Information based on query as of Saturday, June 29, 2024.
Permit Information
Permit NumberNAF16-00034
StatusFinaled
Name ALTA FIRE PROTECTION COMPANY
Site Address 6939 W STATE ST
Project NameDISCOUNT TIRE
Customer Number 
ePlanReviewNo
Description
[Discount Tire]
The fire sprinkler scope of work consists of protecting a retail tire store. The building is a single floor with a mezzanine. The system is supplied through 8” underground to an 8” backflow preventer to a 6” header. There is a 6” riser to the overheads grid system of 4”x2 ½”x2 ½”. The in rack system is 4” to a 4” tree with 2” lines. The overhead sprinklers are K=11.2 and the in rack sprinklers are K=8.0

This project has been reviewed utilizing FM 8.3 2009 Data Sheets for the design.

Tires to be stored on TREAD ONLY.

Storage or display of tire outside is not permitted. Fire Protection Keynote 15 indicates there will be no outside storage
Contact Information
See Activities list for contact information
Show Inspection Activities Only
DescriptionReceivedRequestedCompletedAM/PMDispositionAssigned To 
Miscellaneous action  1/30/2017 DONE
Took to records for scanning
INSP-Final1/26/20171/26/20171/26/2017PPASS
DetailsKatie Marron
System is now monitored and active. Scope of work complete. Permit Finaled.
INSP-Final1/24/20171/25/20171/25/2017APART
DetailsKatie Marron
Operation test completed (flow test w/outside bell, tampers reporting to panel, forward flow). Fire Alarm contractor could not be present, so no monitoring capability. System was not left in active status.
INSP-Sprinkler Rough-in/Hydro1/24/20171/25/20171/25/2017APASS
DetailsKatie Marron
Hydrostatic test for overhead and racking completed satisfactory.
INSP-Final1/18/20171/20/20171/20/2017ANR
DetailsKatie Marron
Not ready per phone call with contractor
INSP-Sprinkler Rough-in/Hydro1/18/20171/18/20171/18/2017PPART
DetailsKatie Marron
Rough-in completed satisfactorily. Hydro static test passed on underground. Underground flush completed.

Hydro static tests failed on rack and over head systems, shall need to be redone.
INSP-Sprinkler Rough-in/Hydro1/18/20171/20/20171/18/2017PCANC
DetailsTroy Cobbley
Call prior to going Phone #: 8017063435 >> Inspection requested via mobile web by Dan snith Inspection cancelled via mobile web on Wednesday, January 18, 2017.
INSP-Sprinkler Rough-in/Hydro1/17/20171/18/20171/18/2017ACANC
DetailsKatie Marron
Call prior to going Phone #: 8017063435 >> Inspection requested via mobile web by Dan smith Inspection cancelled via mobile web on Wednesday, January 18, 2017.
CHANGE STATUS TO (ISS)  8/30/2016 DONE
permit was voided by mistake-as per Katie there should be 3 permits on this project
INSP-Sprinkler Rough-in8/24/20168/25/20168/25/2016PPASS
DetailsTroy Cobbley
The underground supply piping is ok to cover.
INSP-Conference8/24/20168/24/20168/24/2016PDONE
DetailsTroy Cobbley
Went over underground supply bury requirements.
Plan resubmittals received  8/10/2016 PASS
PLANS/APPL TAKEN TO FRONT DESK  8/10/2016 DONE
Permit Ready to Issue  8/10/2016 DONE
Issue and Courier  8/10/2016 DONE
emailed Shelley and put in the inner office mail
Plan resubmittals received  8/9/2016 DONE
resubmittals received4 sets of plan review comments,letter from Fisher Engineering, hydraulic calcs,wet pipe auto sprinler system equip, sheets FP1.0, FP1.1, FP2.0, FP3.0, FP3.1, FP4.0, FP4.1 & 1 permit app-took to Tim Frost
Meeting  7/8/2016 DONE
DetailsTim Frost
Applicant is now in the process of submitting a fire protection design as a "Performance Based Code Alternate" under the license of a PE. This proposed code alternate will be evaluated by the Fire Code Official upon recieving.
Meeting  5/24/2016 DONE
Had a telephone conference meeting with the engineering group, myself (Tim Frost) and the assistant fire marshal (Ron Johnson).
The engineering firm wanted to use the real flow test information not the information supplied by Garden City. The said they could make and ESFR system work without the need for a pump. Subsequent to the meeting I was informed Romeo had a prior discussion with Garden City water. They were apparently adamant that only S-50, R-20, Q-2000 could be used in their jurisdiction. Email was provided from the engineering group reiterating this fact. I have tried and Romeo has tried to reach FM and ask about the 8' aisle requirment in FM 8-3. So far no one at FM has returned our calls. The engineering firm want to use 44" isles per IFC. I have stated and the assistant fire marshall has stated that FM criteria has to be used entirely not just bits and pieces. Therefore, portions IFC cannot be intermixed with FM criteria.The project is on hold waiting for FM to respond or the engineering firm to redesign the system with 8' aisle per FM 8-3
Sprinkler Plan Check4/29/2016 4/29/2016 FAIL
DetailsTim Frost
1st review completed  4/29/2016 FAIL
Miscellaneous action  4/29/2016 DONE
Emailed contractor failed review.
Application received  4/20/2016  
Plan assigned to (Tim)4/20/2016    
DetailsTim Frost