Laserfiche WebLink
Kona Outdoor Circle--Comments to Proposed Sign Ordinance Bill No. 280 8/17/98 <br /> Page 4/5 <br /> Page 11, (4) Roof Sign. <br /> Comment: If roof signs are to be permitted at all, thirty-two feet is too big. <br /> However, we would like further discussion as to whether roof signs are <br /> appropriate. Our initial take is that they are not needed. <br /> Page 11, (5) (B) Wall Sign. <br /> Comment: Thirty-two feet is too big. <br /> Page 12. (C) Wall Sign <br /> Comment: Two hundred and fifty feet of sign is a billboard. We propose 150 <br /> square feet maximum. <br /> Section 3-22 and 3-23. Variances: <br /> Comment: There should be a public comment period allowed/required for any <br /> variance requested. <br /> Division 7, Fees <br /> Page 17, Section 3-25, Disposition of Fees. (a)(2) F ines <br /> Comment: Is it possible for the violator to pay the cost of collection, so the entire <br /> fine can be devoted to the purpose for which it is ireended? If the cost of collection <br /> is to be deducted from fees for the use of the county,lion, is that to be determined? <br /> Division 9. Location Specifications. <br /> Page 19, Section 3-33, Height above buildings <br /> Comment: This is confusingly-worded, but sounds like signs are permitted to <br /> extend six feet above buildings. That doesn't seem right. We would suggest that <br /> this be clarified, and that if roof signs are permitted at all (which we question), <br /> they not be permitted to extend that high above the roofline. <br /> Division 11. Noncomforming Signs. <br /> Page 20, Section 3-35. <br /> Comment: There must be a time limit in which a. no ncomforming sign must be made <br /> to come into conformance. Even if it was erected under preciously-existing <br /> regulations, it must be brought into compliance after a reasonable time period. <br /> Perhaps there's a standard amortization period for suns which could be considered. <br />