Laserfiche WebLink
C (rvernber- 1ti, 2015 <br /> To: KVDC Commissioners <br /> RE: Kinhia Village Design Commission November, 17, 2015 Agenda Item No,1. <br /> Please accept the loHowing comments regarding the agenda items under <br /> considerationand my regrets for being unable to atterid the meet` n& <br /> I am strongly opposed to the presented signs and requested sign variance for the <br /> project at TMK7-5-007--OK <br /> In t1reft,variance application to the County Council in 2014 the Owner gave six <br /> reasons,why zi variance should be granted. None of these are coinIvIling arguments <br /> for as variance orthe sip <br /> ns a,s presented in this application, (Reference Resolution <br /> N(�). 553 14,, as rioted 41 the applicaticii i) <br /> 1) The voriance is necessitated by the peculiarity ofthe Applicont's outside sign, <br /> requireinents, 'I'liehotel's corporate rules seerri to reqUire that every Holiday hur <br /> Express have the!i;ame sign, T'heir rules do riot and cannot supersecte flee flawaij <br /> C'orinty Code. OUr colde says that Kaittra Village is aunique pilace with its own <br /> character that does ervesspeciai consideration. <br /> 2) The adjacent teniants willnot,be adversely alfected inamuch as they have opprcwed <br /> tire Applicarits request, T'he adjacent,teriants rricist likely don't realize that therewill <br /> be art adverse impact, This application rnay be just one or two signs on one <br /> property but it will create precedent and cause art incremental degradation of the <br /> character orf Kaflua Village. <br /> 3), he, ranting o 'the variance will not unreasonabi violate tim',interest,so/eq,1 <br /> convervence, orgeneral well'bre ofthe public,inasniuch as the proposed slgn hPill <br /> identil"v the location ofthe A,pplkvnts busintis preinisesf6t,tire public and no other <br /> identification exists„fot the Applicants business along only streetfiront(,ye, The <br /> public's interest and general welfare, are violated by signs which are, larger- tharr <br /> permitted and riot in character with Kailua Village. Safety and convenience can both <br /> be satisfied with signs ofallowable size which are designed to work with the <br /> ctiaracter,of Kailua Village, <br /> 4) Sti,wictopplicatio),) qf'thet(�)-i,o� o, the Cotinty("ode to tl)eAppli(,,or)twot,ilo'nicer kat'i <br /> unneccezory hardship and far octicial dif <br /> ,j"iculty on the Applicant inasmuch (is another <br /> lorger sign hos,already obtained a variance f4r placeinent on the sarne wall alor(q the <br /> some streetfirontage. In #3 they say there is no sigiv, °l leis is confusbig, <br /> S) Grantin,(j the variance ivill riot constitute a grant ofpersonal i.,)r special privilege <br /> inconsisterit with limitations upan other properties under ,, This reason is exactly <br /> why the Kailua Village Design Cornmission needs to oppose these signs. If everyone <br /> JEXHIBIT 21 <br />