The above-captioned case was scheduled for hearing on May 13, 2008 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Chairman Coutu, Vice Chairman Newbrook and Commissioners Dias, Pearson, Jasparro, Jackson, Preiss, Blackburn and Richard were present.  The fire service was represented by Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshals Gregory Unsworth and John Horan of the North Providence Fire Marshals Office.  A motion was made by Vice Chairman Newbrook and seconded by Commissioner Richard to grant the Applicant relief as outlined herein.  The motion passed over the opposition vote of Commissioner Preiss.
FINDINGS OF FACT
	The numbers of the Decision below correspond with those of an October 6, 2005 inspection  report compiled by the North Providence Fire Marshals Office.  The above report was utilized by the Board, the Applicant and the North Providence Fire Marshals Office during the May 13, 2008 hearing on this matter.  Accordingly, the Board hereby incorporates the October 6, 2005 inspection report as its initial findings of fact.  Any modification of the Boards 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, 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 directs the Applicant to correct deficiency 1 by providing the paneling of this facility with an approved Class A finish installed at the direction, to the satisfaction and within a timetable established by the North Providence Fire Marshal.
	2.  The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of section 13.2.1 and its referenced standards in order to allow the Applicant to maintain the existing egress from the unoccupied basement of this facility.  In granting this relief, the Board notes that the basement stairs have a door at the top and that it is utilized only for utilities and limited storage.  
	3.  The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of section 7.4.1.3.1 in order to allow the Applicant to maintain the non-remote exits from the dining room of this facility.  In granting this variance, the Board notes that there is a property line issue present in this case, and that the North Providence Fire Marshal's office has no objection based on that structural hardship condition.
	4.  It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiency 4 at the direction and to the satisfaction of the North Providence Fire Marshal's office.
	5.  It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiency 5 at the direction and to the satisfaction of the North Providence Fire Marshal's office.
	6.  The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of section 6.1.14.4.1 in order to allow the Applicant to maintain the existing separation between the assembly and residential occupancies of this building.
	7.  The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of section 7.4.1.1 in order to allow the Applicant to utilize an emergency window from the single bedroom apartment on the second floor of this facility.  In granting this relief, it is the understanding of the Board that the North Providence Fire Marshal's office has no objection.
	8.  It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiency 8 at the direction and to the satisfaction of the North Providence Fire Marshal's office.
	9.  The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of section 7.1.5.1.1 in order to allow the Applicant to maintain the existing projections and headroom in the unoccupied basement of this facility.  This variance is based again on structural hardship and the fact that the basement is not a typically occupied area.
	10-13.  It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiencies 10, 11 12 and 13 at the direction and to the satisfaction of the North Providence Fire Marshal's office.

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)].