Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2020-02-11 Kailua Village Design Commission Minutes KAILUA VILLAGE DESIGN COMMISSION COUNTY OF HAWAII MINUTES Meeting Date: February 11, 2020 Time: 5:15 pm Place West Hawaii Civic Center Planning Department Conference Room—Building E, 2nd Floor 74-5044 Ane Keohokalole Highway Kailua-Kona, Hawaii 96740 CALL TO ORDER Commissioners Present: Shaun Roth, Riley Smith, Bryant Ching, Ann Kern, John Hetherington, Michaela Ikeuchi, Jasmine Crusat, and Arne Werchick Planning Department: Rosalind Newlon(Planner), Terri Napeahi(Planner) and Kimberly Sakai(Planning Clerk) Applicants/Representatives: Fritz Harris-Glade, Sultan Ramzanalli(Circadia Management) Public: Robert Leasure A quorum was present. Chairman Roth called the meeting to order, and the Commissioners introduced themselves. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Minutes of the meetings of January 14, 2020 Chairman Roth asked if there were any corrections to the minutes. No corrections offered, and the minutes were approved as circulated. STATEMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC ON AGENDA ITEMS None. NEW BUSINESS 1. The applicant, Fritz Harris-Glade, is submitting revisions for the proposed Henry Street Hotel, previously approved by the KVDC on September 19, 2017, and received Final Plan Approval on January 11, 2018. The proposed revisions include; 1) reducing the size and number of hotel rooms, from 140 to 128 rooms (80 with kitchens, 48 without kitchens); 2) reserve an area for a second phase to include up to 18 apartments; 3) reduce the proposed parking to the corresponding reduction in units and units with kitchens; and 4) reduce the size and height of the Mauka Wing by one floor. The landscaping, exterior building colors, materials, and orientation of the Makai Wing would remain unchanged. Landowner: Circadia Management LLC TMK: (3) 7-5-004:006 Location: SW Corner of Henry Street and Queen Ka`ahumanu Hwy. The applicant addresses Chairman Roth regarding an amendment to the agenda. Ms. Newlon recommends all rectifications to be made during the applicant's presentation or in the plan approval phase. Ms. Newlon commenced her PowerPoint presentation for the proposed revisions for the Henry Street Hotel. She used slides to help orient the commission as to where the subject parcel is situated. Slide 2- Subdivision map no. 7789-r, subject parcel, lot 1-A with access and utility easement off Henry Street. Slide 3 —Tax map indicating the location of the project parcel 6 Slide 4 - A letter from the design review by KVDC first held on August 15, 2017, whereby the KVDC voted to defer action with recommendations made to address concerns and to return for another meeting. KVDC held a second meeting on 9/19/2017 for a revised design, and the KVDC unanimously voted to recommend approval of the proposed project with; 1) any white color to be changed to almond, and; 2) for the stucco treatment, as shown on sheet A-5.1, to be changed from driftwood to cotton. The submittal following the recommendation letter dated 10/4/2017 was consistent with recommendations as cited above and reflected in the approved Final Plan Approval on 1/11/2018. Slide 5 —The agenda required rectifications according to the submittal from the applicant. Revisions include; 1) 140 rooms reduced to 128 (48 rooms with kitchens, and 80 rooms without); 2) reserve an area for a potential second phase to include up to 18 apartments; 3)reduce the proposed parking with the intent to provide a minimum of 128 stalls; 4) reduce the size and height of the Mauka Wing by one floor. The landscaping, materials, and orientation of the Makai Wing would remain unaltered. Slide 6—Displays the exterior elevation submitted for this design review and includes the colors of the proposed Henry Street Hotel that are an amendment request to the previously approved color scheme: 1) Siding—changed back to driftwood, from already approved recommendation to cotton. 2) Any color or white previously changed to cotton; now trim is shown as Patina Green. 3) Doors previously shown as almond, now shown as bronze. 4) Windows previously shown as almond, now shown as bronze. Slide 7 & 8—Displays the reserved area for future changes to the design footprint for phase two in the northeast corner of the parcel. Slide 9 & 10—Floor plans level 1 —4. Slide 11 —Rooftop plans. Slide 12 & 13—Exterior elevations. Commissioner Ching questions, "What part of the hotel,if any, will be seen from Queen K?"Ms.Newlon depicts the black and white photocopies of the original photographs provided with the application. Due to the poor quality of the copies,it was yet unclear as to what would be seen. Chairman Roth notes prior review of the plans, and with landscaping and the drop in elevation, the commissioners determined not much of the building would be seen. Commissioner Kern also mentioned on page A-3.1, the north, south, east, and west orientations may give some thought and clarification to the question. Commissioner Ikeuchi queries regarding the reserved area and presumes another meeting for phase two of the plan. Ms. Newlon confirms and goes on to explain for future developments; the developer can show a footprint, including a parking area, or set aside a reserved space on the parcel. Regardless, the developer will need to return for further design review for the potential phase two. Chairman Roth called upon the applicant, and architect, Fritz Harris-Glade. He provided the commission with the original hotel design from 2 �/z years prior. Mr. Harris-Glade then addressed commissioner Ching's previous question. He explains the 35-foot difference in elevation along with the reduction of the Mauka Wing, and where one is situated on the highway, will determine how much and what part of the building will be seen. He then proceeds on to explain the reasoning for the proposed changes. Originally the hotel was built with a generic footprint, and after much research and consideration with different hotel brands, they selected to go with the Marriott design. Marriott's design standards require that Mr. Harris-Glade complies with their design guidelines. The developer's decision to keep the concept, but reduce the hotel in size, was realized due to the economy. The reduction in size provides the hotel with more than enough water presently needed, giving the owner's the opportunity for future expansion. Mr. Harris-Glade offered a potential phase two footprint to include up to 18 apartments, with provided parking for the units. He goes on to explain the amendment request for the previously approved exterior design since the manufacturer discontinued the initially approved colors(a lighter color for most of the building and a darker shade to give depth). Another significant change is to the roof. Instead of a Mansard rooftop, various roof pods will be used to break up the visual effect. Commissioner Ikeuchi inquires as to whether the apartments would be sold as timeshare or at market rate. As of then, Mr. Harris-Glade did not know and countered that was not up for discussion at that time. As stated on the agenda, he was required to show the use of the reserved area for a potential second phase to include up to 18 apartments. Commissioner Hetherington asked for clarification on the building's exterior. Mr. Harris-Glade confirmed what looks to be cement blocks are hard shingles, and the white portions of the building are stucco. He presents the commission with color chips for the requested exterior color scheme amendment: 1) Patina or Parkway Green for the roof, 2) Changing the color of the wood trim from white to Patina Green 3) Dover Sky for the light stucco; 4) Spectrum Brown for the contrasting stucco. Chairman Roth requested that Mr. Harris-Glade elaborate on what necessitated the roof change from Mansard to individual roof pods. Mr. Harris-Glade's response was, according to Marriott's design guidelines, there should be no visible rooftop. His purpose for the roof pods was to give balance and character to the building while making it visually attractive, with functionality. The three makai roof pods would become premium rooms with high ceilings, and the mauka roof pods will be utilized to camouflage roof equipment. Commissioner Ching addresses his concerns regarding the exterior color scheme amendment. He informs Mr. Harris-Glade to be aware that the exterior colors approved by the commission are the colors that must be used for the project unless an amended proposal is approved. Mr. Harris-Glade recommended doing a swatch of the approved colors before the final color coat is applied to be sure the color scheme is appealing. Mr. Harris-Glade's concept is to achieve a light and dark shade for visual break-up. There were a few rectifications made by Commissioner Ching regarding the location of the lot. His concern is for the proposal to be accurate, and the wording correct, so the project approved corresponds with the plan. Mr. Harris-Glade concurs. He then reiterates that the owners intend on providing 128 parking stalls; I stall per room. There being no more questions for Mr. Harris-Glade, Chairman Roth opens the floor for discussion. He counsels the commission to consider phase two as a future development, and not up for review at that time. Moving on to the exterior color scheme, the commission agrees to; 1)Dover Sky for the light stucco; 2) Spectrum Brown for the contrasting stucco. The next item up for discussion is the reduction in size. Chairman Roth notes considering the original scope of the project was previously approved, and it would be hard to argue against a reduction in size. The third item Chairman brings up for discussion is the significant change to the roof. The commissioners feel the fact that the roof pods are utilized to camouflage equipment is an attractive idea. Commissioner Ching made a motion to approve the project as proposed with the color scheme: 1) Dover Sky for the light stucco; 2) Green metal roof with two color options, Patina or Parkway Green; 3) Spectrum Brown for the contrasting stucco, or equivalent colors if necessary. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Kern that the Commission forward to the Planning Director a recommendation for approval of the proposal as presented. Commissioner Ikeuchi queries regarding the surrounding landscaping. In response to her question, Commissioner Kern recaps the previously approved plan, including the requirements for the surrounding foliage. Ms. Newlon confirms Commissioner Kern's response. There being no further discussion on the motion, a roll call vote was taken, and the motion carried with six ayes (Ching, Crusat, Hetherington, Kern, Smith, Werchick), one nay (Ikeuchi), and one absent and excused (Sullenberger). ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS None ANNOUNCEMENTS The next meeting tentatively scheduled for February 25,2020,was canceled.No application was submitted. Ms. Newlon handed out copies of an email, specifying clarification for the January 14, 2020 meeting regarding terms for the representatives on the commission. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Chairman Roth adjourned the meeting at 6:09 pm. Respectfully submitted, Kimberly Sakai,Planning Clerk ATTEST: Shaun Roth, Chairman Kailua Village Design Commission