The above-captioned case was scheduled for hearing on March 20, 2007 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Chairman Coutu, Vice Chairman Burlingame and Commissioners Newbrook, Preiss, Pearson, Filippi, OConnell and Richard were present.  The fire service was represented by Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshal Wayne Clark of the Office of Fire Alarm of the Newport Fire Department.  A motion was made by Commissioner Richard and seconded by Commissioner Newbrook to grant the Applicant relief as outlined herein.  The motion was unanimous.
FINDINGS OF FACT
	The numbers of the Decision below correspond with those of a January 13, 2007 deficiency list compiled by the Newport Office of Fire Alarm which was incorporated into a January 23, 2007 letter outlining the Applicants options for this facility.  Accordingly, the Board hereby incorporates the above January 23, 2007 letter along with the January 13, 2007 deficiency list as its initial findings of fact.  
	The Board further finds that the Applicant has been advised that the sprinkler system within this facility is not zoned by floors.  The Board further finds that the sprinkler company was contacted and an inspection was made of the property.  The Board further finds that it was determined that the cost of zoning the system by floors would be extremely expensive and that such zoning for the fire alarm system could potentially be accomplished by other means.  Finally, it is the understanding of the Board that all remaining deficiencies in 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, shall be understood to mean in accordance with the specific provisions related to the particular subject as are contained in the State Fire Code, or as approved in particular by the Authority Having Jurisdiction (the State Fire Marshal, his or her designated Deputy State Fire Marshals and/or Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshals).

CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS 
	1.  The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of sections 13.7.1.1.1.1, 13.8.10.5.4.3 and 13.8.10.5.5 in order to allow the Applicant to maintain the original sprinkler system within this facility and not to rezone that system.  This variance shall be limited to the use of this facility by the current occupant.  As a condition of this variance, the Board directs the owner of the facility to provide any additional heat or smoke detection deemed necessary by the Newport Superintendent of Fire Alarm.  This variance is further granted pursuant to the Boards understanding that there shall be no apartments or other residential occupancy within this facility and that the office, restaurant and basement areas shall have approved smoke detection.  In the event the ownership of this facility changes, the new owner shall be directed to either correct these deficiencies or return to the Board.
	2.  The Board hereby directs the Applicant to provide any additional required notification deemed necessary by the Newport Fire Alarm Superintendent in the second floor south dining room.
	3.  The Board hereby directs the Applicant to provide any additional notification deemed necessary by the Newport Office of Fire Alarm Superintendent in the basement of this facility.
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)].