The above-captioned cases were scheduled for hearing on November 6, 2008 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Acting Chairman Newbrook and Commissioners Richard, Blackburn, Preiss, Jackson, Jasparro and Dias were present.  The fire service was represented by Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshals Dillon and Krapf of the Providence Fire Marshals Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner Jasparro and seconded by Commissioner Dias to grant the Applicant relief as outlined herein.  The motion was unanimous.
FINDINGS OF FACT
	The Board finds that the above buildings are commercial facilities located in the City of Providence.  The Boards finds that the Applicant is a management company authorized by the owner of these facilities to request a time variance under the state fire code.  The Board further finds that the Applicant has requested a time variance to install approved fire alarm systems in each of these facilities.  The Board further finds that the plans for the fire alarm upgrades to these facilities were not submitted to the Providence Fire Marshals Office prior to July 1, 2008.  The Board further finds that the Applicant has engaged the services of a fire alarm contractor who will be submitting a plan of action to the Providence Fire Marshals Office.  Finally, the Board has been advised by the Providence Fire Marshals Office that it does not have sufficient staff to conduct a timely inspection of these facilities. 

CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS
1.	The Board hereby grants a time variance of thirty (30) days from the date of this Decision to submit its plan of action, for bringing these buildings into compliance with the State Fire Code, to the Providence Fire Marshals Office.  The Board further grants the Applicant an additional time variance of one hundred twenty (120) days from the approval of the submitted plans, by the Providence Fire Marshals Office, to fully execute those plans and thereby bring the these buildings into compliance with the State Fire Code.  The Providence Fire Marshals Office is hereby granted the discretionary authority to extend the above deadlines for good faith efforts being made by the Applicant.

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)].