The above-captioned case was scheduled for hearing on December 11, 2012 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Chairman Newbrook, Vice Chairperson Filippi and Commissioners Dias, Pearson, Jasparro, Jackson, Sylvester, Burlingame, Blackburn and Richard were present.  The fire service was represented by Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshal Timothy Lutz of the Providence Fire Marshals Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner Burlingame and seconded by Commissioner Pearson to grant the Applicant relief as outlined herein.  The motion was unanimous.

FINDINGS OF FACT
	During the December 11, 2012 hearing on this matter, the Board had before it a November 1, 2012 letter from the Providence Fire Marshals Office outlining the issue in this case.  The above letter was utilized by the Board, the Applicant and the Providence Fire Marshals Office during the December 11, 2012 hearing on this matter.  Accordingly, the Board hereby incorporates the November 1, 2012 Providence Fire Marshals Office letter as its initial findings of fact.  Specifically, the Board notes that the review of this project under the 2003 Life Safety Code would require rated stairways in the open parking structure.  The Board further finds that in accordance with the 2012 edition of the Life Safety Code, this would not be an issue.  The Board further finds that the Providence Fire Marshals Office is in support of allowing the project to proceed with the plans being reviewed under the 2012 Code and that the Providence Fire Marshals Office has no objection and would actually encourage this action.  Finally, the Board notes that approximately twenty (20) days after the scheduled hearing, the 2012 Code would be going into full force and effect.  It is the understanding of the Board that there are no other deficiencies within this proposed structure that would need addressing.

CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS
	1.  The Board hereby grants a variance in order to allow the Applicant to utilize the 2012 edition of the Life Safety Code with the Rhode Island amendments as the basis for the plan review of the proposed parking garage.  In granting this relief, it is the understanding of the Board that the Providence Fire Marshals 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)].