The above-captioned case was scheduled for hearing on September 11, 2001 at 1:30 P.M. At that time, Chairman Farrell and Commissioners Newbrook, Richard, Burlingame, Filippi, O’Connell and Pearson were present.  A motion was made by Commissioner Burlingame and seconded by Commissioner Pearson to grant the Applicant relief as outlined herein.  The motion was unanimous.

FINDINGS OF FACT
	
During the September 11, 2001 hearing on this matter, the Board was advised and finds that this is a fully renovated building.  The Board further finds that the Applicant's requested relief centers on an existing cast-in-place concrete stairway that services an unoccupied area utilized only for storage.  It is the understanding of the Board that all other deficiencies within this facility have been 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 23-28.1-4(3) of the Rhode Island General Laws.

CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS

1. The Board hereby grants variances from the provisions of NFPA 101 chapters 26 and 5 in order to allow the Applicant the following relief related to the above-referenced concrete stairway servicing the unoccupied storage space.  Initially, the Board grants a variance to allow the Applicant to maintain the existing 24 inch width of this stairway.  The Board further grants a variance to allow the Applicant to maintain the existing stair landing of 24 inches by 38 inches.  The Board further grants a variance in order to allow the Applicant to maintain the existing tread and riser dimensions of this staircase.  Finally, the Board grants a variance in order to allow the Applicant to maintain a door swing opposite of the direction of egress travel.  This variance is granted pursuant to the Board's understanding that the 24 inch stair landing would impose a structural hardship upon the Applicant.

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 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. (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 Board’s 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 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 [R.I.G.L. 42-35-15(c)].