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: TC-COM-0725-01411
Parcel: 12613008C

Address:
102 S SWAN RD

Review Status: Requires Resubmit

Review Details: COMMERCIAL REVIEW - LIMITED v.1

Permit Number - TC-COM-0725-01411
Review Name: COMMERCIAL REVIEW - LIMITED v.1
Review Status: Requires Resubmit
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
08/08/2025 Commercial Building APPROVED
08/04/2025 Commercial Electrical APPROVED
08/08/2025 Bldg Permits - Post Review Express PENDING ASSIGNMENT
08/06/2025 Signs REQUIRES RESUBMIT August 5. 2025
102 S. Swan - TC-COM-0725-01411; COT 306
Repair Vandalized Electrical Equipment
Comments:
1. The Settlement Agreement, Page E9-5, number 5, states, "Clear Channel
shall have the right at any time to repair or replace any damage to or
destruction of any Clear Channel Billboard incurred through the wrongful
acts of third parties … provided that replacement parts are of the same
size, configuration, materials, and age or wear as is practical, and
provided that the repair or replacement is performed in the manner provided
in Exhibit 12." [emphasis added]
Exhibit 12 deals with the Permitting process and the documentation
required.
Exhibit 9, starting at number 2, states, "The following repairs and alterations
may be performed on a Clear Channel Billboard with a Permit …"
The section continues to Page E9-4, item (x) which states, "replacement of
electrical services, conduit, wiring, and /or meters with like electrical
services, conduit, wiring, and /or meters or such reasonably comparable
electrical services, conduit, wiring, and /or meters as required to comply with
the technical codes." [emphasis added]
Among other things, what is proposed in this submittal is the removal of a
disconnect switch to be replaced with a second electrical panel at the
location of the vandalized billboard, which is connected by conduit and
conductors to the second billboard on the site, which is where an existing
panel is located. What is proposed is more than is allowed by Exhibit 9.
There is a solution that does not require a second electrical panel, and that
is to remove the lights on one of the two billboards that are served by this
meter and panel. That would meet the requirements of the "like for like"
aspect as well as the current technical codes.
2. The Partial Site Plan on Drawing Sheet 2 of 2 shows a dimension on the
east side of the billboard of "Approx. 25'." In addition, there is a dimension
from the north end of the other existing billboard on the property of "Approx.
50'." Those dimensions are probably the distance from the billboards to the
curbs along Swan and Broadway. They should be marked as such,
because one could interpret that they are setbacks from the property lines,
which, according to a quick check on Google Earth, they are not. Please
identify them as being the distances to the curbs, not the property lines.
3. Drawing Sheet 2 of 2 in the title block, lower right, the address is
transposed. "201" should be "102."
4. The Partial Site Plan, Sheet 2 of 2, south side, notes that there is an
"existing 3/4" EMT with (2) #8 conductors to be replaced with (2) #6
conductors." This is not "like for like." This may be another issue regarding
having to meet current code, but again, it is beyond the scope of the
Settlement Agreement.
5. The note on the Partial Site Plan noted in #4 above does not match the
"Electrical Service (Exist.)" elevation drawing of the existing Unipole. The
Partial Site Plan note says, "Existing 3/4" EMT with (2) #8 conductors to be
replaced with (2) #6 conductors."
The Electrical Service Elevation drawing says, "Existing 1" EMT with (3) #6
conductors to be replaced with new (like)."
And the Scope of Work statement on Sheet 2 of 2 doesn't match several of
the notes on the drawings.
6. On the same Elevation noted in #5 above, there is no note identifying if
there are /were existing ground rods and cable, only that CCO proposes
"new 5/8" x 8' ground rods (2) and #4 solid copper ground cable."
Were existing ground rods and cable stolen? Are they existing but need to
be replaced? If so, what sizes are they? Is it possible that the installation
was never grounded (?) If it was never grounded, then adding new
grounding equipment is beyond the scope of the Settlement Agreement.
6. There are no specifications noted for the existing Meter Socket, "obsolete
Crouse Hinds Disconnect," or the Timer. I need to know that what is being
proposed is indeed "like for like."
7. It was the intention of the Settlement Agreement to allow CCO to repair
vandalized equipment. But the fact that the code has change in the
meantime does not mean that the Settlement Agreement must be violated in
order to accommodate the new overcurrent protection requirements. In
order to meet those requirements, some entirely new, and other larger sized
equipment is being proposed. The Settlement Agreement allows for
"reasonably comparable" equipment to replace existing equipment. What is
being proposed is more than what the Settlement Agreement allows, and
would make the installation more "robust" with a longer "life" than what is
there now.
Kathi McLaughlin, BRC Reviewer
08/06/2025 Site Zoning REQUIRES RESUBMIT Zoning cannot approve until sign comments have been addressed.
07/25/2025 PDSD Application Completeness Express REVIEW COMPLETED