The above captioned case was scheduled for hearing on July 10, 2001 at l:30 p.m.  At that time, Chairman Farrell and Commissioners Newbrook, Coutu, Evans, Filippi, Wahlberg, O’Connell and Burlingame were present.  The fire service was represented by, Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshal John Campobiano of the Warwick Fire Marshal’s Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner Coutu and seconded by Commissioner O’Connell to grant the Applicant relief as outlined herein.  The motion was unanimous.

FINDING OF FACT
		
During the July l0, 2001 hearing on this matter, the Board was advised and finds that the above captioned facility is a newly constructed Class “A” place of assembly with a maximum occupancy of 3,063 people.  The Board was further advised that pursuant to the provisions of RIGL Section 23-28.6-5(c), this place of assembly was mandated to have a uniformed fire fighter on duty and any additional fire fighters on duty when deemed necessary by the Chief of the local fire department.  The Applicant has come before the Board requesting that they may not be required to maintained a detailed fire fighter on duty until such time they reach a capacity of l,000 or more occupants.  Finally, the Board finds that the Applicant and the Warwick Fire Marshal had agreed to utilize the same standards as outlined in the November 22, l999 Decision covering a theater located on Quaker Lane.
	
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.l-4(3) of the Rhode Island General Laws.

CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS

1.	The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of Section 23-28.6-5(c) in order to allow the Applicant not to have to comply with the above section until such time as occupancy of this facility reaches l,000 or more people.  The Applicant is hereby directed to work closely with the Warwick Fire Marshal’s Office in order to provide for the scheduling of fire fighters on duty on those days in which it is anticipated that the maximum occupancy shall reach or exceed l,000 people.  Further, the Board hereby incorporates the standards outlined in its November 22, l999 Decision covering l200 Quaker Lane as also the mandated standards for this facility.  Finally, the Board shall maintain this file open for a period of six (6) months in order to allow either party to return for clarification or guidance.

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.

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.  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.  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 changes creates a new use or occupancy as outlined in R.I.G.L. 23-28.l-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.

	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.  [RIGL 42-35-l5(c)]