The above-captioned cases were scheduled for hearing on December 17, 2002 at 1:00 P.M. At that time, Chairman Farrell and Commissioners Wahlberg, Preiss, Newbrook, Richard and Pearson were present.  The fire service was represented by Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshal Henry Lateck of the Cranston Fire Marshal’s Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner Newbrook and seconded by Commissioner Wahlberg  to grant the Applicant relief as outlined herein.  The motion was unanimous.

FINDINGS OF FACT

The Board finds that this complex consists of six existing two-story apartment buildings built in 1969. Buildings 1 and 6 each contain twenty-four living units comprising approximately 17,315 square feet of area. Buildings 2, 3, 4 and 5 each contain twelve living units comprising approximately 9,000 square feet of area. Each building has a heat detector in the boiler room and laundry room and there is a municipally connected street box in the middle of the complex. The buildings are heated by gas-fired boilers that are in segregated in one-hour enclosures.  
	
On June 25, 2001, the Cranston Fire Marshal’s Office provided the Applicant with an inspection report covering the fire code deficiencies within this complex. This report was used by the Board, the Applicant and the Cranston Fire Marshal during the December 17, 2002 hearing on this matter. Accordingly, the Board hereby incorporates the June 25, 2001 inspection report as its supplemental findings of fact. It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected the deficiencies cited in the above report with the exception of the missing door labels, spring loaded hinges and the absence of a fire alarm system in buildings 1 and 6.  Finally, the Board finds that the city street box, serving this complex, is located approximately one hundred fifty feet from the front door of Building 1 and approximately two hundred seventy-five feet from the main exit door of Building 6. The Board notes that the original code covering this facility requires a such a fire alarm box to be either located inside the building or within fifty (50) feet of the front door.
	
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 grants a variance from the provisions of section 23-28.16-6 in order to allow the Applicant to maintain the existing solid core doors and jambs within the egress system of the above-cited buildings within this complex. This variance is contingent upon the Applicant’s compliance with the directives of the Board as outlined below.

2. As a condition of the variances granted herein, the Board hereby directs the Applicant to equip the above doors with approved UL listed spring loaded hinges, installed at the direction and to the satisfaction of the Cranston Fire Marshal, within one hundred eighty (180) days of the date of this Decision.

3. The Board finds that Buildings 2, 3, 4 and 5 are “grandfathered” and not required to be provided with additional fire alarm devices. However, the Board would encourage the Applicant to voluntarily explore the possibility of providing a single municipally connected pull station in the main entrance of each of these buildings. 

As a condition of the variances granted herein, the Board directs the Applicant to work with the Cranston Fire Marshal and Fire Alarm Superintendent to develop a plan of action for the installation of a municipally connected fire alarm system in Buildings 1 and 6. Specifically, if feasible, the Applicant shall be allowed to either connect the fire alarm systems in Buildings 1 and 6 to the street box in this complex or share a single master box between these two buildings. The above systems in Buildings 1 and 6 shall be installed within one hundred eighty (180) days of the date of this Decision.

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)].