The above-captioned case was originally scheduled for hearing on November 13, 2012 and the Board issued a decision on March 15, 2013.  On August 13, 2013, the Applicant requested a time extension in order to conclude this original project.  The matter was thereupon rescheduled for hearing on September 10, 2013 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Chairman Newbrook, Vice Chairperson Filippi and Commissioners Booth, Pearson, Thornton, Jackson, Sylvester, Burlingame, Blackburn and Richard were present.  The fire service was represented by Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshal Raymond Pacheco of the Providence Fire Marshals Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner Burlingame and seconded by Commissioner Richard to grant the Applicant relief as outlined herein.  The motion was unanimous.

FINDINGS OF FACT
	The Board hereby adopts its original decision in file number 120130 as its initial findings of fact in this case.  The Board further finds that immediately following the variance approval, the Applicant filed and obtained a building permit and the contractor was prepared to commence construction.  However, the Board finds that issues arose between the landlord and the restaurant owner over the allocation of the cost of the improvements.  The Board finds that at this point in the negotiations, the Applicant feels comfortable with proceeding with the original decision.  Upon review of the facts of the case with the Applicant and the Applicants representative, the Board finds that the project can be completed on or before January 31, 2014.

CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS
	1.  The Board hereby grants a time extension to the Applicant in order to completely comply with the directives of the original decision in this case, on or before January 31, 2014.  The Board notes that there shall be no further extensions granted in this case. 

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 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: 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 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:  Board Rules and Regulations, section 6-2-20).
	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.  Commencement of such an action does not operate as an automatic stay of this Decision [R.I.G.L. 42-35-15(c)].