Microfiche records prior to 2006 have not been completely digitized and may not be available yet on PRO. If you cannot find what you are looking for please submit a records request.

Permit Review Detail

Permit Number: TD-DEV-0626-00148
Parcel: 10610002A

Address:
3749 N ROMERO RD

Review Status: Requires Resubmit

Review Details: DEVELOPMENT PACKAGE NEW v.2

Permit Number - TD-DEV-0626-00148
Review Name: DEVELOPMENT PACKAGE NEW v.2
Review Status: Requires Resubmit
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
07/17/2026 NPPO Standard APPROVED Include the Activity Number TD-DEV-0626-00148 on the NPPO sheets with the next submittal.

Thank you.
Chad Keller, PLA
chad.keller@tucsonaz.gov
06/24/2026 Site Engineering Standard REQUIRES RESUBMIT Permit Activity Number: TD-DEV-0626-00148 (1st Review)
Project: Minor Development Plan for R.E. Darling Co. The proposed use of the project is general manufacturing.
Location: 3749 N ROMERO RD
Review Date: 6/24/2026
Reviewer: Marco Contreras – Engineering Associate
Reviewer Contact Information: marco.contreras@tucsonaz.gov
Related cases:

Plan review for the above-referenced development package has been completed. This review was conducted for compliance with applicable development criteria including the City of Tucson Unified Development Code (UDC), Administrative Manual (AM) Section 2-6, and Technical Standards Manual (TSM) sections governing waste management, pedestrian access, hydrology – retention/detention requirements, and all applicable site standards.
The following comments must be addressed prior to approval. To help facilitate a timely resubmittal, please provide updated plans and calculations along with a written response to each comment, indicating what action was taken and where the change can be found on the plans. Do not use revision clouds on resubmittal drawings — clouds are reserved for post-permit revisions only. Submit your response letter and updated plan set & reports as separate files.

Applicable Code Links for quick/direct reference:
City of Tucson Code: https://www.tucsonaz.gov/Departments/Planning-Development-Services/Codes
Floodplain Code: https://codelibrary.amlegal.com/codes/tucson/latest/tucson_az/0-0-0-19333
Drainage Manual Link: https://www.tucsonaz.gov/files/sharedassets/public/v/1/pdsd/documents/engineering-code/cot-drainage-manual-searchable.pdf
Design standards for Stormwater Detention and Retention Link:
https://www.tucsonaz.gov/files/sharedassets/public/v/1/pdsd/documents/engineering-code/updated-retention-detention-manual.pdf
City of Tucson Chapter 25: https://codelibrary.amlegal.com/codes/tucson/latest/tucson_az/0-0-0-18593

Site Engineering Administrative Review Comments:
1. Provide the development package case number (TD-DEV-0626-00148) adjacent to the title block on each sheet of the plan set. [AM 2-06.3.3]
2. Revise the cover sheet to include the name, registration number, seal, and contact information for the Geotechnical Engineer of Record, along with the name and address of the geotechnical firm. This information shall be presented with the other project registrant contact information on the cover sheet. [AM 2-06.4.1]
3. Provide the page number and total number of pages within the DP (i.e., sheet xx of xx) on the bottom right corner of each page. [AM 2-06.4.2.D]
4. Provide the General note: Maintenance (a) that the owner or owners shall be solely responsible for operation, maintenance, and liability for drainage structures and detention basins; (b) that the owner or owners shall have an Arizona Registered Professional Civil Engineer prepare a certified inspection report for the drainage and detention/retention facilities at least once each year, and that these regular inspection reports will be on file with the owner for review by City staff, upon written request; (c) that City staff may periodically inspect the drainage and detention/retention facilities to verify that scheduled and unscheduled maintenance activities are being performed adequately; and (d) that the owner or owners agree to reimburse the City for any and all costs associated with maintaining the drainage and detention/retention facilities, should the City find the owner or owners deficient in their obligation to adequately operate and maintain their facilities. [Drainage Manual 14.3.2]
5. Provide the Zoning and Land Use General Note: “Any relocation or modification of existing utilities and/or public improvements necessitated by the proposed development will be at no expense to the public.” [AM 2-06.4.7.D]
6. Provide the Zoning and Land Use General Note: “No structure or vegetation shall be located or maintained so as to interfere with the sight visibility triangles in accordance with Section 10-01.5.0, Sight Visibility, of the Technical Standards Manual.” [AM 2-06.4.7.C.2]
7. Provide the general note: “Any Proposed signs will be approved per separate permit” [AM 2-06.4.7]
8. Provide the Zoning and Land Use General Note: “Drainage will remain in its natural state and will not be altered, disturbed, or obstructed other than as shown on this site plan.” [AM 2-06.4.7.B.3]
9. Provide the Zoning and Land Use General note: “The developer, any successors and assigns, will hold the City of Tucson, its officers, employees, and agents harmless from any and all claims for damages related to the use of this development as shown hereon, now and in the future, by reason of flooding, flowage, erosion, or damage caused by water, whether surface flood or rainfall.” [AM 2-06.4.7.B.1]
10. Provide the general note: “Any Proposed signs will be approved per separate permit”
Site & PAAL Comments:
11. Per TSM 7-01.4.1.B, A sidewalk is required adjacent and parallel to any access lane or PAAL on the side where buildings are located. Demonstrate how this is addressed regarding the southeast portion of the new structure.
12. Revise keynote 7 (CI101) – it currently calls out 2” AC pavement on 4” ABC, but the surfacing details provided do not show these values. Revise accordingly to comply with Geotechnical recommendations.
Grading & Drainage comments:
13. The grading plans lack sufficient spot elevation information at key drainage control points necessary to verify design intent and facilitate site inspections during and after construction. Provide spot elevations at all of the following locations:
a. All curb cut inlet locations, showing both the top of curb elevation and the adjacent pavement grade at the inlet opening.
b. All landscaped water harvesting area inlet and overflow points.
c. All curb cut outlet locations, showing outlet invert elevation and the receiving grade immediately downstream.
d. Top of curb versus finished pavement grade at key transitions throughout the site to confirm positive drainage and curb reveal are maintained as designed.
14. Provide a keynote on the grading sheets (CG102 & CG103) for the proposed curb cut/openings shown that are intended to lead towards the proposed basin.
15. Provide keynotes and call-outs identifying all new structure downspouts and sidewalk scupper locations on the site plan sheets. Sidewalks shall be flood free for all storm discharges up to and including a ten-year frequency flood event, and drainage flowing across any pedestrian circulation path shall be conveyed under the path for up to and including the ten-year frequency flood events.[TSM 7-01.4.1.E and 7-01.4.3.E] This information is required to demonstrate compliance and to ensure coordination with building permit plan review.
16. Detention basins with uniform side slopes and no terraces may incorporate retention for a maximum depth of 9” below the lowest outlet elevation. The volume provided below the outlet can be counted as retention volume. The volume provided below the outlet can be counted as retention volume. If infiltration testing is provided, the retained depth may be increased. [DSSDR 2.5]
a. It will be required that infiltration testing be completed for the proposed basin to demonstrate compliance with required drain down times. [DSSDR 4.5.1.1]. For resubmission, ensure to revise the geotechnical report to include this analysis. (Refer to subsequent drainage report comment for further details).
17. Provide a cross-section detail for the proposed outlet Weir for the new basin.
a. Provide both a N-S as well as a W-E cross section detail(s) to demonstrate compliance with applicable erosion protection dimensions that should be determined and provided within the drainage report.
18. Clarification required – Grading plan (Sheet CG103) shows keynote #2 “Grouted riprap scupper.” Is this simply grouted riprap channelized relating to the curb cut, or is an actual sidewalk scupper proposed here? Revise the keynote language to better clarify what is being proposed here.
19. All proposed retention and detention basins must be provided with a minimum of one sediment level measurement device per basin in accordance with DSSDR Section 4.4.1.4. The device may be incorporated into the basin outlet weir structure, embedded in the basin side slope, or constructed as a separate standalone marker. The device must be located where sediment is most likely to accumulate within the basin. Address the following on the plans:
a. Add a keynote and corresponding call-out on the grading sheets identifying the sediment level measurement device at each basin location.
b. Provide a construction detail for the selected device type showing its dimensions, materials, installation method, and graduated measurement markings.
c. The device detail and placement must be consistent across all six basins and must be incorporated into the inspection and maintenance protocol required by DSSDR Section 4.1.1.
20. Clarify & designate the proposed slope treatment/surfacing for the proposed basin on the grading plan (CG103) – hydroseed, screen rock, dumped riprap, etc.
21. Clarification/revision required – the grading plan (CG103) denotes 4:1 slopes, but cross section detail E shows 3:1. If the 3:1 slope only applies to the grouted riprap portion, ensure to make this clear on plan view.
a. Dimension the horizonal dimension for the riprap shown on the discussed cross section.
22. Clarification/revision required – the grading plan (CG103) denotes 4:1 slopes, but cross section detail A shows 3:1. Ensure to make this clear on plan view.
23. Expand Cross-Section detail D to encompass the rainwater harvesting basin proposed to the south.
24. Except for Rainfall Only Non-contributing Basins, stormwater harvesting basins shall be designed with an inlet. The inlet shall meet the following criteria: a. The inlet shall be located to accept flow from the contributing watershed. b. Inlet erosion protection shall be placed at a width sufficient to encompass flow expansion downstream of the inlet. Non-grouted rock shall consist of minimum 4-inch rock hand-placed in 2 layers on filter fabric level with finished grade. Grouted rock shall be embedded into the concrete a minimum of ½ the rock diameter with flat faces placed to provide a level surface. DSSDR 5.3.1.8 Demonstrate this on the grading plan sheets for all rainwater harvesting basins.
a. Ensure applicable erosion protection for this inlet(s) are shown accordingly.
Drainage Report Comments:
25. The report does not demonstrate drain-down compliance for the proposed basin(s) as required by DSSDR Section 4.5. The resubmission must include a dedicated section that calculates and documents the drain-down time for each basin using results from site-specific infiltration testing. The section should showcase this drain down compliance using the results from the infiltration testing completed.
26. Revise the cover page to provide City of Tucson designation. The current property information only shows Pima County.
27. Include within section 5, a table similar to Table 2.2 in DSSDR 2.2. This should break down how the first flush requirement was determined as well as demonstrate how much each drainage improvement achieves.
28. Include within the purpose section the objectives of the report, which should include
a. Compute the peak onsite discharges under existing and proposed conditions
b. Provide detailed calculations for onsite conveyance improvements
c. Provide calculations for first flush retention and critical basin detention drainage requirements
29. Existing vs. Proposed Peak Discharge Summary Table - A comparative summary table presenting existing versus proposed peak discharges for the subject site has not been provided. The table shall address all applicable storm events (2-, 10-, and 100-year) and shall demonstrate compliance with critical basin detention requirements, including the required 15% post-development peak discharge reduction from pre-development levels for the Ruthrauff Wash Critical Basin tributary area.
30. Revise the report to include a more reflective Summary & Conclusions section as described: [Drainage Manual 2.3.1.7
a. Provide a summary of the important analyses and conclusions presented in the report.
b. Certify that the proposed drainage plan, once properly constructed, will adhere to applicable Local, State, and Federal Floodplain Regulations.
31. City of Tucson Hydrologic Data Sheets - All hydrologic computations were performed using the Pima County PC-Hydro online tool, and the associated PC-Hydro summary sheets. City of Tucson Hydrologic Data Sheets with applicable hydrographs shall be submitted for all storm events computed, including the 2-, 10-, and 100-year peak discharges. Pima County data sheets will not be solely accepted in lieu of City of Tucson data sheets.
a. Ensure to use the required 3-inches for the one-hour rainfall depth is used for the calculations.
32. Riprap Sizing & Apron Dimensions – Confirm that the riprap classification (D₅₀ stone size) and apron dimensions (length, width, and depth) shown on the plans are consistent with the erosion protection calculations required. Provide the associated erosion riprap calculations. At a minimum, the following shall be substantiated at the Drainage Report: [Drainage Manual Chapter 9]
a. Riprap sizing (D₅₀): Shall be determined in accordance with Section 9 design procedures, accounting for the design discharge velocity, flow depth, and channel geometry at the outlet or protected reach.
b. Apron length and width: Shall reflect the hydraulic conditions (Froude number, tailwater depth, and flow spread) used in the energy dissipation analysis.
c. Apron depth/thickness: Shall satisfy the minimum blanket thickness requirements relative to the specified D₅₀.
d. Filter fabric / bedding layer: Confirm specification is consistent with Section 9 material requirements.
33. The Drainage report is missing a Long-Term Maintenance Responsibility section - Specify the name, address, and telephone number of the person(s), firm(s), agency or agencies responsible for the ownership, operation, scheduled and unscheduled maintenance, and liability of drainage improvements (i.e., roads, parking areas, washes, drainageways, detention/retention basins, common areas, etc.) described in the drainage report. List other documents where these responsibilities are documented (i.e., CC&Rs, Final Plats, Development Plans, etc.) [Drainage Manual 2.3.1.2.E.1]
34. Ensure to include a “Required Permits” section that demonstrated that if any other or no governmental permits are required for the scope of development. [Drainage Manual 2.3.1.2.F]
35. Provide an inspection and maintenance protocol including frequency of inspection, a checklist of items to be inspected and recommended maintenance when an inspection identifies a maintenance requirement and shall be prepared by an Arizona registrant. The protocol may be included in the project drainage report or prepared as a separate document. The protocol shall be reviewed and approved by the Floodplain Administrator prior to approval of the tentative plat or development plan. The protocol shall be delivered to the entity responsible for inspection and maintenance. An example of a detention basin inspection and maintenance checklist is provided in Appendix F. DSSDR 4.1.1 The currently provided checklist is considered insufficient. [Drainage Manual 2.3.1.6.C]
SWPPP Sheet Comments:
36. Ensure to delineate flow arrows on the SWPPP Sheet provided. (CS101)
37. No material storage/staging area — no area is designated for storage of construction materials, chemicals, or hazardous substances, revise the plan to provided appropriate staging area(s).
38. No emergency contact information — operator name, 24-hour emergency contact, and site supervisor should appear on the sheet
39. No inspection schedule note — at minimum, a note referencing the required inspection frequency (per CGP) should be included on the sheet.
40. No interim or final stabilization notes — the plan doesn't indicate what stabilization method will be used for disturbed areas at project completion (required per CGP); especially important for a Tucson site given the monsoon season and ADEQ's 14-day stabilization deadlines.
07/17/2026 Site Landscape Standard REQUIRES RESUBMIT PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
REVIEWER: CHAD KELLER, PLA
SITE LANDSCAPE/NATIVE PLANT PRESERVATION SECTION

PROJECT: MINOR DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR R.E. DARLING COMPANY
ACTIVITY NO: TD-DEV-0626-00148
ADDRESS: 3749 N ROMERO RD
ZONING: LIGHT INDUSTRIAL ZONE (I-1)
LAND USE: GENERAL MANUFACTURING
7.16.2026

THE PROPOSED PLANS HAVE BEEN REVIEWED FOR COMPLIANCE WITH APPLICABLE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR SITE LANDSCAPE, NATIVE PLANTS, AND RAINWATER HARVESTING, PER-THE-CITY OF TUCSON UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE (UDC), TECHNICAL STANDARDS MANUAL (TSM), AND ADMINISTRATIVE MANUAL (AM).

RESUBMIT REVISED DRAWINGS ALONG WITH A DETAILED RESPONSE LETTER, STATING HOW ALL SITE LANDSCAPE AND NPPO SECTION REVIEW COMMENTS HAVE BEEN ADDRESSED.

SITE LANDSCAPE/NPPO SECTION COMMENTS:

1. This site landscape plan set/Development Package is substantially complete.

2. Prior to site landscape approval, ensure that Site Zoning and Site Engineering comments are fully addressed. If civil or zoning comments require adjustments to the site plan base linework, then please update the plans to match.

3. Include the Activity Number TD-DEV-0626-00148 on all sheets in the plan set.

Thank you.
Chad Keller, PLA
Landscape Architect
chad.keller@tucsonaz.gov
520.837.4923
07/15/2026 Site Zoning Standard REQUIRES RESUBMIT CDRC TRANSMITTAL

TO:
Development Services Department
Plans Coordination Office

FROM:
Olga Salazar
PDSD Zoning Review Section

PROJECT:
3749 North Romero Road, Tucson, AZ 85705
Development Package (1st Review)
TD-DEV-0626-00148

TRANSMITTAL DATE: July 15, 2026

COMMENTS: Please resubmit revised drawings and any redlined plans along with a detailed response letter, which states how all Zoning Review Section comments were addressed.

Section 3.3.3.G.5.c UDC, An applicant has one year from the date of application to obtain approval of a site plan that complies with zoning and other development requirements in effect at the time of application, unless an ordinance adopted by Mayor and Council during this period states otherwise. A site plan application that has been in review for a period of one year and has not yet been approved is considered denied. To continue the review of a site plan for the property, a new site plan must be submitted that complies with regulations in effect at the time of re-submittal. The new submittal initiates a new one-year review period. One year Expiration date is June 9th, 2027.

SECTION 2-06.0.0: DEVELOPMENT PACKAGE (TENTATIVE PLATS AND SITE PLANS)


2-06.3.0 FORMAT REQUIREMENTS

2-06.3.11 - A key plan (if provided) shall be located on the first sheet.

1. COMMENT: 2-06.3.11 – Please clarify on the cover sheet whether Keynote #22 is included in the project's scope of work. If it is not part of the scope, remove it.


CONTENT REQUIREMENTS

2-06.4.2.D - The page number and the total number of pages in the package (i.e., sheet xx of xx).

2. COMMENT: 2-06.4.2.D - Please provide the page number and total number of pages as noted by the standard above.


2-06.4.3 - The administrative street address and relevant case numbers (development package document, subdivision, rezoning, board of adjustment, DDO, MDR, DSMR, overlay, etc.) shall be provided adjacent to the title block on each sheet.

3. COMMENT: 2-06.4.3 - Provide the development package case number, TD-DEV-0626-00148, adjacent to the title block on each sheet.

2-06.4.4.A - Show the subject property approximately centered within the one square mile area;

4. COMMENT: 2-06.4.4.A – Ensure the subject property is centered within the project location map as noted by the standard above.


2-06.4.4.B - Identify major streets and regional watercourses within the square mile area and all streets that abut the subject property; and,

5. COMMENT: 2-06.4.4.B – On project location map, identify major streets and regional watercourse as noted by the standard above.

2-06.4.7 - General Notes
The following general notes are required. Additional notes specific to each plan are required where applicable.

Zoning and Land Use Notes

2-06.4.7.A.4 - Identify the existing and proposed use of the property as classified per the UDC. List all UDC sections applicable to the proposed uses.

6. COMMENT: 2-06.4.7.A.4 - The proposed use is General Manufacturing which is permitted subject to Use Specific Standards 4.9.5.C.2, .6, .7, & .8 and 4.9.13.Q. On the cover sheet, under General Note "K", please add the applicable use specific standards.

2-06.4.7.A.8 - For development package documents provide:

2-06.4.7.A.8.a - Floor area for each building;

7. COMMENT: 2-06.4.7.A.8.a – On the cover sheet, for the building identified with addresses 3749-1 and 3749-2, please show the total square footage (18,960 sq.ft.) only once, ensuring that any duplicate entries are removed.

2-06.4.7.A.8.c - Percentage of building, lot area, or vehicular use area expansion. If the building(s) or lot area have been previously expanded, those calculations shall be included; and,

COMMENT: 2-06.4.7.A.8.c – Aerial views show that an expansion to Building 3761 was completed in 2020; however, Zoning cannot find records of permits for this addition. This may require additional permits.

2-06.4.8 - Existing Site Conditions
The following information shall be provided on the plan/plat drawing to indicate the existing conditions on site and within 50 feet of the site. On sites bounded by a street with a width of 50 feet or greater, the existing conditions across the street will be provided.



2-06.4.8.C - The following information regarding existing private or public right-of-way adjacent to or within the site shall be provided: the name, right-of-way width, recordation data, type and dimensioned width of paving, curbs, curb cuts, and sidewalks.

8. COMMENT: 2-06.4.8.C – Per Subdivision Plat MP-46-092, Book 46, Page 92, Sheet 4, Smoot Drive is 43 feet wide. Please correct the site plan to reflect this measurement, which excludes any adjacent private property, and ensure the referenced recordation information is properly noted. This information is available at the following link: https://maps-and-records.tucsonaz.gov/subdivisions/details/5345

2-06.4.9 - Information on Proposed Development
The following information on the proposed project shall be shown on the drawing or added as notes.

2-06.4.9.E - Proposed land splits or existing lot lines shall be drawn on the plan with dimensions and the identification number and approximate square footage of each lot. (Please be aware that, if land division occurs and the number of lots falls within the definition of subdivision, a subdivision plat is required.) Land splits require a separate permit and review.

9. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.E – Please complete and record the Covenant application, which can be found at the following link: https://www.tucsonaz.gov/files/sharedassets/public/v/1/pdsd/documents/submission-documents/covenant-regarding-development-and-use-of-real-property-udc-with-release.pdf. Once the document has been recorded, please include a copy of the recorded document and the corresponding recordation number with your next submittal.


2-06.4.9.F - All existing zoning classifications on and adjacent to the project (including across any adjacent right-of-way) shall be indicated on the drawing with zoning boundaries clearly defined. If the property is being rezoned, use those boundaries and classifications. The basis for this requirement is that some zoning requirements on a project are based on the zoning classification of adjacent property. Also, in some instances, each zone has to be taken into consideration on property that is split by two or more zoning classifications, as each may have different requirements.

10. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.F – C-2 zoning is not adjacent to the site, please remove this zoning classification from Note “C” under General Notes.

2-06.4.9.H.5.a - Show all motor vehicle off-street parking spaces provided, fully dimensioned. As a note, provide calculations on the number of spaces required (include the ratio used) and the number provided, including the number of spaces required and provided for the physically disabled. The drawing should indicate parking space locations for the physically disabled. A typical parking space detail shall be provided for both standard parking spaces and those for the physically disabled. For information on parking requirements for the physically disabled, refer to adopted building and accessibility codes of the City of Tucson. Design criteria for parking spaces and access are located in Section 7.4.6, Motor Vehicle Use Area Design Criteria, of the UDC.

11. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.a – Provide an ADA parking design detail showing compliance with design standards.

2-06.4.9.H.5.c - Show all loading zones, vehicle maneuverability fully dimensioned, and access route. Provide as a note the number of loading spaces required, the number provided, whether the loading space is a Type A or B as provided in UDC Section 7.5.4.

12. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.c – The proposed building requires a Type B loading zone. Please indicate the location of this area on the site plan.

2-06.4.9.H.5.d - Show bicycle parking facilities fully dimensioned. For specifics, refer to Section 7.4.9, Bicycle Parking Design Criteria, of the UDC. Provide, as a note, calculations for short and long term bicycle spaces required and provided.

13. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.d – Provide a wall-mounting detail for long-term bicycle parking.


2-06.4.9.Q - Provide the square footage and the height of each commercial, industrial, or business structure and the specific use proposed within the footprint of the building(s).

14. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.Q – Identify the proposed and existing uses for each building on the site plan, as noted by the standard above.

2-06.4.9.R - Show on-site pedestrian circulation and refuge utilizing location and the design criteria in Section 7-01.0.0, Pedestrian Access, of the Technical Standards Manual.

15. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.R – Per TSM 7-01.4.1.B, A sidewalk is required adjacent and parallel to any access lane or PAAL on the side where buildings are located. Demonstrate how this is addressed regarding the southeast portion of the new structure. Please note, per TSM 7-01.3.0.3.3.B., two exceptions exist regarding pedestrian circulation paths. If one of these are being utilized for this project, please provide clarification.

2-06.4.9.V - For gang mailboxes indicate location to assure there are no conflicts with other requirements, such as pedestrian accessibility, utilities, and landscaping.

16. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.V – Please clearly indicate the location of all mailboxes on the site plan. If they will be located inside the building, ensure a corresponding note is added to the General Notes section on the cover sheet.


2-06.4.9.W - Indicate the locations and types of proposed signs (wall, free-standing, pedestal) to assure there are no conflicts with other requirements and that minimal locational requirements can be met. Indicate if there are any existing billboards on site. Compliance to the Sign Code, Chapter 3 of the Tucson Code, is required.

17. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.W - Provide the general note: “Any Proposed signs will be approved per separate permit”

***For additional information on the any standard presented in this memo, please refer to the City of Tucson “Unified Development Code” – Administrative Manual Section 2-06 or Technical Standards noted in the comments. https://codelibrary.amlegal.com/codes/tucson/latest/tucson_az_udc/0-0-0-8753

If you have any questions about this transmittal, Contact Olga Salazar by email Olga.Salazar@tucsonaz.gov

RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development package and comment response letter. To resubmit visit Tucson Development Center at https://tdc-online.tucsonaz.gov/#/home.
Instructions for resubmittal - https://www.tucsonaz.gov/files/pdsd/website/Resubmittals.pdf.
06/17/2026 CDRC Application Completeness Express REVIEW COMPLETED
06/22/2026 CDRC Review Coordinator Express REVIEW COMPLETED CDRC added ADOT to the workflow. Review request email sent to ADOT.FYI email sent to TEP, PAG, USPS, and SWG
07/14/2026 Commercial Plumbing Standard REVIEW COMPLETED
07/08/2026 External Reviewers - Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT) Standard REVIEW COMPLETED ​CDRC​
ADOT has no comments.

Thanks, Rick Freije
07/13/2026 Fire New Construction Standard REVIEW COMPLETED
06/17/2026 OK to Submit - Engineering Fast REVIEW COMPLETED
06/22/2026 OK to Submit - Zoning Fast REVIEW COMPLETED
07/14/2026 ROW Engineering Review Standard REVIEW COMPLETED
06/24/2026 ROW Review REVIEW COMPLETED