The above-captioned case was scheduled for hearing on July 25, 2006 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Chairman Coutu, Vice Chairman Burlingame and Commissioners Richard, Preiss, Newbrook and OConnell were present.  The fire service was represented by Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshal Donald Medeiros of the Little Compton Fire Marshals Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner Newbrook and seconded by Vice Chairman Burlingame to grant the Applicant relief as outlined herein.  The motion was unanimous.
FINDINGS OF FACT
	During the July 25, 2006 hearing on this matter, the Board was advised and finds that the applicant had received a notice of violation for one of the buildings owned and operated by the Church.  The Board was further advised and finds that this facility is currently operated seasonally as a Church thrift shop.  The Board was further advised that the facility lacked a fire alarm system and that the Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshal of Little Compton advised the Church that the fire alarm system had to be installed on or before July 1, 2005.  
	The Board was further advised and finds that the Applicant is in the middle of planning for a major renovation and building program.  The Board was further advised and finds that the Applicant wishes to provide all of its buildings with fire alarm systems installed and monitored by a single fire alarm company.  Finally, the Board was advised and finds that the Church thrift shop building would not be reoccupied until March of 2007. 

CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS 
	1.  In light of the Boards findings above, the Board hereby grants a variance in order to allow the Applicant to provide the Church thrift shop building with an alarm system, installed within the same time frame as the other Church buildings within this complex.  However, the Board notes that the alarm system shall be installed within the Church thrift shop prior to the re-occupancy of this building in March of 2007.


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)].