The above-captioned case was scheduled for hearing on December 5, 2000 at 1:30 P.M. At that time, Chairman Farrell and Commissioners Wahlberg, Newbrook, Pearson, Filippi, Burlingame, Evans, O'Connell and Coutu were present.  This meeting was conducted by Commissioner Burlingame as acting chairman. The fire service was represented by Deputy State Fire Marshal William Howe of the State Fire Marshal’s Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner Evans and seconded by Commissioner Coutu to grant the Applicant relief as outlined herein.  The motion was unanimous.

FINDINGS OF FACT
	
During the December 5, 2000 hearing on this matter, the Board was advised that the Applicant planned to convert this facility into a bed and breakfast or lodging house occupancy.  The Applicant has sought Board approval to provide this facility with an NFPA 13-R sprinkler system.  In making this request, the Applicant advised the Board of the various design possibilities of this system.  The Applicant further advised the Board that, due to the lack of municipal water, the designed system would include a water storage system and an appropriate water pump. It is the understanding of the Board that all other fire code deficiencies will be corrected to the satisfaction of the Bristol Fire Marshal's Office.
	
Any deficiency understood by the Board to have been corrected, which is not so corrected, shall be immediately corrected by the Applicant.  The term “approved”, as used herein, is defined in section 23-28.1-4(3) of the Rhode Island General Laws.

CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS

1. The Board hereby approves the Applicant's proposal to provide this facility with an approved, properly engineered 13-R sprinkler system, installed at the direction and to the satisfaction of the Bristol Fire Marshal, prior to the commercial occupancy of this facility by paying guests. The Board notes, as a point of clarification, that the Applicant may continue to privately occupy this facility, as a single family house, prior to the installation of the above system. 

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 12-13-00.