Vote — approved

Kate Brophy McGee	yes
Debbie Lesko	yes
Mark Stewart	yes
Thomas Galvin	yes
Steve Gallardo	yes

8.SALOME VILLAGE SHOPS Case #: Z250044 (Supervisorial District: 4) Applicant and Owner: Ed Reichenberg, RAP LLC / Vishal Verma, Indus Rivers LLC Request: Zone Change from Rural-43 to C-2 Site Location: Generally located north of Salome Hwy. and approx. 360’ west of Wintersburg Rd. in the Tonopah area Commission Recommendation: On 4/9/26, the Commission voted 8-0 (motion by Commissioner Toma, D4, seconded by Commissioner Rochwalik D3) to adopt a motion recommending the Board of Supervisors approv

Item Text

8. SALOME VILLAGE SHOPS Case #: Z250044 (Supervisorial District: 4) Applicant and Owner: Ed Reichenberg, RAP LLC / Vishal Verma, Indus Rivers LLC Request: Zone Change from Rural-43 to C-2 Site Location: Generally located north of Salome Hwy. and approx. 360’ west of Wintersburg Rd. in the Tonopah area Commission Recommendation: On 4/9/26, the Commission voted 8-0 (motion by Commissioner Toma, D4, seconded by Commissioner Rochwalik D3) to adopt a motion recommending the Board of Supervisors approve Z250044 subject to conditions ‘a’ -‘i’. a. Development of the site shall be in substantial conformance with the zoning exhibit entitled “Zoning Map“, consisting of 1 page stamped received February 19, 2026, except as modified by the following conditions. Staff may determine slight refinements to remain in substantial conformance with the approved site plan. b. Development of the site shall be in substantial conformance with the narrative report entitled “Salome Village Shops“, consisting of 13 pages stamped received March 11, 2026, except as modified by the following conditions. Staff may determine slight refinements to remain in substantial conformance with the approved site plan. c. Administrative approval of a Plan of Development will be required prior to approval and issuance of construction permits to develop and establish use of the site. Prior to issuance of a building permit, written confirmation will be required from the emergency fire protection jurisdiction having authority that the facility has been designed in accordance with their regulations and requirements, and that emergency fire protection service will be provided to the facility. Prior to issuance of the certificate of occupancy, local fire protection jurisdiction review and approval will be required. d. The zone change is applied to restrict the use of the site. Until such time as the site is served by sewer, uses on the site shall only be those acceptable to the Maricopa County Environmental Services Department (MCESD) that can be accommodated by septic systems. A public water system and public sewer system shall be required prior to establishment of any non-residential use that requires potable water. e. The following Planning Engineering conditions shall apply: 1. Further entitlements such as a Plan of development (POD), will require: a. Submittal of an approved traffic impact statement (less than 1year old), updated TIS or TIS waiver. b. Engineered Grading and drainage plans and compliance with drainage and floodplain regulations. c. Compliance with MCDOT planning comments from the PA250132 for Right of way dedication and/or preservation. 2. Engineering and drainage review was based on a zone change submittal without a plan of development. Therefore, without the submittal of a precise plan of development, no development approval is inferred by this review, including, but not limited to number of proposed building lots/units, drainage design, access and roadway alignments. These items will be addressed as development plans progress and are submitted to the County for further review and/or entitlement. 3. Engineering review of re-zone cases is conceptual in nature. All development and engineering design shall be in conformance with Section 1205 of the Maricopa County Zoning Ordinance; Drainage Policies and Standards; Floodplain Regulations for Maricopa County; MCDOT Roadway Design Manual; and current engineering policies, standards and best practices at the time of application for construction. 4. The county does not provide fire service; therefore, it is incumbent that the applicant seeks service and approval of plans from the jurisdictional fire service provide. f. The following Maricopa County Environmental Services conditions shall apply: 1. Wastewater is not permitted to discharge to an adjacent parcel’s septic system. 2. If conducting food service in unincorporated Maricopa, a grease trap will be required by Onsite Wastewater program. 3. Setback requirements must be maintained per Arizona Administrative Code, Title 18, Chapter 9, Article 312, C (Features Requiring Setbacks). 4. Projected flows between 3,000 and 24,000 gallons per day require a 4.23 General Permit and may require nitrogen treatment. 5. If the wastewater flow exceeds 24,000 gpd or if an activated sludge treatment process is to be used, then a wastewater treatment plant may be required. 6. Additionally, an Individual Permit through the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) may be required. 7. Per the Safe Drinking Water Act, any water system that supplies more than 25 people or 15 service connections per day for at least 60 days per year is classified as a Public Water System (PWS). 8. If the above criteria are met, a Public Water System application and a New Source Approval application are required and must be submitted to the MCESD’s Drinking Water Program. A water quality analysis report will be required with submittal and is good within one-year of testing. 9. An Approval to Construct application is required to be submitted to the MCESD’s Treatment Program for all PWS water treatment facilities. 10. An Approval to Construct application is required to be submitted to the MCESD’s Subdivision & Infrastructure Program for all PWS water system infrastructure. g. The following Maricopa County Department of Transportation conditions shall apply: 1. Salome Highway is classified as an urban principal arterial requiring fee dedication of a 65-foot half street from the center line permit the Maricopa County Zoning Ordinance Section 804. a. It is the developer's responsibility to determine if the existing right of way is fee simple, if it is not then the developer will need to provide the right of way in said form. b. Applicant is required to provide, at applicant’s expense, an American Land Title Association (“ALTA”) Owner’s Policy of Title Insurance showing title vested in Maricopa County, a political subdivision of the State of Arizona. c. Dedication shall be completed by time of permit approval or case closeout if no MCDOT permit is required 2. The above comments do not include identification of utilities or underground facilities within or adjacent to the required right-of-way that may have prior rights and/or require relocation. 3. Any additional dedication and offsite improvement requirements will be determined by MCDOT Traffic based on a submitted TIA/TIS and the above roadway classification a. TIA/TIS to be submitted to MCDOT via Permit Center at https://maricopacountyaz-energovweb.tylerhost.net/apps/selfservice#/home. b. If a TIA/TIS has been previously submitted, approval is valid for one year. If review for construction is not underway within this time period, MCDOT may request an updated traffic report to assess any changes in condition. h. The property owner/s and their successors waive claim for diminution in value if the County takes action to rescind approval due to noncompliance with conditions. i. The granting of this change in use of the property has been at the request of the applicant, with the consent of the landowner. The granting of this approval allows the property to enjoy uses in excess of those permitted by the zoning existing on the date of application, subject to conditions. In the event of the failure to comply with any condition, the property may be considered for revocation to the zoning that existed on the date of application. It is, therefore, stipulated and agreed that either revocation due to the failure to comply with any conditions, does not reduce any rights that existed on the date of application to use, divide, sell or possess the property and that there would be no diminution in value of the property from the value it held on the date of application due to such revocation of the Zone Change. The Zone Change enhances the value of the property above its value as of the date the Zone Change is granted and reverting to the prior zoning results in the same value of the property as if the Zone Change had never been granted. (C-44-26-098-X-00)

Attachments (1)