The above-captioned case was scheduled for hearing on November 17, 2009 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Chairman Coutu, Vice Chairman Newbrook and Commissioners Preiss, Blackburn, Richard, Walker, Jasparro, Dias and Filippi were present.  The fire service was represented by Deputy State Fire Marshal Christopher Moore of the State Fire Marshals Office.  A motion was made by Vice Chairman Newbrook and seconded by Commissioners Dias, Walker and Filippi 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 an April 9, 2008 inspection report compiled by the State Fire Marshals Office.  The above report was utilized by the Board, the Applicant and the State Fire Marshals Office during the November 17, 2009 hearing on this matter.  Accordingly, the Board hereby incorporates the April 9, 2008 inspection report 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, is 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 
	1-3.  It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiencies 1, 2 and 3 at the direction and to the satisfaction of the State Fire Marshal's office.
	4.  The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of section 33.2.2.1.1 and its referenced standards in order to allow the Applicant to maintain the existing egress from the second floor of this facility and to further maintain the existing cited window dimensions of the bedrooms of this facility.  In granting this relief, it is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant shall provide this facility with approved sprinkler coverage, installed at the direction and to the satisfaction of the State Fire Marshal's office, as outlined in item 10 below.
	5.  It is the understanding of the Board that deficiency 5 will be rendered moot with the installation of the sprinkler system as outlined in item 10 below.
	6.  The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of section 33.2.2.6.1 and its referenced standards in order to allow the Applicant to maintain the existing dimensional criteria of the stairway leading from the first floor kitchen to the basement of this facility as cited in the April 9, 2008 report.  The Board grants this relief based on the Applicants installation of sprinkler coverage as outlined in item 10 below.
	7.  It is the understanding of the Board that deficiency 7 will be rendered moot with the installation of the sprinkler system as outlined in item 10 below.
	8.  The Board hereby grants the Applicant a time variance until December 31, 2010 in which to provide this facility with an approved local fire alarm system installed at the direction and to the satisfaction of the State Fire Marshal's office.
	9.  It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiency 9 by providing this facility with the required smoke detection.
	10.  The Board hereby grants the Applicant a time variance until December 31, 2010 in which to provide this facility with an approved sprinkler system installed at the direction and to the satisfaction of the State Fire Marshal's office.
	11.  It is the understanding of the Board that the applicant has corrected deficiency 11 by providing the cited electrical junction boxes with approved covers, at the direction and to the satisfaction of the State Fire Marshal's office.
	12.  The Board hereby grants the Applicant a time variance until December 31, 2010 in which to correct deficiency 12 as part of the fire alarm system installation of this facility.

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)].