REP PWPC 005 01/07/1997 1996-1998

Home

1 REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC WORKS AND PARKS DATE: January 7, 1997 RE: COMM. NO. 11 PLACE: Councilroom TIME: 9:00 a.m. Chairperson and Members Hawaii County Council Hilo, Hawaii 96720 Your Committee on Public Works and Parks, to which was referred Communication No. 11, reports as follows: Communication No. 11 is a letter from Roy R. Takemoto, Land Use Planning and Law Consultant, which transmits a sign vaziance request on behalf of applicant, Hale Anuenue Restorative Caze Center. The request is for the purpose of allowing a sign greater than 6 square feet in a residential district, which would constitute a variance from the provisions of Section 3-26 of the Hawaii County Code. The sign, as first proposed in the request, would be a 46 square foot unlighted double-sided ground sign upon which the words, "Hale Anuenue Restorative Care Center" will be mounted. The sign will be located 13 feet from the front property line of the Care Center between Waianuenue Avenue and the porte cochere of the facility. Communication No. 11 was considered by this Committee at its January 7, 1997 meeting. In addition to the information contained in the applicant's sign vaziance request, the Committee also considered testimony from Mr. Roy Takemoto and Mr. Stanley Takemura of the County of Hawaii's Department of Public Works' Building Division. Council Member Curtis Tyler also was present at the meeting and participated in the discussion. In his statement, Mr. Takemoto asked that the variance request be amended to allow a sign of 48 square feet rather than 46 square feet. This change would accommodate any difference in area that might result from measuring the trapezoid shaped sign as a rectangle. He also mentioned that the actual finished height of the sign, after landscaping, would total 5 feet, 6 inches. Mr. Takemura, of the Building Department, stated that the Department of Public Works had no objection to granting this vaziance application. No testimony in opposition to the application was offered. During discussion, it was noted that the request was consistent with other sign variance applications that had been granted by the Council. On the basis of the information contained in the applicant's sign variance request and the testimony of Mr. Takemoto and Mr. Takemura, your Committee found that the enforcement of Section 3-26 of the Hawaii County Code would work a hardship upon the applicant.