The above-captioned case was scheduled for hearing on September 22, 2009 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Chairman Coutu, Vice Chairman Newbrook and Commissioners Richard, Preiss and Jasparro were present.  Commissioner Blackburn recused himself from participation in this case.  The fire service was represented by Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshals Richard Silva and Richard Vespia of the Providence Fire Marshals Office.  A motion was made by Vice Chairman Newbrook and seconded by Commissioner Pearson to grant the Applicant relief as outlined herein.  The motion was unanimous.

FINDINGS OF FACT

The numbers of the Decision below correspond with those of a July 20, 2009 building description and summary of requested variances of compiled by the Applicant.  The above summary was utilized by the Board, the Applicant and the Providence Fire Marshals Office during the hearing on this matter.  Accordingly, the Board hereby incorporates the July 20, 2009 summary as its initial findings of fact.  Any modification of the Boards findings, such as correction of a deficiency by the Applicant, shall be noted herein. 
	Any deficiency understood by the Board to have been corrected, which is not so corrected, shall be immediately corrected by the Applicant.  The term approved, as used herein, shall be understood to mean in accordance with the specific provisions related to the particular subject as are contained in this code, or as approved in particular by the state fire marshal or his or her designee.

CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS
1.	The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of RIUFC section 13.8.10.4.3 (High Rise Fire Alarm Systems) in order to allow the Applicant to provide this building with a fire alarm system as outlined in RIUFC section 13.8.10.4.2 (Municipally Connected Systems).  The above system shall require general evacuation as opposed to evacuation of the floor above.  Further, the building shall be tested for radio communication and be provided with appropriate amplification if deemed necessary by the Providence Fire Marshal.  The Board notes that there was no objection from the Providence Fire Marshals Office. 
2.	The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of RILSC Table 7.2.2.2.1(b) in order to allow the Applicant to maintain the existing dimensions of the interior stairs within this facility.  The Board notes that there was no objection from the Providence Fire Marshals Office. 
3.	The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of RILSC Table 7.2.8.4.1(a) in order to allow the Applicant to maintain the existing dimensions of the fire escape stairs within this facility.  The Board notes that there was no objection from the Providence Fire Marshals Office. 
4.	The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of RILSC Section 7.1.3.2.1(5) in order to allow the Applicant to maintain the existing storage room that opens directly to the exit stairway within this facility if so approved by the Providence Fire Marshals Office.  Specifically, the Board shall leave this file open for the parties to review this situation and determine whether it can be eliminated without creating a hardship to the Applicant.  The parties may also return if there are problems relating to an easement for the sprinkler line and/or the existing active fire protection. The Board notes that there was no objection from the Providence Fire Marshals Office. 
5.	The Board hereby grants a time variance until April 16, 2010 to bring this facility into compliance with the fire code. The Board notes that Marshal Silva specified that this time line was the original projected time line.  Again, this file remains open in the event the parties require further review by the Board.  

STATUS OF DECISION AND APPEAL RIGHTS
	This Decision represents a comprehensive, integrated plan of fire safety for the above-captioned facility under the above-cited use or occupancy.  Accordingly, every variance granted is conditioned upon the Applicants timely and continued compliance with all of the directives of the Board. Every variance granted is further conditioned upon the continued use or occupancy of this facility under the above-cited classification reviewed by the Board. ( See: Board Rules and Regulations, section 6-2-17).
	Failure of the Applicant to initially comply with the full Decision of the Board, within the stated time frame, shall void all variances granted herein. (See: Board Rules and Regulations, section 6-2-18)  In the event of complete, timely and continued compliance with the full Decision of the Board, the above-cited variances shall be deemed to have vested in the above-captioned facility.  As long as this facility is in continued compliance with the full Decision of the Board, the above-cited variances shall remain with this facility in the absence of any change in use or occupancy mandating review under a separate classification of the Fire Code or a revision of the above-cited classification. . (See: Board Rules and Regulations, section 6-2-19).  Such changes in use or occupancy of this facility, or failure to continually comply with the Boards Decision shall void all variances granted under the above-cited use or occupancy.  If such change creates a new use or occupancy as outlined in R.I.G.L. 23-28.1-6, all variances granted under the original use or occupancy are void and this facility shall be reviewed under the newly created use or occupancy. . (See: Board Rules and Regulations, section 6-2-20).
	The Applicant may appeal the Boards Decision, within thirty (30) days of the mailing date of this Decision, by commencing an action against the State Fire Marshal in the Sixth division of the District Court.  Commencement of such an action does not operate as an automatic stay of this Decision [R.I.G.L. 42-35-15(c)].