The above-captioned case was scheduled for hearing on August 21, 2007 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Chairman Coutu, Vice Chairman Newbrook and Commissioners Filippi, Walker, Jasparro, Richard, Jackson, Blackburn, Preiss, OConnell and Pearson were present.  The fire service was represented by Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshal Richard Fournier of the Providence Fire Marshals Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner Blackburn and seconded by Commissioners Richard and Walker to grant the Applicant relief as outlined herein.  The motion was unanimous.
FINDINGS OF FACT
	The Board hereby incorporates its original decision in file number 050854 as its initial findings of fact in this case.  The Board notes that when the original decision was issued in June of 2007, the Applicant was directed to re-swing the door cited in item 1 of the Providence Fire Marshal's office inspection report, and to further provide an expanded landing to include railings on both sides, at the direction of that office.  The Board finds now that this directive would impose a hardship on the Applicant, and that the Providence Fire Marshal's office has no objection to granting relief from this particular item.  It is the understanding of the Board that all other fire code deficiencies in this facility have been corrected by the Applicant.
	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, shall be understood to mean in accordance with the specific provisions related to the particular subject as are contained in the State Fire Code, or as approved in particular by the Authority Having Jurisdiction (the State Fire Marshal, his or her designated Deputy State Fire Marshals and/or Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshals).

CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS 
	1.  The Board hereby grants a variance in order to allow the door cited in the original decision in file number 050854 to remain as is without expanding the landing or providing railings.  In granting this relief, the Board notes that the Providence Fire Marshal's office has no objection on the basis of structural hardship.

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)].