The above captioned case was scheduled for hearing on April 2, 2002 at l:00 p.m. At that time, Chairman Farrell and Commissioners Filippi, Richard, Pearson, O’Connell, Wahlberg, Burlingame, Newbrook, and Coutu were present. The fire service was represented by Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshal Roger Henson of the Barrington Fire Marshal’s Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner Newbrook and seconded by Commissioner Richard to grant the Applicant relief as outlined herein.  The motion was unanimous.

FINDING OF FACT

During the April 2, 2002 hearing on this matter, the Board was advised and finds that the first floor of this facility is approximately 2,000 square feet and the basement is approximately l,200 square feet.  The Board was further advised and finds that the Applicant sought to provide two (2) domestically supplied sprinkler heads over a proposed stairwell to the cellar level of l8 Maple Avenue, Unit #3.  The Board was further advised and finds that the Applicant has a complying stairway through the storage area and that the Fire Chief would support a variance request to allow the Applicant to maintain limited sprinkler coverage on the above stairwell provided that the entire building is brought up to the current code, which would include one (l) hour rated walls, 45 minute rating of all interior doors and an approved one (l) hour floor-ceiling assembly.  The Applicant has agreed to comply with the Fire Marshal’s request.  It is the understanding of the Board that all other fire code deficiencies shall be corrected by the Applicant.
	
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 in order to allow the Applicant to provide two (2) approved sprinkler heads over the proposed stairwell for the cellar of l8 Maple Avenue, Unit #3.  In granting this variance, the Board directs the Applicant to bring the remainder of this facility up to code, at the direction and to the satisfaction of the Barrington Fire Marshal’s Office, including the provision of one (l) hour fire rating of all doors, providing all interior doors with an approved 45 minute rating and providing a one (l) hour floor/ceiling assembly.

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 in 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)].

This decision was mailed on 6-12-02.