The above-captioned case was originally scheduled for August 26, 2003 and a Decision was issued in file number 030282.  The matter was re-scheduled for hearing on June 26, 2004 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Chairman Farrell, and Commissioners Wahlberg, Preiss, Burlingame, Coutu and Filippi were present.  The fire service was represented by Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshals Office David Pastore of the West Warwick Fire Marshals Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner Wahlberg and seconded by Commissioner Preiss to grant relief as outlined herein.  The motion passed over the opposition vote of Commissioner Burlingame.

FINDINGS OF FACT
	The Board hereby adopts its original finding of fact, in file number 030282, as it finding of fact in this case.  Additionally, the Board was advised and finds that the Applicant has presented the West Warwick code enforcement officials with a fire escape plan for this facility.  The Board further finds that the design of the proposed fire escape system requires it to be in close proximity to the three existing windows.  While many existing fire escape on apartment houses in West Warwick pass in close proximity to existing unprotected windows, the West Warwick Fire Marshal sought to have these windows protected because the fire escape would be considered new construction in this case.  Finally, it is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected all other fire code deficiencies in this building.
	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 to allow the Applicant to maintain the existing cited upper level windows without fire protection.  The Board notes that these window would be less likely to impede fire escape egress.  However, the Board directs the Applicant to provide the first floor window, identified during the hearing as window three with appropriate fire protection.  In this case appropriate fire protection can be accomplished by either blocking off the window with non-combustible materials, providing the window frame with a stationary piece of wired or fire-rated glass, or providing the opening with a custom designed fire rated window.  Any of the above options would be considered acceptable to the Board. 

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)].