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.
Inspection History Details
Inspection Status: Approved
Inspection History: INSP - INITIAL CODE ENFORCMENT
Case Number - T16DV03617
Inspection Description - INSP - INITIAL CODE ENFORCMENT
Inspection Status - Approved
| Date | Description | Inspector | Results | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 06/20/2016 | INSP - INITIAL CODE ENFORCMENT | Approved | VISITED SITE, MET WITH TFD, OWNER HAD TWO WOODEN BENCHES ON THE EXTERIOR REAR PATIO WITH A TABLE BETWEEN THE BENCHES AND PLACED UP AGAINST THE REAR WALL OF THE HOUSE. BENCHES CAUGHT FIRE, OWNER STATES THE LAST PERSON WHO WAS OUT THERE WAS THE WIFE'S BROTHER WHO WAS VISITING ON VACATION AND WAS OUT THERE SMOKING. TFD THINKS A SMOLDERING CIGARETTE BUTT CAUGHT THE BENCHES AND TABLE ON FIRE, FIRE MOVED INSIDE THE EXTERIOR WALL CAUSING FIRE TO THE LIVINGROOM/PATIO WALL. OWNER'S CONTRACTOR MATT KIM WAS ALSO ON SITE. HOUSE IS ONLY 2-3 YEARS OLD. MY FINDINGS ARE AS FOLLOWS: >6-0 X 6-0 WINDOW WAS FIRE DAMAGED BUT NOT BROKEN. >4 X 6 POST INSIDE THE WALL USED FOR TIE DOWN PURPOSES WAS FIRE DAMAGED. FRAMING AROUND THE WINDOW,( KING STUD, (2) TRIMMERS, SILL AND CRIPPLES WERE ALL FIRE DAMAGED, OSB SHEAR ALSO FIRE DAMAGED. >A HOLE WAS PLACED IN THE PATIO CEILING DRYWALL 3-0 X 3-0 >MULTIPLE HOLES WERE PLACED IN THE REAR WALL STUCCO FROM TFD CHASING THE FIRE IN BETWEEN 2 X 6 BAYS. >ELECTRICAL OUTLET AND WIRING IN THE SECTION OF WALL WAS ALSO AFFECTED. >MAIN DISCONNECT WAS TURNED OFF AT THE SERVICE PANEL TO THE ENTIRE HOUSE. > TFD CHOSE NOT TO CONTACT S/W GAS DUE TO NO GAS IN THE AREA OF THE FIRE. >SMOKE DAMAGE WAS EVIDENT IN THE DOWN STAIRS PORTION OF THE HOUSE, OWNER DENIED THE NEED FOR RED CROSS, STATED HE WOULD GET HIS OWN HOTEL ROOM. >POWER WAS RESTORED TO THE STRUCTURE BUT ISOLATED THE ELECTRICAL TO THE LIVINGROOM OUTLETS AND LIGHT. >CONTRACTOR MATT KIM STATED HE WOULD BE ADDING A SECOND STORY PORCH, MAY TRY TO DO BOTH UNDER ONE PERMIT. EXPLAINED THAT WOULD BE A CONTRACTOR/ INSURANCE DECISION. >NO SECURING OF THE STRUCTURE WAS REQUIRED >NOV ISSUED FOR PERMITS REQUIRED ONLY |