The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCOM 0042.066 2002-2004JUN -15-2004 TUE 08:42 PM CCRPORATION COUNSEL FAX N0, 9618622 P. Ol 01 ^l.x.,. Lincoln S.T. Ashida -•7! Corporation Counsel Gerald Takase {tit Assistant Corporation y+ Counsel COUNTY OF HAWAII OFFICE OF THE CORPORATION COUNSEL 101 AUpUM Street, Suite 325 • Milo. Hawaii 96720-4262 • (608) 961.8251 • Fax (808) 961-8622 June 15, 2004 To: J. Curtis Tyler III Councilman, Hawaii County Council Fm: Diane Noda 0^r" Deputy Corporation Counsel Re: Bill 280 (Draft 5) re: Sign Code 1. You requested alt interpretation of the phrase "bounded by, and adjacent to" as set forth in the definition of the "Kailua Village core" in Section 3-3 (19) of the proposed sign code. Therc is no definition found in Hawaii statutes or case law. Therefore, an interpretation must be gleaned from the common definition of these words. a. "Bounded by": 1) "bound," verb: to delineate a property boundary (Black's Law Dictionary. 7th edition, 1999) 2) "bounds," noun: land within boundary lines (Random House Dictionary Unabridged Edition, 1966) b. "Adjacent to": 1) "adjacent", adjective: Lying near or close to, but not necessarily touching (Black's Law Dictionary) 2) "adjacent", adjective: lying near, close, or contiguous; adjoining; neighboring; abutting, juxtaposed, touching. (Random House Dictionary) As we discussed last week, the common interpretation of this is any real property that is within the four bordering streets, or on the outermost edges of these four bordering streets, that is, whose property line is on the northern side of Palani Road, the southern side of Hualalai Road, the eastern side of Alit Drive, or the western side of Kuakini Highway. Comm. No, 82.10(0 Ref. To: Prese tZ Ref. Dote JUN -15-2004 TUE 08:43 PM CCRPORATION COUNSEL FAX NO. 9618622 P. 02 Memo to Tyler p.2 Any real property that does not have a property boundary "bounded by or adjacent to" any of these four bordering streets would not be considered to be within the Kailua Village core. In the example you posed of a property "one lot away from Kuakini Highway," that property does not have any of the four bordering streets as a boundary, and therefore is not part of the present Kailua Village core. 2. You requested confirmation that our office racottunonds the six-month time limit restriction for exempt signs in Section 3-8(a)(1)(A). I believe it was Mr. Kunitake who alluded to a maximum time limit for posting exempt signs, in fairness for all business owners. Whether a time limit is considered reasonable and in the public's best interest is for the council to decide. 1 drafted this proposed amendment with this understanding. 3. You also requested I comment on the two letters faxed to me yesterday, which includes Walter Kunitake's letter dated June 8, 2004, and Terri Ribordy's letter dated June 4, 2004. 1 note both letters are objections to Draft 44, whereas Draft #5 is before the council tomar:row. a. Mr. Kunitake requests the proposed sign code be equitable for all business owners, and believes the businesses in the Kailua Village core are discriminated against. Whcther the proposed sign code is fair to all persons may need to pass constitutional muster. I will do further research into this. Whether the sign code is enforeeabIc island -wide is speculative and is dependent on personnel, funds, and departmental priorities. Mr. Kunitake also complains many sections of the code are unclear and difficult to understand, but does not refer to specific sections. As such, this objection cannot be addressed at this time. b. Regarding 1V s. Ribordy's letter: 1) Concern, #1 and #3 have been addressed in Draft #5. 2) Concern #2 regarding the arbitrary boundaries of the Kailua Village core: She believes the Kailua Village core, as defined in the proposed sign code, should be a larger area, such as the area defined as the Kailua Village Design district in the county zoning code (HCC 25-7-1). My understanding is you wanted to hear more public input regarding this issue. 3) Concern #4: She is requesting a "wanting" level of penalty be included, prior to being issued a citation. 4) Concern 45: 1 do not have the summary sheets she refers to. 5) Concern #6: She is incorrect in reading all the sections in conjunction with each other. The language specifies that the sections applicable to the Kailua Village core take precedence over other provisions. I will be at the council meeting tomorrow. U Harry Kim Mayor COUNTY OF HAWAII Lincoln S.T. Ashida Corporation Counsel Gerald Takase Assistant Corporation Counsel OFFICE OF THE CORPORATION COUNSEL 101 Aupuni Street, Suite 325 • Hilo, Hawaii 96720-4262 • (808) 961-8251 • Fax (808) 961-8622 PRIYILEGE'DAND CON IDEN71AL C0M!WI-ti'1C:4T10N ATTORNEY-CLIENT C0M.411,,'.1VICATION AAD/OR .1 TTORNEYWORK PRODUCT NOTA PUBLIC RECORD DO NOT RELEASE "THIS MESSAGE WITHOUT CONSULTTN`G THE AUTHOR June 15, 2004 To: J. Curtis Tyler III Councilman, Hawaii County Council Fm: Diane Noda Deputy Corporation Counsel Re: Bill 280 (Draft 5) re: Sign Code 1. You requested an interpretation of the phrase "bounded by, and adjacent to" as set forth in the definition of the "Kailua Village core" in Section 3-3 (19) of the proposed sign code. There is no definition found in Hawaii statutes or case law. Therefore, an interpretation must be gleaned from the common definition of these words. a. "Bounded by": 1) "bound," verb: to delineate a property boundary (Black's Law Dictionary. 7`h edition, 1999) 2) "bounds," noun: land within boundary lines (Random House Dictionary Unabridged Edition, 1966) b. "Adjacent to": 1) "adjacent", adjective: Lying near or close to, but not necessarily touching (Black's Law Dictionary) 2) "adjacent", adjective: lying near, close, or contiguous; adjoining; neighboring; abutting, juxtaposed, touching. (Random House Dictionary) As we discussed last week, the common interpretation of this is any real property that is within the four bordering streets, or on the outermost edges of these four bordering streets, that is, whose property line is on the northern side of Palam Road, the southern side of Hualalai Road, the eastern side of Alii Drive, or the western side of Kuakini Highway. Memo to Tyler p.2 Any real property that does not have a property boundary "bounded by or adjacent to" any of these four bordering streets would not be considered to be within the Kailua Village core. In the example you posed of a property "one lot away from Kuakini Highway," that property does not have any of the four bordering streets as a boundary, and therefore is not part of the present Kailua Village core. 2. You requested confirmation that our office recommends the six-month time limit restriction for exempt signs in Section 3-8(a)(1)(A). I believe it was Mr. Kunitake who alluded to a maximum time limit for posting exempt signs, in fairness for all business owners. Whether a time limit is considered reasonable and in the public's best interest is for the council to decide. I drafted this proposed amendment with this understanding. You also requested I comment on the two letters faxed to me yesterday, which includes Walter Kunitake's letter dated June 8, 2004, and Terri Ribordy's letter dated June 4, 2004. I note both letters are objections to Draft #4, whereas Draft #5 is before the council tomorrow. a. Mr. Kunitake requests the proposed sign code be equitable for all business owners, and believes the businesses in the Kailua Village core are discriminated against. Whether the proposed sign code is fair to all persons may need to pass constitutional muster. I will do further research into this. Whether the sign code is enforceable island -wide is speculative and is dependent on personnel, funds, and departmental priorities. Mr. Kunitake also complains many sections of the code are unclear and difficult to understand, but does not refer to specific sections. As such, this objection cannot be addressed at this time. b. Regarding Ms. Ribordy's letter: 1) Concerns #1 and #3 have been addressed in Draft #5. 2) Concern #2 regarding the arbitrary boundaries of the Kailua Village core: She believes the Kailua Village core, as defined in the proposed sign code, should be a larger area, such as the area defined as the Kailua Village Design district in the county zoning code (HCC 25-7-1). My understanding is you wanted to hear more public input regarding this issue. 3) Concern #4: She is requesting a "warning" level of penalty be included, prior to being issued a citation. 4) Concern #5: I do not have the summary sheets she refers to. 5) Concern #6: She is incorrect in reading all the sections in conjunction with each other. The language specifies that the sections applicable to the Kailua Village core take precedence over other provisions. I will be at the council meeting tomorrow. Harry Kim Mayor (911un#lr >o f �.ttfirttti Lincoln S.T. Ashida Corporation Counsel Gerald Takase Assistant Corporation Counsel OFFICE OF THE CORPORATION COUNSEL 101 Aupuni Street, Suite 325 • Hilo, Hawaii 96720-4262 • (808) 961-8251 • FAX (808) 961-8622 TRANSMITTAL LETTER TO: Jeanette Aiello DATE: October 22, 2004 Council Committees FROM: Diane A. Noda Deputy Corporation Counsel RE: Attachment; Sign Code, Draft 5 COPIES/ITEMS DATE DESCRIPTION copy 6/15/04 Bill 280 (Draft 5) re: Sign Code TRANSMITTED FOR: ( ) Your information and files ( ) Your approval ( ) Your signature and return ( ) Your review & comments ( ) Your signature and forwarding as (X) See remarks below noted below ( ) Filing and return () Per vour reauest (Envelope enclosed) REMARKS: Attached per Megan Mitchell's e-mail request of today; clean copy for Council Committee's archives. CORPORATION COUNSEL B L 4, , M rle K. Kalof Legal Clerk DAN:mkk Attachment sAdepts\dpw\sign code\trans.to j.aiello\10-22-04\DANmkk.wpd Hawat i County is an Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer