My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
COM 0042.001 2002-2004
ClerkCouncil
>
Council Records
>
Communications
>
2002-2004
>
COM 0042.001 2002-2004
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/1/2019 2:40:24 PM
Creation date
5/9/2008 11:58:20 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Communications
Communications - Type
COM
Communications - Council Term
2002-2004
Communication
0042
Point
001
Author
J. Curtis Tyler, III, Vice Chairman, Hawai‘i County Council
Communications - Referred To
PWIRC
Comments
PWIRC: Deferred - 3/18/03
Communications - File Code
HCC/ADV
Document Relationships
AGE PWIRC 03/18/2003 2002-2004
(Related)
Path:
\Council Records\Agendas\2002-2004\Public Works & Intergovernmental Relations Committee (PWIRC)
BIL 280 Draft 03 1996-1998
(Related)
Path:
\Council Records\Bills\1996-1998
BIL 280 Draft 03 1996-1998
(Related To)
Path:
\Council Records\Bills\1996-1998
COM 0042.000 2002-2004
(Related)
Path:
\Council Records\Communications\2002-2004
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
24
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Honorable J. Curtis Tyler, III <br />Councilman <br />Hawaii County Council <br />Page 3 <br />October 22, 2001 <br />defined in the bill. The "core" has some regulations stricter than the rest of the Village, <br />whereas signs are allowed in the Industrial Subdivision that are considerable larger than <br />the Village, but not as large as allowed generally. <br />The "village core" should be defined to include all signs on buildings fronting on Alii <br />Drive, Palani Road, Kuakini Highway and Hualalai Road to eliminate any possible <br />argument about "adjacent to". <br />The boundaries of the Kona Industrial Subdivision should be specified. <br />Number of signs: The draft bill increases the number of permissible signs from one per <br />street frontage per business to two per business. This is consistent with the rest of the <br />sign code, but is it the intent for Kailua Village? <br />It is not clear how the aggregates are to be applied. Are they applied separately for each <br />type of sign? For example, can a building in the Kailua Village core have twelve square <br />feet of ground signs, plus twelve square feet of marquee signs, plus twelve square feet of <br />hanging signs? <br />The whole subject of aggregate signage is a problem in the current sign code. While it is <br />a good idea to have an overall limit when there are multiple businesses, it creates a <br />problem that sometimes a business cannot legally have a sign because the quota has been <br />used up. If we are to have aggregate limits, I suggest that one small wall, hanging or <br />window sign be allowed per business that does not count against the aggregate limit. <br />The phrase "total area" is ambiguous: does it apply to the total area of any one sign, or <br />does it apply to the total area of signs in the aggregate on a building? <br />The current code does not specifically allow marquee signs in Kailua Village. The draft <br />bill allows signs hanging from marquees, as well as a thirty-two square foot sign on the <br />face of a marquee (smaller in the village core). <br />Sign height is another issue. Under the present code, there does not seem to be any way <br />for a building on the second floor to have a sign, because all signs are limited to five and <br />a half feet from the ground, except projecting signs, which can be nine feet from the <br />ground. The draft bill continues that, except that wall signs can be one-half the height of <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.