The above-captioned case was scheduled for hearing on October 23, 2012 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Chairman Newbrook and Commissioners Dias, Walker, Jasparro, Jackson, Sylvester, Burlingame and Richard were present.  The fire service was represented by Chief Plan Review Officer Wade Palazini and Deputy State Fire Marshal Cynthia Dehler of the State Fire Marshals Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner Walker and seconded by Commissioners Dias and Sylvester to grant the Applicant relief as outlined herein.  The motion was unanimous.

FINDINGS OF FACT
	The Board hereby adopts its decision in file number 090278A as its initial findings of fact in this case.  In addition, based upon the testimony of the State Fire Marshals Office, the Board finds that everything in this facility has been corrected but the windows.  The Board further finds that the Applicant had encountered zoning issues which delayed the implementation of his original plan.  The Board further finds that the plans have been approved but the Applicant cannot currently go forward without an approved building permit.  The Board finds that the Applicant and the State Fire Marshals Office have requested additional time for the Applicant.

CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS
	1.  The Board hereby grants the Applicant an additional 120 days from the date of this decision in which to correct the remaining deficiencies within this facility.  The Board notes that during any construction operation, the Applicant is to not have children on the upper floor of this facility.  It is also the understanding of the Board that there is no longer any occupancy in the basement level of this facility.  Finally, the Board notes that the State Fire Marshals Office may extend the above time line for good faith efforts being shown by 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 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)].