COM 0042.083 2002-2004 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

NOV-09-2004 11:57 PM BEACHES 1 808 323 0238 P. 04 i i PROPO ED AMENDMENT Section ~-Sg Sign Area. (b) In any case, the total area allowed shall not exceed twelve square feet for y sign not fronting a public street or vehicular access RATIO ALE This ro coon conflicts with the Master Plan for Kailas-Kona, is excessive for the purposes of i j the sign, e, and is unfair to newer and smaller businesses. i One the stated goals of the Master Plan is to maintain the continued role of Kailas Village as a t dead lion and retailing focus of Kona (Section 2.1.1). The Council has heard anecdo testimo y $om multiple Kailas Village merchants that small changes in aignage has resulted up t0 30% change in business activity. Decreasing the maximum allowable size of some;i by altnoet half (22 to 12 sq. ft) will reduce potential visibility for many businesses whirh', 11 negatil~ely impact busIneas activity. This is in opposition to the stated goal of rho Master to pr~mote Kailas Village as a retailing focus of Kona, i The M I er Plan r'ecotnmends size guidelines up to 22 aq. R. based on the size of the business frontage, the above restriction does not allow adjustments between 12 to 22 sq. ft. for larger business ntages. The Master Plan recommends that sign needs be `determined primarily' by criteria ' chiding the building's architecture, however, the above restriction would not allow adjuatm is between 12 to 22 sq. ft. and would probably result in sign designs incongruent with larger b inoss frontages. The sign code proposes to regulate signs for the purport of protecting the public health, safety, and mo sand to promote public welfare and convenience; encourage and promote the visitor i industry' ;and foster sightliness and pltyaical good order (Section 3-i (ax1)). If the above i ream was ndcesssry to protect the public health, safety, and morals or foster sightliness arld physioa~ cod order, then all signs island-wide should be restricted to 12 sq. ft. It is more ~ probabl that this restriction will result in decreasing public welfare end convenience through dxredsp g business activity and revenues, a result in opposition of the purposes of the sign code. This ro 'orlon ial~, excessive for the purposes of the sign code. This re I coon id unfair to newer businesses end businesses without existing permitted signs ~I bet t is sub Bally out-of--line with the existing signs in the district. For example, many of i the along Iii Drive currently have multiple directory signs, all of which ere significantly ~ ~ i larger 12 aq, ft end some larger titan the 22 sq, ft. proposed limit. Consider the the Kona Seaside all with thirteen business suitor (multiple registered businesses within so a suites) and ' currentl does not have a directory sign. If the mall was limited to a l2 aq. ft. ry sign, each ass suite would be limited to a space no greater than S" high by 24" wide i}t which to identify it businesses. Thm oonsidor that many of the malls along Alii Drive have more than thirteen usinesaea suites. Thin restriction is overly-excessive and unfair to newer buginesaea or business properties without existing directory signs. I'