The above-captioned case was originally scheduled for hearing on October 29, 2002 at 1:00 P.M. The parties did not appear and the matter was re-assigned to November 12, 2002. During the November 12, 2002 hearing on this matter, the Board determined that, due to the complexity of this facility, the matter should be assigned to an on-site subcommittee review. A subcommittee of the Board met on-site at 11:00 AM. The subcommittee reported their findings and recommendations to the Board during its regularly scheduled meeting on November 19, 2002 at 1:00 PM. At that time, Chairman Farrell and Commissioners Evans, Newbrook, Richard, O’Connell, Preiss, Pearson, Wahlberg, Filippi and Coutu were present.  The fire service was represented by Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshal Daniel Isles of the Providence Fire Marshal’s Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner Wahlberg and seconded by Commissioner 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 a February 5, 2002 partial plan report compiled by the Providence Fire Marshal’s Office. The above report was utilized by the Board, the Applicant and the Providence Fire Marshal’s Office during the November 19, 2002, hearing on this matter.  Accordingly, the Board hereby incorporates the February 5, 2002 partial plan review report as its initial findings of fact.  Any modification of the Board’s 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 defined in section 23-28.1-4(3) of the Rhode Island General Laws.

CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS

1-6. During the on-site subcommittee review of this case, the Board was advised that the Applicant would correct deficiencies 1,2,3,4,5 and 6 prior to the occupancy of this facility. Accordingly, the Board hereby directs the Applicant to correct deficiencies 1,2,3,4,5 and 6 prior to occupancy of this facility.

7. During the on-site subcommittee review of this case, the Board was advised that  the Applicant would redesign the central stairway (A) to eliminate the winding stairs. However, correction of the existing metal stairways (B and C)  would impose a structural hardship upon the Applicant. Accordingly, the Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of sections 18-2.2.3.1 and 5-2.2.2.5 in order to allow the Applicant to maintain the existing winding nature of stairways B and C. The Board further directs the Applicant to modify stairway A by eliminating the winding treads prior to the occupancy of this facility.

8-9. The Board hereby directs the Applicant to correct deficiencies 8 and 9 prior to occupancy of this facility.

10. During the on-site subcommittee on this matter, the Board was advised and finds that only the ground floor portion of stairway A will be slightly less than the required forty-four (44’) inches in width. The Board further finds that existing stairways B and C are located in reinforced concrete stair towers the removal of which would impose a structural hardship upon the Applicant. Accordingly, the Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of sections 18-2.2.3.1 and 5-3.4.1 in order to allow the Applicant to maintain the existing cited dimensions of stairways A, B and C as outlined above.

11. During the on-site subcommittee on this matter, the Board was advised and finds that the Applicant has agreed to provide positive pressurization in stairway A as a condition of a variance to allow him to maintain the existing exit access and configuration. Accordingly, the Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of sections 18-2.2.3.1 and 5-5.1.2 in order to allow the Applicant to maintain the proposed condition of entering one of the two (2) tenant spaces on each floor below the penthouse  in order to reach a second means of egress from the central stairway.

12 –14. The Board hereby directs the Applicant to correct deficiencies 12, 13 and 14 prior to occupancy of this facility.

15. During the on-site subcommittee review of this matter, the Board noted that the installation of standpipes in the existing stairways B and C would further reduce the already narrow exit width and would not be easily utilized by firefighters in the event of a fire emergency. However, the installation of standpipes would provide the fire service with ready access to each of the apartment units on the upper levels of this facility. Accordingly, the Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of sections 18-4.1, 32-8.2.2, 7-7.4.2 and 14-5.3.2(a) in order to allow the Applicant to install standpipes in stairway A, and not in stairways B and C, prior to occupancy.   

16. The Board directs the Applicant to correct deficiency 16 by properly posting fire safety instructions and evacuation plans, at the direction and to the satisfaction of the Providence Fire Marshal’s Office, prior to the occupancy 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 Applicant’s 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 Board’s 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 Board’s 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)].