The above-captioned case was scheduled for hearing on January 28, 2003 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Chairman Farrell and Commissioners Pearson, Richard, Newbrook, Preiss and Wahlberg were present.  The fire service was represented by Chief of Inspections William Howe and Deputy State Fire Marshal David Curran of the State Fire Marshal’s Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner Wahlberg and seconded by Commissioner Newbrook to allow the applicant to reduce the occupancy of this facility to a conforming three unit from a non-conforming four unit apartment.  The motion was unanimous.

FINDINGS OF FACT
	
Prior to the full hearing on this matter, the Board was advised that the parties had agreed to resolve the case by allowing the applicant to convert this non-conforming four unit apartment house to a conforming three unit residential occupancy.  The Board was further advised that this facility is fully equipped with smoke and carbon monoxide detection and that in all other respects complies with the requirements for a three family occupancy.  

CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS

1. In light of the above, the Board hereby grants the applicant a variance from the provisions of Chapter 23-28.16 in order to allow the applicant to reduce the occupancy of this facility from a non-conforming four unit apartment house to a conforming three unit residential occupancy.  In granting this variance, the Board directs the applicant to abate the fourth unit of this facility and not to re-occupy this as a four-unit 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 Applicant’s 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 Board’s 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 Board’s 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)].

This decision was mailed on 5-15-03.