As indicated in the file, a hearing involving the above-captioned property was conducted on March 21, 2017 before the Fire Safety Code Board of Appeal and Review, pursuant to RI General Laws Section 23-28.3-5.
	In attendance at the hearing were the following:
COMMISSIONERS: Chairman Newbrook and Commissioners Richard, Pearson, Jackson, Sylvester, Booth, Thornton and Davison.
AUTHORITY HAVING JURISDICTION: Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshals Stephen MacIntosh and Richard Mancini of the Cranston Fire Marshals Office.
APPLICANT: Ramzi Loqa.
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR: W. Keith Burlingame, Esq.

TRAVEL OF THE CASE

1.	This is an Application for Variance filed under R.I.G.L. Chapter 23-28.3, entitled Fire Safety Code Board of Appeal and Review, and the Administrative Regulations promulgated thereunder.
2.	The Application was filed by Ramzi Loqa (authorized representative) of 49 Bacheller Avenue, Providence, RI dated December 26, 2016.
3.	The Application was received by the Board and File  170010 was opened on January 13, 2017.
4.	A hearing on the Application was conducted on March 21, 2017 at 1:00 PM before the Fire Safety Code Board of Appeal and Review.
5.	After all evidence was presented at the hearing, a motion was made by Commissioner Sylvester and seconded by Commissioner Richard to grant the Applicant the relief as outlined herein.  The motion passed on an 8 to 0 vote.

RECORD OF THE CASE

The following documents are part of the administrative record for Appeal  170010 and are pertinent to the decision rendered:

1.	Variance Application  170010 dated December 26, 2016 and filed on January 13, 2017.
2.	Cranston Fire Marshals Office Plan Review Report dated January 9, 2017.
3.	Letter of authorization for Ramzi Loqa from Dr. Cosmo Haralambidis dated January 9, 2017.

EXHIBITS

The following documents were presented at the March 21, 2017 hearing as exhibits:

1.	None.

FINDINGS OF FACT

	Based on the testimony and evidence introduced at the hearing and a review of the administrative file, the Board makes the following Finding of Fact:

1.	The numbers of the Decision below correspond with those of the January 9, 2017 plan review report compiled by the Cranston Fire Marshals Office.  The above report was utilized by the Board, the Applicant and the Cranston Fire Marshals Office during the March 21, 2017 hearing on this matter.  Accordingly, the Board hereby incorporates the January 9, 2017 plan review 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.
2.	The building is a proposed 2-story with basement business occupancy consisting of approximately five thousand seventy-five (5,075) square feet (gross area) and originally built in 2017.
3.	The building is of wood frame construction and will have a compliant fire alarm system and will be provided with an approved automatic sprinkler system.
4.	The maximum occupant load of the facility has been calculated at eighteen (18) persons.
5.	There is no objection by the Cranston Fire Marshals Office to the granting of the relief outlined herein.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND
DETERMINATIONS ON VARIANCE REQUESTS

1.	The Board hereby grants the Applicant a variance from the provisions of RILSC section 38.2.4.6(1) and NFPA 13 (2010 edition) section 4.1 by allowing the proposed single exit from the second floor without requiring automatic sprinkler protection in the attic space.  In consideration of the relief granted herein, the Board directs the Applicant to comply with the following conditions:
a.	Provide fire alarm system heat detection throughout the attic space, at the direction and to the satisfaction of the Cranston Fire Marshal's Office;
b.	Occupancy of the building shall be limited to a single tenant at all times; and,
c.	The installed sprinkler system shall be deemed a required system and shall comply with RILSC section 9.7.1, NFPA 13, Standard for the Installation of Sprinkler Systems, 2010 edition, and NFPA 25, Standard for the Inspection, Testing, and Maintenance of Water-Based Fire Protection Systems, 2011 edition.

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 understood to mean in accordance with the specific provisions related to the particular subject as are contained in this Code, or as approved in particular by the Authority Having Jurisdiction (State Fire Marshal, his or her designated Deputy State Fire Marshals and/or Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshals).

STATUS OF DECISION AND APPEAL RIGHTS

1.	This Decision constitutes a final order of the Fire Safety Code Board of Appeal and Review as set forth in R.I.G.L. section 42-35-12 and 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: Fire Safety Code, section 6-2-22).
2.	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: Fire Safety Code, section 6-2-23.)  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: Fire Safety Code, section 6-2-24).
3.	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:  Fire Safety Code, section 6-2-25).
4.	In accordance with R.I.G.L 42-35-12, 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.  (See: Fire Safety Code, section 6-2-18).  Commencement of such an action does not operate as an automatic stay of this Decision [R.I.G.L. 42-35-15(c)].