The above captioned case was scheduled for hearing on October 23, 2001 at l:00 p.m.  At that time, Chairman Farrell and Commissioners Wahlberg, Pearson, O’Connell, Richard, Burlingame, Filippi, Newbrook, and Evans.  Commissioner Coutu recused himself from hearing this case.  The fire service was represented by Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshal Garvey of the Central Falls Fire Marshal’s Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner Newbrook and seconded by Commissioner Pearson to grant the Applicant relief as outlined herein.  The motion was unanimous.

FINDING OF FACT
		
During the October 23, 2001 hearing on this matter, the Board was advised and finds that the Applicant has converted this facility to a three- (3) unit residence.  The facility does not fall within the jurisdiction of the State Fire Code.  However, the facility was originally inspected as a four- (4) unit apartment house on January 26, 2001.  The Board has now been asked to waive any fines the Applicant may have occurred while occupying this facility as a four- (4) unit apartment house on condition that it shall be maintained as a three- (3) unit house.

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 waives any fines, which may have accrued pursuant to the January 26, 2001 inspection of this facility as a four- (4) unit apartment house.  As a condition of this variance, the Board directs the Applicant to maintain this facility as a three- (3) unit residence.

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)]