The above-captioned case was scheduled for hearing on December 4, 2007 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Chairman Coutu and Commissioners Filippi, Walker, Preiss, Blackburn, Richard, Jackson and Jasparro were present.  The fire service was represented by Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshal Claude LaFlamme of the Cumberland Hill Fire Marshals Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner Blackburn and seconded by Commissioner Richard to grant the Applicant relief as outlined herein.  The motion was unanimous.
FINDINGS OF FACT
	During the December 4, 2007 hearing on this matter, the Board had before it an August 28, 2007 plan review notice compiled by the Cumberland Hill Fire Marshal's office.  The Board further had before it as part of the application for variance a December 16, 2007 variance supplement prepared by E.A. McNulty Real Estate.  Accordingly, the Board hereby incorporates the August 28, 2007 Cumberland Hill Fire Department document along with the October 16, 2007 E.A. McNulty document as its initial findings of fact.  The Board further finds that the parties have agreed in principle to sprinkler the residential units of the proposed development in order to secure relief from the fire department access in accordance with their plan of action.
	
CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS 
	1.  The Board hereby approves the parties plan of action for providing limited fire department access to this facility in conjunction with the sprinklering of the residential units within this complex.  In light of the above, it is the understanding of the Board that the Cumberland Hill Fire Marshal has no objection.

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)].