The above-captioned case was scheduled for hearing on March 7, 2006 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Chairman Farrell, Vice Chairman Coutu and Commissioners Blackburn, Richard, Preiss, Filippi, Newbrook and Burlingame were present.  The fire service was represented by Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshal Arthur Lowe of the Warwick Fire Marshals Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner Newbrook and seconded by Commissioner Burlingame to grant the Applicant relief as outlined herein.  The motion was unanimous.
FINDINGS OF FACT
	The Board finds this is a two-story wood frame facility where the lower level is utilized as an office and the upper level is utilized for a single family dwelling.  The use of the upper level will be converted to a security office as well as the lower level, to contain one (1) tenant.  The Board finds that the office section on the upper level will be isolated with a one-hour rated wall at the top of the stairway in addition to the installation of a local fire alarm system, in accordance with the Warwick Fire Marshal's office.  The Board further finds that the Applicant shall provide this facility with an approved local fire alarm system in addition to domestic sprinkler heads at the top and bottom of the cited stairs.  Finally, the Board finds that all other fire code deficiencies shall be corrected by the Applicant.  

CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS
	1.  The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of section 38.3.2 and section 8.6 in order to allow the Applicant to enclose the upper level of the stairway with an approved one-hour rated wall at the top of the stairway in addition to the local fire alarm system.  The Board further directs the Applicant to provide domestic sprinkler heads at the top and bottom of the cited stairway installed at the direction and to the satisfaction of the Warwick Fire Marshal's office.  In granting this relief, the Board finds that full compliance with the code would impose a structural hardship upon the Applicant and that the Applicants plan of action for this facility is a suitable alternative providing equivalent fire safety for the limited number of occupants within 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)].