The above-captioned case was scheduled for Subcommittee hearing on January 19, 2011 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Chairman Newbrook and Commissioners Dias and Walker were present.  The fire service was represented by Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshal Glen Bathgate of the Cranston Fire Marshals Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner Walker and seconded by Commissioner Dias to recommend to the full Board that the Applicant be granted the relief as outlined herein.  The motion was unanimous. 

The Subcommittees recommendations were thereupon reviewed by the Board during its February 8, 2011 hearing at 1:00 PM.  At that time, Chairman Newbrook and Commissioners Blackburn, Pearson, Jasparro, Dias and Preiss were present.  A motion was made by Commissioner Jasparro and seconded by Commissioner Pearson to approve the Subcommittee recommendations as presented. The motion was unanimous. Accordingly, the Subcommittee recommendations, as outlined below, now have the status of a full Board Decision. 

FINDINGS OF FACT
	The numbers of the Decision below correspond with those of a July 14, 2008 inspection report compiled by the Cranston Fire Marshals Office. The above report was utilized by the Board, the Applicant and the Cranston Fire Marshals Office during the hearing on this matter.  Accordingly, the Board hereby incorporates the July 14, 2008 inspection report as its initial findings of fact.  Any modification of the Boards findings, such as correction of a deficiency by the Applicant, shall be noted herein. 
	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.
	In addition, the Board finds that the subject facility was converted from an Industrial to an Educational occupancy in 2002 and had apparently been in compliance with the codes at that time.  The Board further finds that the building is currently protected by a municipally-connected fire alarm system and a sprinkler system. The Board further finds that the Cranston Fire Marshals Office has determined that the existing fire alarm system may need certain upgrades to comply with the current codes. The Board notes that the current fire alarm requirements for educational occupancies are now under review and may be modified by the technical subcommittee during this code adoption cycle.  Finally, the Board finds that any upgrade of the system would be least disruptive to the students if completed over the summer months.

CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCES GRANTED
	The Board hereby grants the Applicant a time variance of thirty (30) days from the date of this Decision to have its fire alarm contractor, or other professional, study the current fire alarm system and present the Cranston Fire Marshals Office with an initial plan of action for the upgrade of the fire alarm system.  The Board further grants the Applicant an additional time variance, to complete any required work, on or before the commencement of the 2011-2012 academic year in September of 2011.  Finally, the Board shall hereby maintain this file as an open file in order to allow the parties to return (without the necessity of paying additional filing fees), and present the Board with proposed alternative arrangements, in the event of hardship and/or modification of the code prior to September 2011.   

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).
	If the Applicant is aggrieved by the Subcommittees recommendations, as accepted by the Board of Appeal and as outlined above, the Applicant shall have the right to petition the Board of Appeal, within thirty (30) days of the mailing date below, for review of the above Decision. The Applicant shall thereupon be scheduled for hearing before the full Board of Appeal & Review. (State Fire Safety Code, Section 6-2-9).