A hearing involving the above-captioned property was conducted on Tuesday, April 1, 2025 before the Fire Safety Code Board of Appeal and Review [hereinafter the Board], pursuant to Rhode Island General Laws [RIGL] sections 23-28.3-5, 42-35-9 and 42-46-3. 

 
In attendance at the hearing were the following: 

COMMISSIONERS: Vice-Chairperson Thornton and Commissioners ODonnell, Muto, Walsh & Mancini. 

AUTHORITY HAVING JURISDICTION [AHJ]:  State Fire Marshal April Kuzdeba of the Providence Fire Marshals Office. 

APPELLANT: Joseph Watson. 

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR: W. Keith Burlingame, Esq. 

 
TRAVEL OF THE CASE 

 
This is an Application for Appeal submitted under RIGL chapter 23-28.3, entitled Fire Safety Code Board of Appeal and Review, and the Administrative Regulations promulgated thereunder. 

The Application was submitted by Joseph Watson (&8203;authorized representative&8203;) of Jensen Hughes, 117 Metro Center Boulevard  Suite 1002, Warwick, RI dated &8203;January 24, 2025&8203;. 

The Application was processed by the Board and Appeal  2025012 was filed on &8203;January 24, 2025&8203;. 

A hearing on the Application was conducted on April 1, 2025 at 1:00 PM before the Fire Safety Code Board of Appeal and Review. 

After consideration of the application, the testimony of the witnesses and of the entire record presented to the Board, and after carefully reviewing such information, a motion was made by Commissioner Mancini and seconded by Commissioner Walsh to grant the Appellant the relief as outlined herein.  The motion passed on a 5 to 0 vote. 


RECORD OF THE CASE 

 
The following documents are part of the administrative record for Appeal  2025012 and are pertinent to the decision rendered: 

 
Appeal Application  FVA-25-12 submitted on &8203;January 24, 2025&8203; and filed on &8203;January 24, 2025&8203;. 

Attached Plan of Action dated &8203;November 25, 2024&8203; 

Supporting documents (50 pages) titled Brown Indoor Turf Facility Thermal and Egress Analysis Report dated September 10, 2024. 

Letter of authorization for Jensen Hughes from Paul Dietel dated &8203;December 3, 2024&8203;. 

Providence Fire Marshals Office &8203;Plan Review&8203; Report  BLDG-24-397 dated [undated]. 

Appellants request for continuance (email) dated March 1, 2025. 

Reschedule Notice dated March 5, 2025. 


EXHIBITS 


The following documents were presented at the April 1, 2025 hearing as exhibits: 


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 Findings of Fact: 

 

The determinations below correspond with the [undated] &8203;plan review&8203; report compiled by the Providence Fire Marshals Office in conjunction with the Appellants submitted plan of action.  The above report was utilized by the Board, the Appellant and the Providence Fire Marshals Office during the April 1, 2025 hearing on this matter.  Accordingly, the Board hereby incorporates the [undated] &8203;plan review&8203; report as its initial findings of fact.  Any modification of the Boards findings relating to this report, such as correction of a deficiency by the Appellant, shall be noted herein. 

The building is a proposed 1-story above grade building &8203;with&8203; a [3,936 sq. ft.] mezzanine level, classified as a multiple/mixed use (assembly, business and storage) occupancy, consisting of approximately sixty-seven thousand nine hundred twenty-nine (67,929) square feet &8203;(gross area)&8203; currently under construction. 

The building will be of &8203;Type II (222)&8203; construction, will have a &8203;compliant&8203; emergency voice/alarm communication system with emergency forces notification and will be provided with an &8203;approved&8203; automatic sprinkler system, fire pump and a manual Class I standpipe system. 

The Board finds through the testimony of the Appellant that: 

The maximum occupant load of the facility has been calculated at one thousand two hundred fifty-seven (1,257) persons for its intended conventional use (95 utilization rate); 

The maximum occupant load of the facility has been calculated at four thousand one hundred ninety (4,190) persons for its intended alternate use for special (large assembly) events (5 utilization rate); and, 

The design egress capacity of the facility is for one thousand five hundred seventy-four (1,574) persons. 

The Board finds through the testimony of the parties that the closest public fire hydrant to the proposed structure is located approximately five hundred twenty-five (525) feet to the north on Lloyd Street. 

The Board finds through the testimony of the parties that it is the standard operating procedure of the Providence Fire Department that so-called private fire hydrants located on private property are not utilized or relied upon during fire suppression operations. 

The Board further adopts and incorporates by reference the Applicants plan of action dated November 25, 2024, as more specifically referenced and modified below.  Any violation or deficiency self-identified within the plan of action and addressed by this Decision shall be subject to correction and enforcement by the AHJ as if cited by the AHJ directly. 

There is no objection by the Providence Fire Marshals Office to the granting of the relief outlined herein. 

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND 

DETERMINATIONS ON VARIANCE REQUESTS 

 

References to NFPA shall mean the National Fire Protection Association; references to the Rhode Island Fire Code [RIFC] shall mean NFPA 1, (2018 edition) as incorporated by reference and amended by 450-RICR-00-00-7; and, references to the Rhode Island Life Safety Code [RILSC] shall mean NFPA 101, (2018 edition) as incorporated by reference and amended by 450-RICR-00-00-8. 

 

DESIGN REQUEST 1: FIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTION LOCATION: The Board hereby grants the Appellant a variance from the provisions of RIFC sections 13.2.1 and 18.5.3 and NFPA 14 (2016) section 6.4.5.4 by allowing the proposed standpipe fire department connection (FDC) to remain as designed, located at five hundred twenty-five (525) feet from the nearest public fire hydrant.  In consideration of the relief granted herein, the Board directs the Appellant to provide appropriate signage and/or identification markings in accordance with NFPA 14 section 6.4.5, at the direction and to the satisfaction of the Providence Fire Marshal's Office. 

DESIGN REQUEST 2: EGRESS CAPACITY: The Board hereby denies the Appellants requested relief from RILSC section 7.3.1.1.1 and RIFC section 1.4.2 to increase the special event occupant load to four thousand one hundred ninety (4,190) persons, thereby exceeding the available design egress capacity.  The Board further directs that this file may be reopened if necessary, in order to allow the Appellant to return in the future should additional consideration for relief be required to address this issue. 

DESIGN REQUEST 3: TRAVEL DISTANCE: The Board hereby grants the Appellant a variance from the provisions of RILSC sections 7.6.1 and 12.2.6 and RIFC section 1.4.2 allowing the proposed first floor travel distance of two hundred fifty-five (255) feet to remain as designed, exceeding the maximum permitted travel of two hundred fifty (250) feet. 

 
Any deficiency understood by the Board to have been corrected, which is not so corrected, shall be immediately corrected by the Appellant.  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 
 

This Decision constitutes a final order of the Fire Safety Code Board of Appeal and Review as set forth in RIGL 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 Appellants 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 [FSC] section 450-RICR-00-00-1.7.2(W)]. 

Failure of the Appellant to initially comply with the full Decision of the Board, within the stated time frame, shall void all variances granted herein.  [See: FSC section 450-RICR-00-00-1.7.2(Y)].  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 FSC or a revision of the above-cited classification.  [See: FSC section 450-RICR-00-00-1.7.2(Z)]. 

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 RIGL section 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:  FSC section 450-RICR-00-00-1.7.2(AA)]. 

In accordance with RIGL section 23-28.3-5(e), any person who violates a final order of the Board may be subject to prosecution in the District Court with possible imprisonment for a term not exceeding one (1) year, or fined not more than one thousand dollars (1000) for each offense. 

In accordance with RIGL section 42-35-12, the Appellant 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: RIGL section 23-28.3-6 and FSC section 450-RICR-00-00-1.7.2(S)].  Commencement of such an action does not operate as an automatic stay of this Decision [See: RIGL section 42-35-15(c)].