COM 0337.000 2018-2020 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Aaron S.Y. Chung, Council Chair and Members of the County Council County of Hawaii Page 10 stamp of the professional engineer who prepared the TZAR.DOT also stated that the site plan included within the TIAR did not reflect the report's recommendations. Finally, DOT indicated that no additional access would be permitted from the property to Puainako Street. Based on the last point,the Director recommends amending Condition G to include language limiting access to the subject parcel from Puainako Street to a single driveway. Second, as a standard practice, when a change of zone or any amendments thereto require a TIAR, the Planning Department relies on agency review (in this case DOT and DPW) to inform appropriate conditions for roadway improvements to mitigate traffic impacts.Traffic in this area is known to be problematic and the Director wants to ensure that the appropriate agencies get ample opportunity to review,affir►n,and approve the TIAR and any mitigation recommendations therein. The applicant recently provided the Planning Department with an updated TIAR dated May 20, 2019, however, with the exception of a new site plan and a new site access evaluation section describing proposed new striping treatments for Puainako Street an limitation of access from Puainako Street to a single driveway(starting on page 52),the TIAR is nearly identical to the report submitted in 2017, including all of the same traffic data,analyses,and recommendations.Based on the timing of recent submittal, neither DOT or DPW have had a chance to review and comment on the TIAR analysis and appropriateness of proposed mitigation measures.Based on the preceding, the Director does not support the deletion of Condition E as it would eliminate the opportunity for reviewing agencies to vet and approve the TIAR and require suitable mitigation measures for identified traffic impacts caused by the project. Finally, these change of zone amendments do not require the applicant to develop their currently proposed project. Should AutoZone choose to expand the size of their store now or in the fixture or should any successor applicant wish to develop a different or larger project, retaining this condition will ensure that any increased traffic impacts would be studied, and proposed mitigation of those impacts would be reviewed and approved by appropriate agencies (State DOT and County DPW). Furthermore, as the project will take access from both State and County roadways,the Director recommends amending Condition E to include DPW-Traffic Division as a required review and approving agency. Finally,the Director recommends adding a stipulation to this condition that the applicant construct any roadway improvements that may be required by DOT and/or DPW prior to the issuance of Certificate of Occupancy. Lastly, to the Planning Director recommends the following addition of a condition and revisions to several other conditions: