The above captioned case was heard by a subcommittee of the Board on March 4, 2003 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Chairman Farrell and Commissioners Richard, Coutu, Filippi, Newbrook, Preiss, Burlingame, OConnell, Evans and Pearson were present.  The fire service was represented by Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshal Susan Hawksley of the East Greenwich Fire Marshals Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner Richard and seconded by Commissioner Burlingame to grant the Applicant relief as outlined herein.  The motion passed over the opposition vote of Commissioner Preiss.

FINDINGS OF FACT
	This case was previously before the Board and variances were granted as outlined in File No. 020168.  Accordingly, the Board hereby relies upon its original findings of facts in that case.  During the original hearing, the Board advised the Applicant and the East Greenwich Fire Marshals Office to review the proposed emergency escape through a rated corridor in the boiler room of this area and they have so completed this review.  The Applicant and the East Greenwich Fire Marshals Office report back that the proposed emergency escape route provides adequate protection of approximately twelve (12) people utilizing this as an emergency egress route.  The egress route is slightly undersized due to the basement height and the fact that one of the walls of this emergency route is part of the stone foundation of the building.  The emergency egress route is being reported to the Board as safe as it possibly could be.  The Board further notes that this facility shall be protected by a full fire alarm system and that the boiler area shall be fully sprinklered.
	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 23-28.1-4(3) of the Rhode Island General Laws.
	
CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS 
1.	The Board hereby grants a dimensional variance in order to allow the Applicant to maintain the existing dimensions of the emergency escape route through the basement boiler room of this facility.  In granting this variance, it is the understanding of the Board that this corridor is fully rated and shall only be accessed by twelve (12) people.  Finally, it is the understanding of the Board that this facility is fully alarmed and that the boiler room portion of this facility is sprinklered.

	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.  
	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 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.  
	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)].