The above-captioned cases were originally scheduled for hearing on July 15, 2008 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Chairman Coutu, Vice Chairman Newbrook and Commissioners Preiss, Walker, Filippi, Dias and Jasparro were present.  Commissioner Richard attended that portion of this hearing covering the issues raised by the Providence Fire Marshals Office.  Commissioner Blackburn recused himself from consideration of this case.  The fire service was represented by Deputy State Fire Marshal David Cionfolo of the State Fire Marshals Office and Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshal Lisa Krapf of the Providence Fire Marshals Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner Dias and seconded by Vice Chairman Newbrook and Commissioner Jasparro to grant the State Fire Marshal the authority to approve a reasonable fire alarm alternative to the current fire drill requirements for the day care occupancy in this facility.  A second motion was made by Commissioner Preiss and seconded by Vice Chairman Newbrook to confirm that a freight elevator, that did not have thirty (30) feet of travel, was not required to have fire fighter recall.  The motions were approved unanimously.
During the second half of the July 15, 2008 hearing, the Applicant presented an initial plan of action addressing the issues raised with the egress system.  After initial relief was considered by the Board, it was determined that the parties should develop a comprehensive plan of action and return in two (2) weeks.  Accordingly, the matter was rescheduled for July 29, 2008. 
During the July 29, 2008 hearing, Chairman Coutu, Vice Chairman Newbrook and Commissioners Walker, Dias and Preiss were present.  Commissioner Blackburn again recused himself.  An initial motion was made by Vice Chairman Newbrook and seconded by Commissioner Walker to accept the July 28, 2008 plan of action as presented by the Applicants architect (Austin Architects LLC).  This initial vote failed due to the opposition vote of Commissioner Dias.  Upon reconsideration, after further review, Commissioner Dias amended his vote in favor of accepting the Applicants July 28, 2008 plan of action as presented to the Board on July 29, 2008.  Accordingly, the plan of action was approved. 

FINDINGS OF FACT
	The Board finds this facility to be an existing educational occupancy with a child day care operation.  The Board finds that this facility has an existing 3,528 square foot gymnasium and that it had an existing 1,127 square foot stage.  The Board finds that the Applicant has proposed to convert the existing stage to a fitness center.  The Board further finds that the entire school is fully protected with an automatic wet-pipe sprinkler system and an automatic fire alarm and smoke detection system.  The Board further finds that the gymnasium is separated from the remainder of the school by a fire resistant rated wall of at least one hour rating with self closing and latching fire resistant rated doors.  The Board further finds that the Applicant has submitted a plan of action, dated July 28, 2008, covering the egress system of this facility.  Accordingly the July 28, 2008 plan of action is hereby incorporated by reference.  Finally, the Board finds that the Applicant has represented that the middle school gymnasium is typically limited in occupancy and utilized primarily for basketball practice.  Specifically, the gymnasium would be limited in occupancy to typically twenty-five (25) people and that the fitness room would be typically limited to twenty-three (23) people.

CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCES

1.	The Board hereby grants a variance to grant the State Fire Marshal the authority to approve a reasonable fire alarm alternative to the current fire drill requirements for the day care occupancy in this facility. 
2.	The Board hereby confirms that the freight elevator within this facility, that does not have thirty (30) feet of travel, is not required to have fire fighter recall.  
3.	Pursuant to the Boards understanding that both the above fitness center and middle school gymnasium shall typically be limited in occupancy and that any proposed major increase in occupancy would first be reviewed with the Providence Fire Marshals Office, the board hereby grants a variance to accept the July 28, 2008 plan of action as presented by the Applicants architect (Austin Architects LLC) and reviewed by the Board and the Providence Fire Marshals Office during the July 29, 2008 hearing on this matter. 

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)].