Permit Review Detail
Review Status: In Review
Review Details: DEVELOPMENT PACKAGE NEW REVISION v.3
Permit Number - TD-DEV-1024-00291
Review Name: DEVELOPMENT PACKAGE NEW REVISION v.3
Review Status: In Review
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | CDRC Post Review Express | PENDING ASSIGNMENT | |||
| N/A | Commercial Plumbing Standard | PENDING ASSIGNMENT | |||
| N/A | ROW Engineering Review Standard | PENDING ASSIGNMENT | |||
| 10/28/2026 | Site Engineering Standard | REQUIRES RESUBMIT | Permit Activity Number: TD-DEV-1024-00291 Project: HTeaO - Revision 1 Location: 3250 E SPEEDWAY BL Review Date: 10/28/2026 Reviewer: Joe Macaulay – Civil Engineer – Site Development Reviewer Contact Information: joe.macaulay@tucsonaz.gov 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 Review Comments: 1. Please provide plans with signed seal of an Arizona Registrant for each sheet of the submitted plan set as there are sheets missing signature. [AM 2-06.4.2] 2. As the development package TD-DEV-1024-00291 had yet to see full approval until after the shown revisions on the cover sheet “Revision Issue Log”, please remove all revision bubbles and deltas around changes made prior to approval of plan set as they are not considered after approval revisions. a. Any revisions shown that were directly related to any reviewing entity comments during the initial submittal process need to be removed from the plan set, and the current revision shown within the set as Revision 1. Comment 2 & 2a Clarification: The submitted plan set shows 9 different revisions throughout the plans. Most of these revisions are during the timeframe of the review cycle before original permit approval and issuance on 6/13/2025. These "revisions" are based upon COT and outside review comments and are not considered revisions to an approved plan set, they are just normal review process procedure to ensure the submitted plans are to code and permit is approvable for issue. There are also other revisions shown in the set (7-9) that were done after the issuance date, but these are not in our system as submitted revisions, so there were concerns on how these were shown. My comments are given in order to clear out the review process comment revisions (1-6) from the set as they are not needed and should not be on the submitted set. The other revisions (7-9) should be shown and clouded on the plans, but they would start at Revision 1 - 6/25/25, Revision 2 - 6/26/2025, Revision 3 - 7/18/2025. This recent submission would then become Revision 4, but since our system did not receive the prior 3, it came in as Revision 1, and that's where the confusion comes in because there is already a "Revision 1". 3. Provide clouded linework around all information effected by the submitted revision on each applicable plan sheet. Each revision cloud shall be identified with a corresponding triangular revision number. (Comment arises from comments 2 & 2a as the bubbles and revision numbers will change based on what is removed from the plan set, but also that the entire work in the revision is not shown on the set). a. Sheet C2.0 shows revision bubble at southeast for Existing Manhole 9810-113, but does not include the linework for the entire manhole revision. Please ensure to show all proposed revision linework and the new location of the manhole on the related sheets. (As the site plan should include all of the work for the development, this is where this comment arises, and even though it is not in the scope of our review, the revised location of the manhole should be clearly shown in the submitted plans for clarity). 4. Provide a revision description table on each plan sheet, including the cover sheet. a. The table shall identify the applicable triangular revision number and provide a brief description that accurately corresponds to the submitted revision number shown on that sheet to allow the information to be readily correlated throughout the plan set. Comment 4 & 4a Clarification: Comments rise from the need to show the revisions correctly in the table on the cover sheet of the plan set and other sheets where the revisions are tabled based on the removal of the 1-6 revisions noted above. |
||
| 10/21/2026 | CDRC Review Coordinator Express | REVIEW COMPLETED | External Reviewers not required. No further action is required from the customer at this time. | ||
| 10/20/2026 | OK to Submit - Engineering Fast | REVIEW COMPLETED | |||
| 10/20/2026 | OK to Submit - Zoning Fast | REVIEW COMPLETED |