INSP-Final Inspection | 1/5/2006 | 1/9/2006 | 1/9/2006 | A | PASS |
Troy Cobbley
|
|
|
Permit finaled
|
Sprinkler Plan Check | 11/29/2005 | | 11/29/2005 | | PASS |
Troy Cobbley
|
|
|
Plans approved with comments
|
PLANS/APPL TAKEN TO FRONT DESK | | | 11/29/2005 | | DONE |
|
|
|
|
Permit Ready to Issue | | | 11/29/2005 | | DONE |
|
|
|
|
Inspection Record Card- Fire | 11/29/2005 | | 11/29/2005 | | DONE |
|
|
|
|
Telephone call | | | 11/29/2005 | | DONE |
|
|
|
Spoke with Jeff and told him permit is ready & fees///11/29/05 @ 9:25am BAS
|
Issue and Print Permit | | | 11/29/2005 | | DONE |
|
|
|
|
Plan resubmittals received | | | 11/1/2005 | | DONE |
|
|
|
|
FIR-Aging Inspection | 10/17/2005 | 10/17/2005 | 10/19/2005 | | NR |
Troy Cobbley
|
|
|
Jeff is going to check on job status
|
Issue permit | | | 7/18/2005 | | DONE |
|
|
|
|
Inspection Record Card- Fire | 7/13/2005 | | 7/13/2005 | | DONE |
|
|
|
|
Permit Ready to Issue | | | 7/13/2005 | | DONE |
|
|
|
|
Telephone call | | | 7/13/2005 | | DONE |
|
|
|
tlk to jeff packham ###-#### that permit and fees are ready to be picked up
|
Sprinkler Plan Check | 7/1/2005 | | 7/12/2005 | | PART |
Bill Alexander
|
|
|
Re-Submittals Of The Following Items Are Required:
1. Plans submitted require elevation detail specifically relating to ceiling height, soffit heights, soffit widths and deflector locations and distances. Scope of work indicates ceiling will be lifted (the word "shorten" is used). Since the soffits are not being toughed, this would imply the possibility that a problem could exist which the designer has not made it clear that he verified. This information shall be addressed on the plans when submitting since chapters and paragraphs are prevalent addressing obstructions throughout NFPA 13, starting in detail with 8.6.5.1.2.(BMC 7-01-50 IFC 901.2, 105.4.2)
2. This system was verified for OH-1 Occupancy densities over 2,500-ft/2? This appears to be an FM design minimum and would be subject to a "no change."
3. It is interesting to note that the designer indicates the original design density spacing is for 225-ft/2, yet nowhere even remotely near that spacing was found on the original plan? System design indicates the original design was for .15 density with a 120-ft/2 spacing? If incorporating light hazard density spacing, this would be limited to 180-ft/2 spacing and ignoring true friction loss pressure for that spacing. It shall be the inspector's prerogative to require verification and possible resubmittals if spacing exceeds what was originally designed and installed (excess of 120-ft/2). (BMC 7-01-50 IFC 901.2, 105.4.2)
|
PLANS/APPL TAKEN TO FRONT DESK | | | 7/12/2005 | | DONE |
|
|
|
|
Application received | | | 7/1/2005 | | |
|
|
|
|
Case Summary | | | 7/1/2005 | | |
|
|
|
|
Plan assigned to (Bill) | 7/1/2005 | | | | |
|
|
|
|