The above-captioned case was scheduled for hearing on April 25, 2006 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Chairman Farrell, Vice Chairman Coutu and Commissioners Richard, Blackburn, Preiss, Burlingame and Filippi were present.  The fire service was represented by Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshals Richard Vespia and Richard Silva of the Providence Fire Marshals Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner Richard and seconded by Commissioner Blackburn to grant the Applicant relief as outlined herein.  The motion was unanimous.
FINDINGS OF FACT
	During the April 25, 2006 hearing on this matter, the Board reviewed an April 23 letter compiled by the Applicants design team.  The letter advised and the Board finds that the Applicant is requesting the Board to allow the Providence Fire Marshal's office to approve the issuance of a temporary certificate of occupancy for this building.  The letter further noted and the Board finds that many of the areas of this facility are in full compliance with the code upon final inspections.  However, the building itself is not completely in compliance with the code.  Finally, the Board finds that the sprinkler system on the first floor of this facility is in good operating condition and that the egress system, in the opinion of the Providence Fire Marshal's office, has been greatly improved.

CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS 
	1.  The Board hereby grants the Providence Fire Marshal's office the authority to approve the issuance of a temporary certificate of occupancy on a floor by floor basis throughout this complex.  Specifically, if the Providence Fire Marshal's office deems the life safety of a particular area of this building to be in general compliance with the code with all major systems intact, the Providence Fire Marshal shall have the authority to approve the issuance of one or more temporary certificates of occupancy by the building department.
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)].