This case was originally heard by the Board on May 23, 2000 and a written decision was issued on July 13, 2000. At that time the residential portion of this facility was primarily addressed. 

The above-captioned case was most recently scheduled for hearing on January 2, 2001 at 1:30 P.M. It was the parties’ intent to primarily address the assembly occupancy at that time. Chairman Farrell and Commissioners Wahlberg, Newbrook, Coutu, Richard, Burlingame, Pearson and Filippi were present at the January 2, 2001 hearing.  The fire service was represented by Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshal Authur Laurenson of the Providence Fire Marshal’s Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner Burlingame and seconded by Commissioner Wahlberg to grant the Applicant relief as outlined herein.  The motion was unanimous.

FINDINGS OF FACT
	
This matter was previously before the Board and a decision, addressing the residential portion of this facility, was issued a July 13, 2000.  The Applicant and the Providence Fire Marshal have returned to the Board to address the deficiencies in the proposed place of assembly. The numbers of the Decision below correspond with those of a June 14, 2000 plan review report complied 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 January 2, 2001 hearing on this matter.  Accordingly, the Board hereby incorporates the June 14, 2001 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. It is the understanding of the Board that deficiency 1 is moot because all of the heating units servicing this facility have been mounted on the roof.  Accordingly, there is no violation.

2. The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of section 23-28.6-7(d) in order to allow the Applicant to maintain the existing enclosure to the cited exit to Douglas Avenue.

3. The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of section 23-28.6-8(a)(1) in order to allow the Applicant to maintain the cited vertical opening and seven foot archway between the dining room area and the bar lounge area. In granting this variance, the Board notes the opinion of the Providence Fire Marshal that there's no practical way to enclose the archway.  The Board further directs the Applicant to provide double 5/8 sheetrock at the basement level to separate from the kitchen of this facility, at the direction and to the satisfaction of the Providence Fire Marshal within 120 days of the date of this decision.

4. During the January 2, 2001 hearing on this matter, the Applicant advise the Board that he would correct that portion of deficiency 4 relating to the Branch Avenue door.  The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of section 23-28.6-9(d) in order to allow the Applicant maintain the existing hardware on the door leading from the private office of this facility.

5. The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of section 23-28.6-10(a) in our to allow the Applicant maintain one handrail on the stairway leading from the dining area, two handrails on the exterior business stairs, and one handrail on the residential stair.  The above handrails shall be installed at the direction and to the satisfaction of the Providence Fire Marshal within 120 days of the date of this decision.

6. The Board hereby directs the Applicant to correct deficiency 6 at the direction and to the satisfaction of the Providence Fire Marshal within 120 days of the date of this decision.

7. The Board hereby directs the Applicant to correct deficiency 7, by providing the cited exit signs as part of the fire alarm system, at the direction and to the satisfaction of the Providence Fire Marshal within 120 days of the date of this decision.

8. The Board hereby directs the Applicant to correct deficiency 8 at the direction and to the satisfaction of the Providence Fire Marshal within 120 days of the date of this decision.

9. The Board hereby directs the Applicant to correct deficiency 9, by providing the cited emergency lighting as part of the fire alarm system, at the direction and to the satisfaction of the Providence Fire Marshal within 120 days of the date of this decision.

10. The Board hereby directs the Applicant to correct deficiency 10 by providing this facility with approved fire extinguishers, installed at the direction and to the satisfaction of the Providence Fire Marshal, within 15 days the date of this decision. 

11. During the January 2, 2001 hearing this matter, the Board was advised that the Applicant show used no fabric in the interior finish of this facility.  Accordingly, there shall only be painted surfaces.  Finally Up to theso this, the Applicant advised the Board that all carpeting shall be Class C.

12. As a condition of the variances granted herein, the Board directs the Applicant to extend the fire alarm system from the residential area of this facility to cover the entire building.  Accordingly, this facility shall be fully protected by local fire alarm system, at the direction and to the satisfaction of the Providence Fire Marshal, or designee, within 120 days of the date of this decision.

13. With regard to number 5 in the original decision, the Board directs the Applicant to provide this facility with approved properly engineered system of domestic sprinkler heads, installed at the direction and to the satisfaction of the Providence Fire Marshal within 120 days of the date of this decision.  There shall be no further time extensions to grant the above sprinkler system or compliance with any of the above items of.
 
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)].