STATE OF FLORIDA

DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

DONNA MARIE JOHNSON, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

vs. ) CASE NO. 91-6537

)

DEPARTMENT OF PROFESSIONAL ) REGULATION, BOARD OF ARCHITECTURE ) AND INTERIOR DESIGN, )

)

Respondent. )

)

RECOMMENDED ORDER

Pursuant to notice, the Division of Administrative Hearings, by its duly designated Hearing Officer, William F. Quattlebaum, held a formal hearing in the above-styled case on July 27, 1992, in Fort Myers, Florida.

APPEARANCES

For Petitioner: Paul Watson Lambert, Esquire

2851 Remington Green Circle Suite C

Tallahassee, Florida 32308-3749

For Respondent: Arthur R. Wiedinger, Esquire

Assistant Attorney General The Capitol, Suite 1603

Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1050 STATEMENT OF THE ISSUE

Whether the Petitioner is qualified for licensure as an interior designer under the "grandfather" provisions of Section 21, Chapter 88-383, Laws of Florida, as amended by Chapter 89-19, Laws of Florida.

PRELIMINARY STATEMENT

By Respondent's letter dated August 21, 1991, the Petitioner was informed that her application for licensure as an interior designer was being denied on the grounds that the application failed to "show sufficient evidence that you met the requirements of Florida Statute 481.203(8) and Chapter Law 89-19, Section 21." The letter further stated that "[a] review of your application by the Interior Design Committee shows that you do not have six year (sic) of interior design experience prior to December 31, 1989, as required under Section 21." The Petitioner requested a formal administrative hearing to challenge the license denial.

At the hearing, the Petitioner testified on her own behalf, presented the testimony of John Wyatt and Fred Dudley, and offered into evidence exhibits

numbered 1-16. Joint exhibits numbered 17-18 were admitted. The Petitioner filed a proposed recommended order at the conclusion of the hearing.

A transcript of the hearing was filed on August 7, 1992. The Respondent subsequently filed a proposed recommended order. The proposed findings of fact are ruled upon either directly or indirectly as reflected in this Recommended Order, and in the Appendix which is attached and hereby made a part of this Recommended Order.

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. On October 16, 1989, Donna Marie Johnson filed her application for licensure as an interior designer with he Department of Professional Regulation ("DPR").

   
   

2. According to the policy and practice of the DPR Board of Architecture and Interior Design, interior design licensing matters are addressed by the Interior Design Committee (comprised of two interior designers and one architect) which reports to the Board of Architecture and Interior Design.

   
   

3. There is no evidence that Ms. Johnson's application was ever considered by the full Interior Design Committee or by the Board.

   
   

4. Ms. Johnson's application was initially reviewed by Susan M. May, Professional Regulation Specialist I, for the DPR Board of Architecture and Interior Design.

   
   

5. Ms. May is responsible for review of applications for completeness and for review of additional information provided. She has no formal education or training in interior design or decorating, and has received no formal training in review of licensure applications by the DPR.

   
   

6. In this case, Ms. May determined that the application filed by Ms. Johnson was incomplete. Ms. Johnson was notified of the missing information and was provided an opportunity to complete the application. Ms. May also forwarded three "CLIENT REFERENCE FORMS" to Ms. Johnson. The forms, as well as other material was subsequently submitted to the Board by Ms. Johnson. 1/

   
   

7. The client reference form prepared by the DPR sets forth the definition of "interior designer" provided by statute and refers to the applicant as the "interior designer". The form, which includes three questions which are answered by the client related to the work that the "interior designer" performed, does not distinguish interior design from interior decorating and gives no indication any such distinction exists. The form requires each client to "describe the work performed by the Interior Designer" by making reference to the statutory definition. Each client must sign the form and have the signature notarized.

   
   

8. Given the terminology of the form and the identification of the applicant as an "interior designer", an attestation by a client that the applicant is qualified to be an "interior designer" is of little meaning and is not persuasive. However, the attachments to the forms submitted by the clients are credited as accurate reflections of the services provided by Ms. Johnson. Such letters establish that Ms. Johnson primarily provided interior decorating services such as color coordination, flooring, wallpaper, window treatments, and furniture selection.

9. By letter dated January 18, 1990, Ms. Johnson was informed that her application was being denied on the grounds that six years of interior design experience had not been demonstrated. The letter stated that Johnson could submit additional materials and seek reconsideration of her application. Subsequently, Ms. Johnson requested reconsideration and submitted additional material.

   
   

10. The additional material was reviewed by Carl Gerkin, a member of the Interior Design Committee. Gerkin allegedly determined that her credentials did not warrant licensure under the referenced "grandfather" provisions. No other committee member reviewed the materials.

    
    

11. By letter dated October 19, 1990, Johnson was informed that her application was again being denied on the grounds that six years of interior design experience had not been demonstrated and again provided that Ms. Johnson could request reconsideration. Ms. Johnson did so.

    
    

12. By letter dated August 21, 1991, Johnson was informed that her application failed to demonstrate six years of interior design experience prior to December 31, 1989, as required by the "grandfather" provision under which Johnson had applied for licensure. Ms. Johnson was informed of her right to a formal administrative hearing which resulted in the subject proceeding.

    
    

13. Ms. Johnson's application for licensure states that she has worked as a "design consultant" for a number of businesses and individuals. Ms. Johnson's resume, included with her application, lists her capabilities as color coordination, flooring, wallpaper, window treatments, furniture and space planning.

    
    

14. Although there is evidence that Ms. Johnson is currently capable of providing interior design services, the greater weight of the evidence fails to establish that, for the six year period prior to December 31, 1989, Ms. Johnson's services met the statutory definition of "interior design". To the contrary, the evidence establishes that services provided by Ms. Johnson during the referenced six year period consisted primarily of interior decorating services generally provided through the retail carpet and flooring business owned by Ms. Johnson and her husband, and through new home contractors who referred new home buyers to Ms. Johnson for decorating services.

    
    

15. Ms. Johnson's application indicates that she worked for Mary Smith of Buckeye Homes during 1980-81 and describes her participation with Buckeye Homes as "[c]ustomers referred for interior design of their new home." There is no credible information which permits a determination that the services provided by Ms. Johnson to Buckeye Homes customers meet the statutory definition of "interior design".

    
    

16. The application indicates that Ms. Johnson handled new customer referrals from Wesley Oben, Sr. of Cedar Homes Factory Direct, Inc. during 1987- 1989, for interior design of new homes. There is no credible information which permits a determination that the services provided by Ms. Johnson to Cedar Homes customers meet the statutory definition of "interior design".

    
    

17. The application indicates that Ms. Johnson worked for Liz or Phil Vail of Edison Homes during 1988-1989, for interior design of new homes. No further information was provided.

18. The application indicates that Ms. Johnson worked for Fred Nachbrun of FCN Builders during 1979-1989 for interior design of new homes. By letter of reference dated September 19, 1989, Fred Nachbrun wrote during a 12 year period, Ms. Johnson had worked with his customers "in the capacity of decorating advisor. Her knowledge of floor covering, wallpaper, and window treatments have enabled our customers to make their transition into their new homes a pleasant one....I feel as though Ms. Johnson's knowledge and capabilities surpasses those of any other decorator I have worked with in the past." There is no credible evidence that the services provided by Ms. Johnson to FCN Builders met the statutory definition of "interior design".

    
    

19. The application indicates that Ms. Johnson worked for "Julio or Pat" of Fairview Builders during 1986-1989. There is no credible evidence that the services provided by Ms. Johnson to Fairview Builders met the statutory definition of "interior design".

    
    

20. The application indicates that Ms. Johnson worked for Arlene Steinweg of R.A. Grant Construction during 1987-1989. By letter of reference dated September 18, 1989, James Matey of R.A. Grant Construction wrote that "R.A. Grant Construction has been using B & D Carpet for the past year. We have used their services in carpeting and interior color schemes. During this time we found their work to be satisfactory." There is no credible evidence that the services provided by Ms. Johnson to R.A. Grant Construction met the statutory definition of "interior design".

    
    

21. The application indicates that Ms. Johnson worked for Phyllis Nelson of Mission Bay Homes, Inc. during 1980-1989. A letter of reference dated February 10, 1988, states that Ms. Johnson "has been our decorating advisor for the past five years" and attributes the sales of some homes to her interior decorating. There is no credible evidence that the services provided by Ms. Johnson to Mission Bay Homes met the statutory definition of "interior design".

    
    

22. The application indicates that Ms. Johnson worked for Lynn Kirby at Nu-Cape Construction, Inc. during 1979-1989, as a "design consultant for all their commercial jobs." By letter of reference dated September 18, 1989, Mr. Kirby wrote that he had worked with Ms. Johnson "in the capacity of interior design on all our commercial projects. The job was completed on schedule and was always done in a professional manner." Mr. Kirby opined that Ms. Johnson

    would be an asset to "your profession". There is no credible evidence as to the types of interior services performed by Ms. Johnson for Nu-Cape Construction which would establish that said services met the statutory definition of "interior design".

    
    

23. The application indicates that Ms. Johnson worked for Raymond Scalero at Oyster Bay Homes, Inc. during 1983-1989. By letter of reference dated September 12, 1989, Mr. Scalero wrote that "[d]uring the past four years Donna Johnson has worked individually with all our customers. She helps our customers select their personal color needs from the roof to the flooring." The letter further states "Donna has just completed the interior designing of our new Vista model. She has detailed the interior, planning interior and exterior paint colors, window dressing, wallpaper, wall hangings, as well as utilizing space and placement of furniture. She coordinated all colors from the roof to the flooring, selected light fixtures, tile and plumbing fixtures. For our Lehigh Acres model, Donna put together several color boards for our customers to choose from." There is no credible evidence that the services provided by Ms. Johnson to Oyster Bay Homes met the statutory definition of "interior design".

24. The application indicates that Ms. Johnson worked for Peter Santos of Air Control Systems during 1989, handling the "[i]nterior of new office building." A subsequent client reference form completed by Mr. Santos states that in February of 1989, Ms. Johnson contracted with Air Control Systems to handle office space planning and remodeling, including wall relocations. Ms. Johnson also supplied drawings, dated in April of 1989, of the floor plan for the Air Control project. The Air Control Systems project meets the statutory definition of "interior design".

    
    

25. The application indicates that Ms. Johnson worked for Leland Ritter of Cape Coral Plumbing, Inc. during 1985-1989, handling "[i]nterior of offices, personal home, designed booth for Parade of Homes." A letter of reference dated August 31, 1989, states that during the previous five years, Ms. Johnson has been consulted on various occasions to address problems related to plumbing installations and that her response was always prompt. It notes that she has an excellent reputation among several local builders. It further notes that in 1987, her parade booth design won an award. There is no credible evidence that the services provided by Ms. Johnson to Cape Coral Plumbing met the statutory definition of "interior design".

    
    

26. The application indicates that during 1987-1989, Ms. Johnson handled the interior design of the Community National Bank building. By letter of reference dated February 2, 1988, Dave Gomer writes that Ms. Johnson and her husband "were selected to furnish the carpeting in our original bank building and most recently were engaged as the interior decorators for our branch bank building. They selected and furnished all floor coverings, window draperies and framed wall art." Mr. Gomer also states that he had engaged the Johnsons "to do interior decorating in my home". There is no credible evidence that the services provided by Ms. Johnson to Community National Bank met the statutory definition of "interior design".

    
    

27. The application indicates that Ms. Johnson handled the interior design of the main office of First National Bank in 1988-1989, and was working on a bank branch at the time of the application. By letter dated September 7, 1989, Michael P. Geml, bank president/CEO, states that, in may of 1988, Ms. Johnson competed for and received the bid to "design a 15,000 square foot, two-story office building that was destined to be the focal point of Cape Coral for years to come." The letter state that "[t]he contract was awarded to Donna, and the results were magnificent. She brought her design boards, her carpet samples, but more importantly she brought with her expertise and her willingness to work with the design committee....I can recommend Donna Johnson of B & D Carpets, Inc. to anyone who may ask for a reference and feel with complete confidence she will deliver a product to be proud of." A subsequent client reference form completed by Mr. Geml states that from October 1987 to February 1989, her "recommendations on the lay-out of the teller line were beneficial; her collaboration with all sub-contractors was crucial in not only the structural aspect, but also keeping in mind that we don't deter from the basic concept." Beyond the specific reference to design of the teller line, the evidence is insufficient to establish that the services provided by Ms. Johnson meet the statutory definition of "interior design".

    
    

28. The application indicates that Ms. Johnson remodeled a branch office of First Federal Savings & Loan in 1989. No further information was provided.

    
    

29. The application indicates that Ms. Johnson decorated offices and color coordinated all flooring at Cape Coral Hospital during 1979-1989. By letter of reference addresses to Mr. Bill Johnson from David R. Van Loon, vice-president,

    wrote "[i]n the past several years, B & D Carpets, Inc. has installed the floor coverings on all Cape Coral Hospital's major expansion and renovation projects. Carpet installation was completed on schedule and always in an extremely professional manner. The letter further acknowledges Mr. Johnson's personal assistance in addressing carpet seaming problems and advises that the Hospital may be used as a reference for B & D Carpets, Inc. The evidence is insufficient to establish that Ms. Johnson provided "interior design" services to Cape Coral Hospital.

    
    

30. The application indicates that Ms. Johnson handled the design of the art studios at Savonna Art Consultants during 1988-1989. A letter of reference dated August 30, 1989, states that the writers "have worked with Donna Johnson of B & D Carpets, Inc. for several years in conjunction with the interior decorating service offered by Mrs. Johnson and have always found that she has superior ability in planning and designing difficult interiors as commissioned by her clients. The carpeting, furniture, window treatments, wall coverings and accessories are fully coordinated to achieve the specific ambience and function needed." The letter further states that Ms. Johnson "has always provided detailed drawings and elevations which are necessary to determine the size and number of pieces needed and has spent long hours with us in choosing the correct mats and frames to blend with the decor, and to best compliment the art selected by the client....We have furnished design boards with the total color schemes, furniture selections, wall and floor treatments, etc., as directed by Mrs. Johnson." The letter concludes by noting that Mr. and Mrs. Johnson were honest, trustworthy, and the writers' "most prompt paying customer". The evidence is insufficient to establish that Ms. Johnson provided "interior design" services to Savonna Art Consultants.

    
    

31. The application indicates that Ms. Johnson worked with J.G. Steinweg, consultant to construction, during 1987-1989, assisting customers in color coordination of new homes. By letter of reference dated September 29, 1989, Mr. Steinweg states that he has known Ms. Johnson for three years and that he would "refer her to all those that I come in contact with who require a professional in the field of interior design." Mr. Steinweg's letter does not identify any specific projects on which Ms. Johnson has worked. The evidence is insufficient to establish that Ms. Johnson provided "interior design" services to J.G. Steinweg.

    
    

32. The application indicates that Ms. Johnson designed the interior of Zak's Jewelry Store during 1985-1989. No further information was provided.

    
    

33. The application indicates that Ms. Johnson designed the interior of the Law Offices of Robert Adamski, beginning at a date uncertain (the copy of the application in evidence is unclear) and continuing through 1989. By subsequent client reference form, Mr. Adamski states that he had worked with Ms. Johnson twice over a seven year period in two separate law office projects. He states, "Mrs. Johnson was able to accommodate my personal needs in utilizing the space designed for my office, as well as the secretarial office and the waiting area. She created a very functional environment for all concerned." A copy of a floor plan was attached to Mr. Adamski's form, however the copy identifies neither the name or date of the person who prepared the plan or the project depicted on the plan. The client reference form makes no mention of the attachment. Based on the information provided by Mr. Adamski, it is not possible to determine whether the services provided by Ms. Johnson met the statutory definition of "interior design".

34. The application indicates that Ms. Johnson designed the interior of the Joseph Zeterberg Medical Office, during at an unidentified period (the copy of the application in evidence is unclear). No further information was provided.

    
    

35. The application indicates that Ms. Johnson designed the complete interior of Powell's Restaurant and Robbie's Roadhouse Restaurant during unidentified periods (the copy of the application in evidence is unclear). No further information was provided.

    
    

36. The client reference forms initially provided to Ms. Johnson by Ms. May were completed by three of Ms. Johnson's clients (Henri Lafenetre, Linda Hayward, and John M. and Julie A. Young) and submitted to the DPR. Attached to each form was a letter from each client providing additional information regarding services provided by Ms. Johnson.

    
    

37. By letter dated December 1, 1989, Mr. Henri Lafenetre, former general manager for Oyster Bay Homes, wrote that he had been referred to Ms. Johnson when he first became employed by Nu-Cape Construction and "would refer my clients to Mrs. Johnson for all their decorating needs". As the general manager of Oyster Bay Homes, he undertook construction of three model homes. Ms. Johnson participated in the model home project. According to the letter, "she not only did a complete layout, but furnished me with color boards, which enabled me to see the model in its entirety."

    
    

38. Linda Hayward wrote that Ms. Johnson's knowledge of "space management" permitted her to enlarge her office using "perception and color. Her ability to relax a given area with color stories has enabled my sales staff to double their sales in an extremly (sic) comfortable environment." Ms. Hayward notes that "Donna and I have just completed an addition to my home were (sic) a nursery and florida (sic) room were added" and closes by stating that she "would not consider making any decorating or space management decisions without Donna and her color boards, swatches, and instruments of her profession".

    
    

39. The Youngs wrote that the primary reason for the purchase of a new Mission Bay home was "the innovative color and design of their models, created by Mrs. Johnson." The Youngs further state that, during the construction of their home, Ms. Johnson provided "space utilization, full interior and exterior selections, which were available per the builder's specifications. Color boards which included the furniture lay-out, wallpaper selections, window treatments, with the complete decor, were made available...." No dates were provided.

    
    

40. By letter of reference dated September 12, 1989, John Wyatt wrote that during Ms. Johnson's 18 years in the Cape Coral area, she had "gained the knowledge and experience in color coordination, flooring, wallpaper, window treatments and furniture." Mr. Wyatt opined that Ms. Johnson was qualified to be a licensed designer.

    
    

41. Testifying during the hearing, Mr. Wyatt stated that he has known Ms. Johnson for five or six years, not the 18 years referenced in his letter. His discussion of the distinction between interior design and interior decorating services failed to clearly indicate an understanding of the statutory definitions of the terms. Although Mr. Wyatt opined that Ms. Johnson was qualified for licensure without examination as an interior designer, his personal knowledge of Ms. Johnson's work over the referenced six year period was very limited and was not persuasive.

42. By letter of reference dated September 29, 1989, Jack Thomas wrote that during Ms. Johnson's 18 years in the Cape Coral area, "[t]he knowledge and experience that she has gained, not only in flooring, but also in color coordination, wallpaper, window treatments and furniture, has definitely enable (sic) her to work more closely in the field of interior design." Mr. Thomas opined that Ms. Johnson was qualified to be a licensed designer.

    
    

43. At some point in the application process, Ms. Johnson submitted floor plans for a remodeling of a kitchen. The plans are dated "2-24-88" and were prepared by Ms. Johnson for "Mr. & Mrs. Reeves". The floor plan indicates that Ms. Johnson was providing services meeting the definition of "interior design" to the couple.

    
    

44. Although an interior designer may provide interior decoration services, such services as color coordination, flooring, wallpaper, window treatments and furniture selection are interior decorating services.

    
    

45. During the hearing, Ms. Johnson asserted that her work during the six year period prior to December 31, 1989 met the definition of "interior design". Beyond the evidence addressed previously, there is no documentation which supports Ms. Johnson's testimony. As documented in Ms. Johnson's application and supplemental references, the services provided by Ms. Johnson were primarily interior decorating services such as selection of or assistance in selection of surface materials, window treatments, wallcoverings, paint, floor coverings, surface mounted lighting, or loose furnishings.

    
    

46. Although Ms. Johnson currently appears to be capable of providing interior design services (and has cited several projects undertaken in 1988-89 which required design capabilities) the evidence is insufficient to establish that she has done so for the six year period ending December 31, 1989. As such, she does not qualify for licensure without examination as an interior designer pursuant to law referenced herein.

    
    

    CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

    
    

47. The Division of Administrative Hearings has jurisdiction over the parties to and subject matter of this proceeding. Section 120.57(1), Florida Statutes.

    
    

48. Section 21, Chapter 88-383, Laws of Florida, provides for licensure of a person as an interior designer without examination (the "grandfather" provision). In order to qualify for licensure as an interior designer without successful completion of examination requirements, the Petitioner must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that she had completed six years of interior design experience prior to December 31, 1989. Balino v. Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services, 348 So.2d 349 (1st DCA 1977). Florida Department of Transportation v. JWC Company, Inc., 396 So.2d 778 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981). In this case, the burden has not been met.

    
    

49. "Interior design" means design services which do not necessarily require performance by an architect, including consultations, studies, drawings, and specifications in connection with reflected ceiling plans, space utilization, furnishings, or the fabrication of nonstructural elements within and surrounding interior spaces of buildings; but specifically excluding mechanical and electrical systems, except for specification of fixtures and their location within interior spaces. Except as provided herein, interior

    design shall not include services which require performance by an architect. Section 481.203(8), Florida Statutes.

    
    

50. "Interior design" is distinguished from "interior decorating" at section 481.229(6), Florida Statutes, which identifies interior decorating services as selection of or assistance in selection of surface materials, window treatments, wallcoverings, paint, floor coverings, surface mounted lighting, or loose furnishings not subject to regulation under applicable building codes. By definition, design services consist of consultations, studies, drawings, and specifications in connection with reflected ceiling plans, space utilization, furnishings, or the fabrication of nonstructural elements within and surrounding interior spaces of buildings.

    
    

51. Although an interior designer may offer decorating services, the provision of such decorating services does not constitute the practice of interior design. In order to conclude that an applicant had provided design services during a specified time period requires credible evidence that, on a continuing basis, the applicant provided consultations, studies, drawings, and specifications in connection with reflected ceiling plans, space utilization, furnishings, or the fabrication of nonstructural elements within and surrounding interior spaces of buildings, during the six year period prior to December 31, 1989. To conclude otherwise renders the definitional distinction between interior design and interior decorating of little meaning.

    
    

52. In this case, the evidence fails to establish that, during the six year period prior to December 31, 1989, the Petitioner provided consultations, studies, drawings, and specifications in connection with reflected ceiling plans, space utilization, furnishings, or the fabrication of nonstructural elements within and surrounding interior spaces of buildings. The evidence establishes that, as Ms. Johnson has undertaken larger projects, her expertise and ability has increased commensurate with her added responsibilities. Although she is likely able to provide "interior design" services at this time,

the evidence is insufficient to establish that she has done so for the six years prior to December 31, 1989.

RECOMMENDATION

Based on the foregoing, it is hereby RECOMMENDED that the Department of Professional Regulation, Board of Architecture and Interior Design enter a Final Order denying the application of Donna Marie Johnson for licensure as an interior designer under the "grandfather" provisions cited herein.

DONE and RECOMMENDED this 24th day of September, 1992 in Tallahassee, Florida.

WILLIAM F. QUATTLEBAUM, Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings

The DeSoto Building 1230 Apalachee Parkway

Tallahassee, FL 32399-1550

(904) 488-9675

Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 24th day of September, 1992.

ENDNOTES

1/ The practice of the Board of Architecture and Interior Design is to disassemble applications and supporting materials for review. It is therefore, not possible to accurately determine at which point each supporting document was submitted to the board. The entire body of materials admitted into evidence at the hearing has been considered in the preparation of this Recommended Order.

APPENDIX TO RECOMMENDED ORDER, CASE NO. 91-6537

The following constitute rulings on proposed findings of facts submitted by the parties.

Petitioner

The Petitioner's proposed findings of fact are accepted as modified and incorporated in the Recommended Order except as follows:

11. Rejected, immaterial.

1. Rejected, unnecessary.

   
   

2. Rejected, contrary to greater weight of credible and persuasive evidence.

   
   

3. Rejected, unnecessary, definition is provided by statute.

20-21. Rejected, immaterial.

25-30. Rejected, irrelevant, definitions are provided by statute.

21-23. Rejected as to "application of policy defining interior design," immaterial. The definition of "interior design" is set forth at Section 481.203(8). Services performed by "interior decorators" are set forth at Section 481.229(6).

24. Rejected, irrelevant.

36. Rejected, not supported by cited evidence. The client reference form makes no reference to the attachment. The layout contains no identifying information.

1. Accepted as to the review by Gerkin, otherwise rejected, hearsay.

   
   

2. Rejected, irrelevant.

41. Accepted, however there is an apparent typographical error in the excerpt taken from the cited letter.

42, 46, 48. Rejected, unnecessary.

51-54. Rejected, immaterial.

Respondent

The Respondent's proposed findings of fact are accepted as modified and incorporated in the Recommended Order except as follows:

21. Rejected, hearsay as to Gerkin. Reference to Santos is unsupported by any evidence.

23-25. Rejected, unnecessary.

COPIES FURNISHED:

Angel Gonzalez Executive Director Board of Architecture

and Interior Design Northwood Centre

1940 North Monroe Street Tallahassee, FL 32399-0792

Jack McRay General Counsel Northwood Centre

1940 North Monroe Street Tallahassee, FL 32399-0792

Paul Watson Lambert, Esq. 2851 Remington Green Circle Suite C

Tallahassee, FL 32308-3749

Arthur R. Wiedinger, Esq. Assistant Attorney General The Capitol, Suite 1603 Tallahassee, FL 32399-1050

NOTICE OF RIGHT TO SUBMIT EXCEPTIONS

ALL PARTIES HAVE THE RIGHT TO SUBMIT WRITTEN EXCEPTIONS TO THIS RECOMMENDED ORDER. ALL AGENCIES ALLOW EACH PARTY AT LEAST TEN DAYS IN WHICH TO SUBMIT WRITTEN EXCEPTIONS. SOME AGENCIES ALLOW A LARGER PERIOD WITHIN WHICH TO SUBMIT WRITTEN EXCEPTIONS. YOU SHOULD CONTACT THE AGENCY THAT WILL ISSUE THE FINAL ORDER IN THIS CASE CONCERNING AGENCY RULES ON THE DEADLINE FOR FILING EXCEPTIONS TO THIS RECOMMENDED ORDER. ANY EXCEPTIONS TO THIS RECOMMENDED ORDER SHOULD BE FILED WITH THE AGENCY THAT WILL ISSUE THE FINAL ORDER IN THIS CASE.

Docket for Case No: 91-006537

Orders for Case No: 91-006537