The above captioned case was scheduled for hearing on December 4, 2001 at l:00 p.m.  At that time, Chairman Farrell and Commissioners Wahlberg, Newbrook, Filippi, Coutu, Richard and O’Connell were present.  A motion was made by Commissioner Wahlberg and seconded by Commissioner Newbrook to grant the Applicant relief as outlined herein.  The motion was unanimous.

FINDING OF FACT

The numbers of the Decision below correspond with those of a May 30, 2001 plan review report compiled by the Providence Fire  Marshal’s Office.  The above report was utilized by the Board, the Applicant and the Providence Fire Marshal during the December 4, 2001 hearing on this matter.  Accordingly, the Board hereby incorporates the May 30, 2001 plan review report as its initial findings of fact.

	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.l-4(3) of the Rhode Island General Laws.

CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS

1.	The Board hereby grants a variance from provisions of Section 23-28.l7-2(b) in order to allow the Applicant to maintain one (l) means of egress from the unoccupied basement of this facility.  In granting this variance, it is the understanding of the Board that there shall be no occupancy or even storage of the basement of this facility at any time.  It is the further understanding of the Board that the basement is secured by a l l/2 hour steel door, which is physically locked.

2.	The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of Section 23-28.l7-4(a) in order to allow the Applicant relief from the requirement of complete enclosure of the basement exit.  In granting this variance, it is the understanding of the Board that the basement is and shall remain unoccupied and is sealed off by a l l/2 hour labeled door.

3.	A&B.  It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiencies #3A & B.
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.

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.  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.  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 changes creates a new use or occupancy as outlined in R.I.G.L. 23-28.l-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.

	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 within the Sixth Division of the District Court.  Commencement of such an action does not operate as an automatic stay of this Decision.  [RIGL 42-35-l5(c)]