Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: RESIDENTIAL - BLDG/ZONING/ENGINE/NPPO
Permit Number - T13CM03870
Review Name: RESIDENTIAL - BLDG/ZONING/ENGINE/NPPO
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 07/05/2013 | ANDREW CONNOR | NPPO | REVIEW | Reqs Change | This site according to the City Zoning Maps is within the Hillside Development Zone (HDZ). Applicable development includes newly proposed subdivisions or individual lot developments UDC 5.2.3. The following development standards shall apply to lots and parcels that are affected by this zone UDC 5.2.5 Single- Family Residential Development Existing Lot or Parcel Where No Land Division is Proposed The average natural cross-slope (ACS) shall be calculated for the entire lot or parcel. If the ACS is 15% or greater (see TABLE 5.2-1: DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS BASED ON AVERAGE CROSS SLOPE for information on (ACS) 5.2.7. HILLSIDE SITE IMPROVEMENT STANDARD Add the following notes to the plans regarding Vegetation Retention and Revegetation: a. Vegetation Retention (1) Existing viable and transplantable trees with four inch or greater trunk diameter and cacti shall be preserved in their original locations, except for building sites and access and utilities serving building sites. (2) When retention of the above trees and cacti in their original locations is not possible due to building site location, the trees and cacti shall be salvaged and replanted in areas requiring revegetation, whenever possible. b. Revegetation All cut or fill slopes that are no steeper than three horizontal to one vertical and all utility trenches or septic leaching fields that are not located in parking or driveway areas shall be revegetated in compliance with the following standard (1) All plants used in revegetation shall be the same as the native vegetation on the site prior to grading or clearing or any adjacent site; and (2) Revegetation shall be accomplished with the following minimum standards for plants: (a) Desert trees, a minimum of 15-gallon size with a minimum trunk diameter of two inches measured at the soil level, or large specimen cactus shall be placed at the same vegetation density found on the site prior to any clearing, grubbing, or grading; an (b) Seeds for trees, desert shrubs, and grasses shall be planted with a density adequate to control erosion and may use one of the following methods of planting: Raked into the soil with appropriate mulch materials; hydroseeding; anchored mulches; or established on jute, rolled straw, or similar material. Another method may be approved by PDSD. (3) A temporary watering system shall be installed until the revegetation materials are established. 3. Slope Stabilization All slopes steeper than a ratio of three horizontal to one vertical, with the exception of retaining walls, shall be stabilized with properly engineered stone riprapping or sculptured rock as follows: a. Stone riprapping shall be hand-placed on the slope; b. The stabilizing material used shall blend with the natural appearance of the site or lot and the surrounding terrain; and, c. Vegetation retention and revegetation should be used in conjunction with riprapping. Additionally this site is within the Environmental Resource Zone Overlay Maps (ERZ Maps). The ERZ Maps include all parcels along the subject washes that may contain riparian habitat. UDC 5.7.3. DEVELOPMENT OPTIONS: Development subject to the ERZ may use one of the two following options. A. No Encroachment in Floodplain Where the owner of a lot or parcel affected by these standards chooses to leave the 100-year floodplain undisturbed, the ERZ does not apply except that temporary fencing shall be placed between the project site and the floodplain area as provided in Section 5.7.5.B, Temporary Fencing Required. Encroachment of the floodplain is limited to utilities, roadway improvements, walkways, or bike paths. Ensure that all Zoning & Engineering comments and concerns are addressed. Additonal comments may apply |
| 07/09/2013 | LAITH ALSHAMI | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | Laith Alshami, Engineering and Floodplain Review, 07/11/2013 Provide the following information on the site plan: 1. The development of the subject parcel is required to comply with the "Hillside Development Zone" (HDZ) requirements. Submit an HDZ submittal in accordance with the "Unified Development Code" (UDC), Article 5 and Technical Standard 9-01.0.0. The submittal shall include the Average Natural Cross Slope (ACS) Analysis. 2. Submit a Development Package that includes site and grading plans for the proposed development and provide all the information required by the Administrative Manual, Section 2-06.0.0. (Development Package Applications) and "Technical Standard 2-01.0.0". 3. Please be advised that Geotechnical Report is also required to address the proposed slope alteration. |
| 07/15/2013 | MICHAEL ST. PAUL | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | CDRC TRANSMITTAL FROM: Michael St.Paul, Planning Technician PROJECT: T13CM03870 3093 West Mockingbird Lane New SFR TRANSMITTAL: July 15, 2013 COMMENTS: Please attach a response letter with the next submittal, which states how all Zoning Review Section comments regarding the Unified Development Code and Technical Standards were addressed. This site is located in the SR zone (UDC 4.7.4). A single-family residence (SFR) is a permitted use in this zone (UDC Table 4.8-1). The minimum lot size is one hundred forty four thousand (144,000) square feet (UDC Table 6.3-1.A). The minimum set back to the property lines is twenty-five (25) feet (UDC Table 6.3-1.A). This site is in the Hillside Development Zone (HDZ) and the Environmental Resource Zone (ERZ) overlay zones (UDC 5.2 and 5.7). See comments relative these overlay zone by Landscape Review and Engineering. Provide the zoning for the adjacent lots on the site plan. Increase the printing a twelve (12) point font on the site plan. Many of the dimensions on the plan are very small. The setback dimension from the SFR to the property lines need to be enlarged. There are no further comments at this time. |
| 10/24/2013 | KEN VAN KARSEN | BUILDING-RESIDENTIAL | REVIEW | Completed |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 08/19/2013 | CPIERCE1 | REJECT SHELF | Completed |