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

Permit Number: DP15-0174
Parcel: 99999999A

Address:
9955 E 22ND ST

Review Status: Completed

Review Details: TENTATIVE PLAT REVIEW

Permit Number - DP15-0174
Review Name: TENTATIVE PLAT REVIEW
Review Status: Completed
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
10/12/2015 BVIESTE1 POLICE REVIEW Approved I have no issues with this request.


CSO Becky Noel #37968

Tucson Police Dept.

1100 S. Alvernon

Tucson, AZ 85711

520-837-7428
10/12/2015 KROBLES1 START PLANS SUBMITTED Completed
10/14/2015 TOM MARTINEZ OTHER AGENCIES AZ DEPT TRANSPORTATION Approved Regional Traffic Engineering has no comments on this submittal and supports its acceptance. Thank you.
10/14/2015 BVIESTE1 TUCSON WATER NEW AREA DEVELOPMENT REVIEW Approved See additional documents in PRO.

Here is our response letter to above request.

Kellie Anderson

Tucson Water/New Development

Administrative Assistant

520-837-2165

520-791-4718

520-791-2501 (fax)

Kellie.Anderson@tucsonaz.gov
10/14/2015 FDILLON1 DESIGN PROFESSIONAL REVIEW Denied Plans / Architectural Variation PLan has been forwarded to the Design Professional for Review and Comments.
10/14/2015 FDILLON1 DESIGN PROFESSIONAL REVIEW Denied October 14, 2015


DESIGN PROFESSIONAL
RECOMMENDATIONS & MODIFICATIONS REPORT LETTER

PROJECT: COT FLD DP15-0174
Red Colt Ranch
FLEXIBLE LOT DEVELOPMENT
DESIGN PROFESSIONAL REVIEW

This project has been selected for review by Rick Gonzalez, Architect (RGA), a contracted Design Professional for the City of Tucson (COT). RGA has conducted a Flexible Lot Development Design Criteria Review report #1 for compliance with the Unified Development Code on behalf of the Planning and Development Services Department (PDSD) Interim Director, Jim Mazzocco, and Principle Planner (PP), Frank Dillon.
This letter contains recommendations and modifications to be addressed by written responses indicating any actions taken. In order to facilitate a shorter 2nd review, provide all indicated responses and revisions to the plans. Please return revised plans and response letter to the COT PDSD in accordance with their submittal requirements.
To avoid delays, ensure that all responses are made and are complete, and have been coordinated on all applicable details and note sheets. When the plans are found to be in accordance with the UDC FLD recommendations and modifications listed below, RGA will forward a letter of recommendation of compliance to the COT PDSD Interim Director and PP. The PDSD shall make the final decision on the project's compliance with FLD design Criteria for this development (UDC 8.7.3.M).
GENERAL NOTE:
11 point letter Times New Roman - Indicates excerpts or edited excerpts from the FLD or UDC for reference and clarity.
12 point bold and italicized Arial - Indicates Design Professional's Comments
1ST REVIEW COMMENTS:
M. Design Criteria
1. Architectural Variation
c. Requirements

(1) The same architectural elevation shall not be repeated more often than every fourth lot.
Comment 1: Please provide a Site Plan indicating the location of the models and showing the same model will not be repeated in lot sequence more than four times in a row.
(3) Garage Placement. For FLD projects with over 20 or more single family detached residential units, no more than 50 percent of detached residential units throughout the FLD shall be designed with garages that protrude from or are flush with the front wall of the living area or front porch of the house.
Comment 2: Please provide a Site Plan indicating no more than 50% of the detached units are flush or project from the front wall living area.
Architectural Variation Plan Required
(2) The AVP shall be included with the subdivision plat, site plan, or building permit submittal.
(5) Conditions of the approved AVP shall be included as notes on the approved plat or site plan, whichever applies, and the building plan.

Comment 3: Please demonstrate in the Site Plan how dwellings are configured to provide Solar Access and passive Solar considerations.

3. Solar Access and Passive Solar
a. Solar Access
Dwelling units should be configured to allow solar access to adjacent structures in accordance with Section 7.3, Solar Considerations.
b. Passive Solar
FLD projects should incorporate passive solar design when practicable.

END OF 1ST FLD REVIEW, DESIGN PROFESSIONAL RECOMMENDATIONS AND MODIFICATIONS
10/14/2015 KBROUIL1 COT NON-DSD FIRE Approved
10/15/2015 PGEHLEN1 PIMA COUNTY WASTEWATER Approved PIMA COUNTY
REGIONAL WASTEWATER RECLAMATION DEPARTMENT
201 NORTH STONE AVENUE
TUCSON, ARIZONA 85701-1207
JACKSON JENKINS PH: (520) 740-6500
DIRECTOR FAX: (520) 620-0135


October 15, 2015

To: Michael Baker, P.E.
Baker & Associates, Inc

Thru: Patricia Gehlen
City of Tucson

____________________________________________________
From: Tom Porter, P.E Engineering Services (520-724-6719)
Pima County Regional Wastewater Reclamation Department

Subject: Red Colt Ranch Lots 1-21 and Common Areas "A","B" and "C"
Revised Tentative Plat - 1st Submittal


The Pima County Regional Wastewater Reclamation Department (PCRWRD) has reviewed the proposed sewer design for the above-referenced project. The Pima County Regional Wastewater Reclamation Department has approved the above referenced submittal of the Tentative Plat, based upon PCRWRD Engineering Design Standards (EDS) 2012.

If you have any questions regarding this matter please contact me at your convenience.

Cc. Lorenzo Hernandez, P.E., RWRD
Francisco Galindo, P.E., RWRD
Gerry Koziol, RWRD

Project file
10/19/2015 ED ABRIGO PIMA COUNTY ASSESSOR Approved Office of the Pima County Assessor
240 N STONE AVENUE
Tucson, Arizona 85701

BILL STAPLES
ASSESSOR

TO: CDRC Office
Subdivision Review
City of Tucson (FAX# 791-5559)

FROM: Julieann Arechederra
GIS Cartographer
Pima County Assessor's Office

DATE: October 19, 2015


RE: Assessor's Review and Comments Regarding: DP15-0174
RED COLT RANCH TENTATIVE PLAT


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

X Plat meets Assessor's Office requirements.
_______ Plat does not meet Assessor's Office requirements.

COMMENTS:





NOTE: THE ASSESSOR'S CURRENT INVOLVEMENT IN PROCESSING ITS MANUAL MAPS TO DIGITAL FORMAT IS EXPEDITED GREATLY BY EXCHANGE OF DIGITAL DATA. IN THE COURSE OF RECORDING THIS SUBDIVISION YOUR ASSISTANCE IN PROVIDING THIS OFFICE WITH AN AUTOCAD COPY WOULD BE GREATLY APPRECIATED. THANK YOU FOR ANY DIGITAL DATA PREVIOUSLY SUBMITTED.
10/22/2015 BVIESTE1 OTHER AGENCIES PIMA ASSN OF GOVTS Approved See additional documents in PRO.

No objections/adverse comments. See attached.




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Disclaimer: This report and/or data was funded in part through grant[s] from the Federal Highway Administration and/or Federal Transit Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation. The contents of this report and/or data reflect the views and opinions of the author(s) who is responsible for the facts and accuracy of the data presented herein. The contents do not necessarily state or reflect the official views or policies of the U.S. Department of Transportation, the Arizona Department of Transportation, or any other State or Federal Agency. This report and/or data does not constitute a standard, specification or regulation. The information in this publication is provided on an “as is” basis, and there are no warranties, express or implied, including, but not limited to, any warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose. In no event shall PAG be liable for any damages resulting from the use of the information. PAG provides the information in good faith and has endeavored to create and maintain accurate data. The users of this report and/or data are advised to use the information with caution and to independently verify accuracy.

____________________________

Eric W. Kramer, Ph.D., AICP

Senior Land-Use Modeler



PAG40MPOhoriz3.png



1 E. Broadway Blvd, Ste. 401

Tucson, AZ 85701

(520) 495-1455 (tel)

(520) 620-6981 (fax)

www.pagregion.com

ekramer@pagregion.com
10/29/2015 BVIESTE1 PIMA COUNTY ADDRESSING Approved Good Morning,

Pima County Addressing approves Dp15-0174 / Red Colt Ranch FLD Tentative Plat.

Thank you,

Robin Freiman

Addressing Specialist

Pima County Development Services Department

201 N Stone AV – 1st Floor
Tucson, AZ 85701

(520) 724-7570

201 N. STONE AV, 1ST FL
TUCSON, AZ 85701-1207


ROBIN FREIMAN
ADDRESSING REVIEW
PH #: 721-9512

TO: CITY PLANNING
FROM: ROBIN FREIMAN, ADDRESSING REVIEW
SUBJECT: Dp15-0174 / Red Colt Ranch FLD Tentative Plat - 1st Review
DATE: October 29, 2015

The above referenced project has been reviewed by this Division for all matters pertaining to street naming/addressing, and we hereby approve this project.

Submit a 24 x 36 Reverse Reading Double Matte Photo Mylar of approved Final Plat to City Planning

***PIMA COUNTY ADDRESSING MUST RECEIVE A COPY OF THE RECORDED FINAL PLAT PRIOR TO THE ASSIGNMENT OF ANY ADDRESSES. PLEASE COORDINATE THE DELIVERY AND RECORDATION OF THE MYLAR WITH THE CITY OF TUCSON PLANNING***

2.) All addresses will need to be displayed per Pima County Address Standards at the time of final inspection.


***The Pima County Addressing Section can use digital CAD drawing files.
These CAD files can be e-mailed to: CADsubmittals@pima.gov
The digital CAD drawing files expedite the addressing and permitting processes when we are able to insert this digital data into the County's Geographic Information System. Your support is greatly appreciated.***
10/29/2015 JOHN BEALL COT NON-DSD COMMUNITY PLANNING Passed Applicable policies for the General Plan and the Pantano East Area Plan were addressed at the time of rezoning case C9-06-19.
11/02/2015 LOREN MAKUS ENGINEERING REVIEW Approved
11/03/2015 MICHAEL ST. PAUL ZONING REVIEW Reqs Change CDRC TRANSMITTAL

TO: Development Services Department
Plans Coordination Office

FROM: Michael St Paul
Planning Technician

PROJECT: DP15-0174
9955 East 22nd Street
TP for Red Colt Ranch FLD

TRANSMITTAL DATE: November 3, 2015

DUE DATE: November 5, 2015

1) COMMENT: Please resubmit revised drawings along a response letter, which states how all Zoning Review Section comments regarding the Unified Development Code, The Administrative and Technical Manuals were addressed.

This plan has been reviewed for compliance with the Development Package Standards listed in section 2-06 of the City of Tucson Administrative Manual. Also compliance with applicable development criteria for the proposed use as listed in the City of Tucson Uniform Development Code (UDC).

The review comments include the actual standard first with the applicable Administrative Manual section number and the following paragraph is the actual comment related to the specific item that must be addressed. If you need to review the sections listed below click on the link or copy it in the address bar of your internet program. http://www.amlegal.com/nxt/gateway.dll/Arizona/tucson_az_udc/administrativemanual?f=templates$fn=default.htm$3.0$vid=amlegal:tucson_udc_az

This link will take you directly to the section used for the standards review. The UDC requirements are in the Unified Development Code and can be viewed at the same web link as above

1. 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 .

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

2-06.1.0 GENERAL

2-06.2.0 APPLICATION SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS

2-06.3.0 FORMAT REQUIREMENTS

2-06.4.0 CONTENT REQUIREMENTS

2-06.5.0 FLEXIBLE LOT DEVELOPMENT (FLD) - ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS

2-06.1.0 GENERAL

2-06.1.1 PURPOSE
This standard has been prepared for the purpose of informing applicants of the submittal and review requirements for development package documents to assure proper and adequate information is presented in a consistent manner, thereby providing the basis for an efficient and timely review. The development package documents are prepared in support of applications for building permits and related reviews.

The information that is requested establishes the basis upon which the project will be approved and could affect what is required of the property in the future, should there be a proposal for expansion or for a different use of the property.

This standard does not waive any applicable city regulations or codes.

2-06.1.2 APPICABILITY
This standard shall be used for all site plans and tentative plats submitted to PDSD for review.

2-06.2.1 APPLICATION SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS
Development Package applications are available from PDSD. Completed applications and accompanying materials shall be submitted to PDSD. Incomplete or inaccurate applications will not be accepted, nor will any application in which the pre-application conference or neighborhood meeting requirements have not been met. The types of documents and the specific number of copies required of each of the documents are on the PDSD website or may be obtained from PDSD. Resubmittals of development packages require a comment response letter that details how all previous comments have been addressed. Provide the same number of copies of the comment response letter as plans provided.
The following documents and information shall be submitted upon application:

2-06.2.1 Application Form
A completed application signed by the property owner or authorized designee;

2-06.2.2 Development Package
A development package must be prepared to the format and content requirements described herein;

2-06.2.3 Related Reviews
In addition to the plan process, a project may require review for other types of plans and documents. The applications for those processes are submitted to the appropriate department for review and approval. These related reviews can be applied for so that review can occur concurrently with the development package application. However, it must be understood that, should the related application be approved subject to conditions or denied, this may affect the;

2-06.2.4 Concurrent Reviews
The development package is designed to allow for concurrent review of any site related reviews. Concurrent review means that all plans and documents needed for the review are submitted as one package. Examples of site related reviews include but are not limited to: site plans, landscape plans, NPPO plans, water harvesting plans, grading plans, SWPPP plans, floodplain use permits, and overlay reviews. Separate applications are often required for the different site related reviews even if the plans are submitted concurrently; and,

2-06.2.5 Fees
Fees in accordance with Section 4-01.0.0, Development Review Fee Schedule.

2-06.4.0 CONTENT REQUIREMENTS

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

2-06.4.7.A - Zoning and Land Use Notes

2) COMMENT: In Zoning and Land Use Notes, note number 8 refers to the subdivision as RCP. Change that to FLD. Rezoning Conditions, number (6) six is listed as number four (4). You should correct that.

2-06.4.7.C - Streets and Roads Notes

2-06.4.7.C.3 - Provided the following notes as applicable:

2-06.4.7.C.3.a - "Total miles of new public streets is ____________."

3) COMMENT: Provide the mileage for the new street. It is not zero.

2-06.4.7.C.3.b - "Total miles of new private streets is ____________."

2-06.4.9.M.3 - Tentative Plats - Non Concurrent Review. A separate grading plan may be submitted after the second resubmittal of the tentative plat; however, the grading plan cannot be approved unless it is conformance with an approved tentative plat.
Note: In the case of a tentative plat submitted in conjunction with a rezoning request, the tentative plat and grading plan cannot be approved until 30 days after adoption of the rezoning ordinance. See Section 3.5.3.K.6, Ordinance Effective Date, of the UDC.

2-06.4.9.U - Indicate graphically, where possible, compliance with conditions of rezoning.

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.

4) COMMENT: Signs shall be by separate permits and process.

2-06.4.9.X - Show compliance with landscaping and screening requirements by locations, material descriptions, and dimensions. Specific plant or hardscape material shall be detailed on a landscape plan. A detailed landscape plan is required. In accordance with Section 2-11.0.0, Landscape Plan Requirements.

5) COMMENT: See comments by the landscaping reviewer.

2-06.5.0 FLEXIBLE LOT DEVELOPMENT (FLD - ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS)

2-06.5.2 Tentative Plat Required
An FLD proposing to subdivide the project site into two or more lots must prepare a tentative plat. Tentative plats for FLDs must be prepared in accordance with Section 2-06.0.0, Development Package, including Section 2-06.5.3, Additional Information, and the following developable area information:

2-06.5.2.B - Show the maximum developable area of each lot (i.e., building footprint).

6) COMMENT: See comment number seven (7) below.

2-06.5.3 Additional Information
The following are required in addition to the requirements of the tentative plat or site plan, whichever is applicable:

2-06.5.3.A. Reduced Perimeter Yards
Street perimeter yards along interior street rights-of-way and perimeter yards between interior lots may be modified in accordance with Section 8.7.3.L, Perimeter Yards on Interior Lots, of the UDC. Applicants requesting a perimeter yard reduction must indicate what the required and reduced perimeter yards are and their locations. Applicants requesting a reduced street perimeter yard must provide a written description of how the reduced yard will enhance the architectural design or the vehicular circulation in the FLD and submit a transportation statement, or if required by the Department of Transportation, a traffic impact analysis;

7) COMMENT: Note 7 in the Architectural Notes on the cover sheet call out for a minimum side yard separation of ten feet for lots one through ten. Delineate and dimension this requirement on sheet 2 of the tentative plat.

2-06.5.3.E - Architectural Variation Plan
When applicable, an architectural variation plan is required in accordance with Section 8.7.3.M.1 of the UDC as follows:

8) COMMENT: See comments by Frank Dillon and the Design Professional.

2-06.5.3.E.1 - Identify on the tentative plat or site plan the lots and/or units that must provide architectural variation; and,

9) COMMENT: See comments by Frank Dillon and the Design Professional.

2-06.5.3.E.2 - Provide a written statement and drawings (such as elevations and building footprints) demonstrating how the proposed architectural variation techniques comply with Section 8.7.3.M.1 of the UDC.
2-06.5.3.F - Privacy Mitigation Plan

10) COMMENT: See comments by Frank Dillon and the Design Professional.

When applicable, a privacy mitigation plan is required in accordance with Section 8.7.3.M.2.d of the UDC as follows:

11) COMMENT: See comments by Frank Dillon and the Design Professional.

2-06.5.3.F.1 - Identify on the tentative plat or site plan the lots and/or units that must provide privacy mitigation;

12) COMMENT: See comments by Frank Dillon and the Design Professional.

2-06.5.3.F.2 - Provide photographs of the site and its interface with the adjacent properties documenting the existing conditions; and,

13) COMMMENT: See comments by Frank Dillon and the Design Professional.

2-06.5.3.F.3 - Provide a written statement and drawings (such as elevations and landscape plans) demonstrating how the proposed mitigation techniques comply with Section 8.7.3.M.2.b of the UDC. The plan should include when practicable additional design elements to increase privacy such as the siting angle of buildings, windows, and lots;

14) COMMENT: See comments by Frank Dillon and the Design Professional.

2-06.5.3.G - Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions

2-06.5.3.G.1 - Provide three copies of the Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&Rs) regarding the homeowner's association's responsibility for the ownership and maintenance of commonly-owned property.

15) COMMENT: Provide the CC&Rs.

2-06.5.3.G.2 - Provide two copies of the protective covenants or common use agreements for any shared areas being established by easements over individually-owned property.

16) COMMENT: Provide the protective covenants.


If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call Michael St. Paul, (520) 837-4959.

RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development package site plan and any requested documents.
11/03/2015 MICHAEL ST. PAUL H/C SITE REVIEW Approved
11/03/2015 MICHAEL ST. PAUL ADA REVIEW Approved
11/03/2015 ZELIN CANCHOLA COT NON-DSD TRAFFIC Approved
11/04/2015 GLENN HICKS COT NON-DSD PARKS & RECREATION Approved No existing or proposed Tucson Parks and Recreation facilities are affected by this development.


Howard B. Dutt, RLA

Landscape Architect
Tucson Parks & Recreation
(520) 837-8040

Howard.Dutt@tucsonaz.gov
11/05/2015 PGEHLEN1 COT NON-DSD ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Passed
11/05/2015 BVIESTE1 UTILITIES SOUTHWEST GAS Approved See additional documents in PRO.

November 5, 2015

The WLB Group, Incorporated
Attn: Linda Thompson
4444 E. Broadway Blvd
Tucson, AZ 85611

RE: SWG Plan Review for Stone Canyon VIII Improvement Plan

Southwest Gas Corporation (SWG) has no objection to the plans of the above-mentioned project. Existing natural gas facilities are located in adjacent rights-of-way and may be affected by the construction of this project; specifically, an existing 6" & 4" gas main with 4" Stubs is located within the right-of-way of Tortolita Mountain circle and Flint Peak Place which may be impacted by pavement sawcutting and grading into the development.

SWG also requests that no trees be planted within close proximity to gas facilities due to root intrusion; therefore, SWG requires all tree placements have a minimum eight-foot clearance from the tree center line to existing or proposed gas facilities. Shrubs and bushes may be planted within the eight-foot clearance zone.

All information is provided for reference use only. Please note that it is the responsibility of excavators or those developers planning excavation to verify actual field conditions in advance of construction so that requests for gas service or any potential issues can be addressed in a timely manner. Blue Stake and potholing are suggested for best accuracy when locating SWG facilities.

Please include SWG in all future plat and development plan submittals of this project. If you have any questions or require any additional information, please contact me at
(520) 794-6194 or TUCSWGDevReview@swgas.com.



Sincerely,



Ben De Los Monteros
Engineering Tech/Engineering
Southern Arizona Division
11/05/2015 PGEHLEN1 UTILITIES EL PASO NATURAL GAS Passed
11/05/2015 PGEHLEN1 UTILITIES CENTURYLINK Passed
11/05/2015 LIZA CASTILLO UTILITIES TUCSON ELECTRIC POWER Approved SUBJECT: RED COLT RANCH - REVISED TENATIVE PLAT
DP15-0174

Tucson Electric Power Co. (TEP) has reviewed and approves the Revised Tentative Plat for Red Colt Ranch submitted on October 12, 2015.

In order for TEP to prepare an electrical design for the subdivision, please provide a copy of the Approved Tentative Plat and the subdivision AutoCAD file to mburke@tep.com. Easements for TEP facilities must be shown on the Final Plat before TEP can approve the Final Plat.

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at 917-8744.

Thank you,

Mary Burke

Right of Way Agent

Tucson Electric Power Co.

Mail Stop HQE613

PO Box 711, Tucson, AZ 85702

Office - 520-917-8744

Cell - 520-401-9895

mburke@tep.com
11/05/2015 PGEHLEN1 COT NON-DSD REAL ESTATE Passed
11/05/2015 JOE LINVILLE LANDSCAPE REVIEW Approved
11/05/2015 ROBERT SHERRY PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL REVIEW Reqs Change Revise the site drawing to identify which lots will require the installation of a backwater valve. A backwater valve shall be installed where the finish floor elevation will be less than 12 inches above the elevation of the next upstream manhole in the public sewer system. Reference: Admin Manual Section 2-06.4.9.N.4.
11/05/2015 BVIESTE1 ENV SVCS REVIEW Approv-Cond The Development Plan has been reviewed on behalf of the Environmental Services Dept and the following will need to be addressed on the resubmittal:

1. Add a general note stating the refuse and recycling service is to be individual curbside service. Plastic containers (APCs) shall be placed and removed from the curbside collection area on the day of service and shall be stored from public view.

If there are any questions, I can be reached at kperry@perryengineering.net
11/05/2015 PATRICIA GEHLEN ZONING-DECISION LETTER REVIEW Reqs Change This review has been completed and resubmittal is required. Please resubmit the following items:

1) Two rolled sets of the plans
2) All items requested by review staff
3) All items needed to approve this plan
11/05/2015 ROBERT YOUNG PIMA COUNTY PIMA CTY - DEV REVIEW Passed
11/05/2015 PGEHLEN1 OTHER AGENCIES U. S. POST OFFICE Passed
11/05/2015 PGEHLEN1 OTHER AGENCIES TUCSON AIRPORT AUTHORITY Passed

Final Status

Task End Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description
11/13/2015 EGALLET1 APPROVAL SHELF Completed
11/13/2015 EGALLET1 OUT TO CUSTOMER Completed
11/13/2015 EGALLET1 REJECT SHELF Completed