The above-captioned cases were scheduled for hearing on November 12, 2008 at 10:00 A.M.  At that time, Chairman Coutu, Vice Chairman Newbrook and Commissioners Dias, Jasparro, Richard and Blackburn were present.  The fire service was represented by Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshals Richard Silva and Timothy Lutz of the Providence Fire Marshals Office.  A motion was made by Vice Chairman Newbrook and seconded by Commissioner Jasparro to grant the Applicant relief as outlined herein.  The motion was unanimous.
FINDINGS OF FACT
	During the November 12, 2008 hearing on this matter, the Board was advised and finds that the above-captioned facilities are all high-rise apartment complexes.  Based upon the documentation received and reviewed by it, the Board further finds that Dexter Manor I & II houses elderly and disabled clients; Dominica Manor houses elderly clients only; Parenti Villa houses elderly and disabled clients; Carroll Tower houses elderly clients only; and that the complex located at 335 Hartford Avenue houses both elderly and disabled clients. 
	During the November 12, 2008 hearing, the Board was advised by the Applicant, and finds, that the Housing Authority was requesting a period of ninety (90) days to issue an RFP to secure the services of a professional engineering firm who would then be directed to design a plan of action to bring the above-captioned facilities into full compliance with the high-rise sprinkler requirement of the fire code.  The Board finds that the engineering firm, so hired, could produce the above comprehensive plans within the ensuing nine (9) months.  In light of the above, the Board finds that, on or before November 12, 2009, the Applicant should be able to present the Providence Fire Marshals Office with comprehensive engineering plans for the installation of the mandated high-rise sprinkler systems within all of the above facilities. 
	Finally, the Board finds that while the deadline for final compliance is January 1, 2016, comprehensive phased-in time tables are necessary to assure that each of the above buildings will be in full compliance with operational sprinkler systems approved by the Providence Fire Marshals Office prior to that date. 

CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS
1.	The Board hereby grants a time variance of ninety (90) days from the November 12, 2008 hearing date to allow the Applicant to issue an RFP and secure the services of a professional engineering firm who would then be directed to design a plan of action to bring the above-captioned facilities into full compliance with the high-rise sprinkler requirement of the fire code. 
The Board further grants the Applicant a second time variance in order to allow the Applicants selected engineering firm to produce the above comprehensive plans, and submit these plans to the Providence Fire Marshals Office for approval, on or before November 12, 2009.  As part of this plan submission process, the Applicant is directed to work with the Providence Fire Marshals office to develop a mutually agreed-upon schedule for the phased completion of this project.  In the event the parties are unable to agree upon a schedule for this project, either party may request that the matter be re-opened, for further review by the Board, prior to the November 12, 2009 deadline. 
Finally, the Board notes that the above time extensions are only granted for the development of a comprehensive sprinkler plan.  All remaining fire code deficiencies, such as fire alarm, must be separately addressed within a separate time table approved by the Providence Fire Marshals Office. 


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).

	The Applicant may appeal the Boards 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)].