The above-captioned cases were consolidated by the Applicant in a detailed state-wide plan of action for fire code compliance.  The detailed plan of action was originally scheduled for review by the Board on August 2, 2005 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Chairman Farrell, Vice Chairman Coutu and Commissioners Richard, Blackburn, Newbrook, Preiss, Burlingame and Filippi were present.  Also present were State Fire Marshal Owens and Chief of Inspections Howe.
	The Applicants original plan of action called for bringing approximately twenty-one (21) apartment building and/or complexes into compliance within specific time lines.  The original plan of action specifically indicated that those apartment buildings and/or complexes known as Chatham Village, East Shore, Hamilton and Trafalgar would be brought into full compliance by December 2011. (Attachment 1  Now modified with an X)
	During the August 2, 2005 hearing, the Applicants representative agreed to the modification o one date on the summary sheet of his proposed plan of action.  Specifically, December 2011 was changed on the record to July 1, 2008.  Accordingly, those apartment buildings and/or complexes known as Chatham Village, East Shore, Hamilton and Trafalgar were to be brought into full compliance by July 1, 2008.
	The above summary sheet was so modified, in ink, during the August 2, 2005 hearing. (Attachment 2.)  The newly modified summary sheet was then presented to the Board for approval.  A motion was thereupon made by Commissioner Newbrook and seconded by Commissioner Richard to approve the Applicants attached plan of action.  (Attachment 2.)  The Chairman did not participate in this vote.  The vote of the remaining Commissioners was unanimous.
	A written Decision was mailed to the Applicant, the State Fire Marshals Office and every local fire marshal having one, or more, of the above apartment buildings and/or complexes within his or her jurisdiction.
	In late February of 2010, the Board was asked to review the record in this case to determine the actual compliance date for the Trafalgar East apartment complex.  Upon review of the record, it was determined that a clerical error had occurred.  Specifically, the original plan of action summary sheet (listing the December 2011 date) was attached to, and referenced by, the original Decision rather than the agreed-upon modified summary sheet (listing the July 1, 2008 date).  After the parties were notified of this clerical error, the Warwick Fire Marshals Office requested an Amended Decision pursuant to Board Rule 6-2-12 which outlines the procedure for addressing a clerical error.
	The Warwick Fire Marshals request for amendment of the above-captioned decisions was scheduled for a second hearing on March 9, 2010 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Chairman Coutu and Commissioners Richard, Preiss, Walker, Filippi, Dias, Jasparro and Pearson were present.  The Fire Service was represented by Chief of Inspections Scott Caron of the State Fire Marshals Office and Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshal Peter J. Marietti, III, of the Warwick Fire Marshals Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner Richard 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 Applicant is a property management group having facilities throughout the state.  (Attachment 2.)  The Board further finds that the above-captioned facilities were initially in various stages of fire code compliance.  However, the Board has now been advised that the major work has been completed in all of the buildings with the exception of the Trafalgar Complex.
	The Board further finds that the Applicant had developed and submitted a plan of action addressing the fire code deficiencies in the above-captioned facilities.  The Board further finds that the plan of action addressed both the immediate concern of the fire service along with the long term goals for fire safety in these facilities.  The Board further finds that addressing the fire code deficiencies, on a system-wide basis, allows for both economy of scale and a rapid upgrade of the fire safety within these facilities.
	Based upon the submitted documentation, the Board further finds that the Applicants expert had initially advised that Trafalgar complex consists of thirty-eight (38) year old wood frame buildings with brick exterior.  The Applicants expert further advised that each building is further subdivided into six unit segments, each separated by masonry block walls which appear to be two hour fire-rated.  Openings which occur at the first floor, are protected by self-closing fire doors.  Each unit within the two hour envelope appears to be separated from other units by a one (1) hour fire wall.
	The Board was further advised that each six units are serviced by an enclosed exit stair and every unit has an exterior door that leads to an exterior exit balcony.  Further, the documentation submitted in this case advised that a local fire alarm consisting of two exterior pull stations and exterior horns is provided.
	Finally, the Board finds that, under the above building description, only a local fire alarm system may be required in this complex.  However, in light of the fire marshals questions as to the integrity of the two hour envelope the Board finds that the Applicant has voluntarily agreed to provide this complex with a municipally connected fire alarm system.
	
CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS 
1.	The Board hereby amends its original Decision to reflect the fact that Attachment 2 with the handwritten amended date of July 1, 2008 accurately reflects the original compliance time table for the Applicants twenty-one (21) apartment buildings and/or complexes listed above.  Accordingly, the Board re-approves Attachment 2 as submitted by Property Advisory Group and Guardian Property Management and as amended by the parties on August 2, 2005.  With the sole exception for the Trafalgar East Complex, as outlined in Item 2 below, the structure and time variances outlined in Attachment 2 are hereby approved and the Applicant is again directed to bring these facilities into compliance within the attached guidelines and timetables.
2.	Pursuant to the agreed-upon plan of action, submitted to the Board by the Applicant and the Warwick Fire Marshals Office during the March 9, 2010 hearing, the Board hereby grants the following additional relief to the Applicant:
	The original compliance deadline for the Trafalgar East Apartment Complex (file numbers 050387, 050635, 050636, 050637  now file numbers 050387A, 050635A, 050636A, 050637A) is hereby extended.  Specifically, the Applicant shall have thirty (30) days from the March 9, 2010 hearing date to submit his plans for bringing the occupied buildings in this complex into full compliance with the fire code.  The Applicant shall then have an additional one hundred twenty (120) days, from the above thirty (30) day period, in which to bring this facility into full compliance with the code at the direction and to the satisfaction of the Warwick Fire Marshals Office.
	Specifically, the Board notes that the Applicant shall have through April 8, 2010 to meet the above thirty (30) day deadline.  The Board further notes that the Applicant shall then have through August 6, 2010 to complete this project.  Finally, the Board notes that there shall be no further extensions of the above deadlines.
	As a condition of this relief, the Applicant shall further protect the residents of this complex by posting either a fire watch or a detailed fire fighter with a two-way radio, as determined by the Warwick Fire Marshals Office, around the clock, until the occupied buildings in this complex are brought into full compliance with the fire code to the satisfaction of the Warwick 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)].