The above-captioned case was originally scheduled for hearing on April 11, 2006 at 1:00 P.M.  A Decision, outlining a plan of action for this facility, was thereupon issued on May 25, 2006.  By letter dated September 29, 2006, the Applicants attorney requested that the file be re-opened to address the issues surrounding a proposed alternative means of egress for this facility. 
An onsite subcommittee was scheduled to review this facility on October 17, 2006 at 10:00 AM.  At that time, Chairman Coutu, Vice Chairman Burlingame, Commissioners Pearson and Filippi were present.  The fire service was represented by State Fire Marshal George Farrell along with Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshals Richard Silva and Richard Fournier of the Providence Fire Marshals Office.  The Subcommittees recommended findings, conclusions and relief, listed herein below, were presented to the full Board during the regularly scheduled meeting on October 17, 2006 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Chairman Coutu, Vice Chairman Burlingame, and Commissioners Richard, Newbrook, Preiss, Pearson, Filippi and OConnell were present. A motion to accept the Subcommittees recommendations was made by Commissioner Newbrook and seconded by Commissioner Richard.  The motion was unanimous.  Accordingly, the Subcommittee recommendations, listed below, now have the status of a full Board Decision. 
FINDINGS OF FACT
	The Board hereby adopts its original findings of facts in Decision number 060072 as its initial findings of fact in this supplemental decision.  Pursuant to the onsite review of this facility, the Board finds that the Providence Fire Marshals description of this facility is accurate.  Specifically, the Board finds that this is a three story building with wooden floors, a wooden roof and masonry exterior walls.  The Board finds that the Building is of NFPA 220 type III ordinary construction.  The Board finds that the Building is fully sprinkled and alarmed and the Applicant has agreed to make any sprinkler or fire alarm upgrades deemed necessary by the Providence Fire Marshals Office.
The Board further finds that the Applicant now plans to extend the Assembly occupancy of the building to the third floor.  The Board further finds that the Applicant is potentially restricted from providing exit discharge from the north, west and south sides of this facility due to property line restraints.  The Board finds that the Applicant is working with the Providence Fire Marshals Office in the development of plans to provide at least two remote means of exit access from each level of this facility.  However, due the existing construction and configuration of this existing building, the Board finds that the Applicant may need certain dimensional, continuity of construction, and other structural relief in order to construct the proposed additional egress system.  Finally, the Board finds that, in light of the restriction of the proposed exit discharge onto the Richmond Street side of this building, issues of potential obstruction of exits and fire department access must be addressed.

CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS
1.	The Board hereby modifies its original decision in order to allow assembly occupancy on the third floor of this facility pursuant to the following conditions.  As a condition of this variance, the Board directs the Applicant to provide two approved remote points of exit access on all three levels of this fully sprinkled and alarmed facility.  Each of these remote exit access points shall lead directly into a rated exit enclosure approved by the Providence Fire Marshals Office.  Finally, the Board directs the Applicant and the Providence Fire Marshals Office to either restrict the parking of vehicles, or provide a fire lane, on the Richmond Street side, or east side, of this facility in order to assure that the exit discharge points shall always remain unobstructed and that the fire department shall always have full access to this facility. 
The Board hereby authorizes the Providence Fire Marshals Office to grant the Applicant dimensional, continuity of construction, door swing and other structural relief deemed acceptable by that office in the retrofitting of the new egress system in this existing facility.  As a condition of this relief, the Board directs the Applicant to maintain the emergency egress door on the north side of this facility.  In the event that emergency door becomes obstructed, the Providence Fire Marshals Office may either develop additional safeguards with the Applicant or return to the Board for additional review. 
The Board further directs the Applicant to upgrade the fire alarm system in this facility and provide the sprinkler system with an approved fire department connection (FDC) at the direction and to the satisfaction of the Providence Fire Marshals Office.  Further, the Board directs that the above corrections shall be completed prior to the occupancy of the third floor of this facility.  Finally, the Board shall maintain this as an open file, until the final CO is issued, in order to address any future questions that the parties may have in this case.

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)].