The above-captioned case was scheduled for hearing on February 27, 2007 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Chairman Coutu, Vice Chairman Burlingame and Commissioners Richard, Blackburn, Newbrook, Preiss, Filippi, OConnell and Pearson were present.  The fire service was represented by Deputy State Fire Marshal Arthur DaCosta of the State Fire Marshals Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner Newbrook and seconded by Commissioner Blackburn to grant the Applicant relief as outlined herein.  The motion was unanimous.
FINDINGS OF FACT
	The Board hereby incorporates as its original findings of fact the building description outlined in a September 29, 2006 inspection report compiled by the State Fire Marshal's office.  In addition, the Board conducted an on-site tour of this facility on February 27, 2007 at 10:00 A.M.  During this tour, the subcommittee reviewed several possible alternative methods of compliance with the Applicant and the State Fire Marshal.  However, it was determined that the parties may need additional time in order to develop a comprehensive plan of action to address all of the deficiencies within this facility.  
CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS 
	1.  The Board hereby grants the Applicant and the State Fire Marshal's office a period of sixty (60) days in which to develop and return with a comprehensive plan of action for the fire safety of this facility.  The Board hereby maintains this file open until the parties have completed their plan of action and had an opportunity to present it to the Board.

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)].