The above-captioned case was scheduled for hearing on May 18, 2010 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Acting Chairman Pearson and Commissioners Preiss, Walker, Filippi, Richard, Jasparro and Dias were present.  Chairman Coutu did not participate in this hearing.  The fire service was represented by Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshal Steven Hughes of the East Greenwich Fire Marshals Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner Richard and seconded by Commissioner Walker to grant the Applicant relief as outlined herein.  The motion was unanimous.

FINDINGS OF FACT
	During the May 18, 2010 hearing on this matter, the Board relied upon a one-paragraph building description compiled by the East Greenwich Fire Marshal's office.  The above building description was utilized by the Board, the Applicant and the East Greenwich Fire Marshals Office during the May 18, 2010 hearing on this matter.  The East Greenwich Fire Marshal's Office finds this building as follows:  
"This building is a two-story, Type V(000) construction built on a slab of approximately 850 sq/ft per level for a total of approximately 1700 sq/ft.  The building was originally constructed, according to tax records, in 1920.  It was utilized as a stone monument company and classified as Industrial.  The building is currently under complete renovation, and its intended use will be Business with an occupant load of less than ten (10) persons per floor.  The first floor has access to two (2) means of egress remotely located from one another.  One which exits the building directly to the exterior, and the second one, had a door that opens into the stairs coming from the second floor.  The second level has a single means of egress that is also shared by the first floor.  The travel distance to reach the exterior of the building from the most remote point to the exterior would be less than one hundred feet (100').  The renovation will include a new code compliant alarm system along with emergency lighting, exit signage, a key box and fire extinguishers."
An unsigned April 13, 2010 letter attached to the application further advised the Board that the Applicant sought variance from the provisions of section 38.2.4 (second means of egress) and 7.2.2.2.1.1 (Stair risers).  The East Greenwich Fire Marshal's office appeared and advised the Board that he had no objection to either of these variances based on the fact that the Applicant will install a non-required fire alarm system and further provide the second level of this facility with an egress stairs having one-hour rated construction and being further equipped with a fire door. 

CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS 
	1.  The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of section 38.2.4 and its referenced standards in order to allow the Applicant to maintain a single one-hour rated means of egress from the second level of this facility installed at the direction and to the satisfaction of the East Greenwich Fire Marshal's office.  In granting this relief, it is the understanding of the Board that the East Greenwich Fire Marshal's office has no objection in light of the Applicant's agreement to provide the exit with the above rating and to further provide this facility with an approved non-required fire alarm system.
	2.  The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of section 7.2.2.2.1.1(a) in order to allow the Applicant to maintain the existing riser height of the stairs within this facility on the basis of structural hardship.  In granting this relief, it is the understanding of the Board that the East Greenwich Fire Marshal's office has no objection.

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)].