Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION vs EDGAR R. NAZARIO, 10-000551PL (2010)

Court: Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Number: 10-000551PL Visitors: 3
Petitioner: DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION
Respondent: EDGAR R. NAZARIO
Judges: J. D. PARRISH
Agency: Department of Business and Professional Regulation
Locations: St. Petersburg, Florida
Filed: Feb. 08, 2010
Status: Closed
Settled and/or Dismissed prior to entry of RO/FO on Friday, April 2, 2010.

Latest Update: Jul. 08, 2024
Feb 8 2010 15:26 By. BPR OGA PAGE @4/ae FILED Department of Busines and Protectan Regulation: Deputy Agency Clerk a2/ar/2ala 1e:ae 8584146749 CLERK Brandon Nichols Cnte 2/16/2008 File # STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION BOARD OF BUILDING CODE ADMINISTRATORS AND INSPECTORS DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, Petitioner, LL Vv. Case No. 2008-007045 EDGAR R. NAZARIO, Respondent. f ig ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLAINT Petitioner, Department Of Business And Professional Regulation, ("Petitioner"), Files this Administrative Complaint before the Board of Building Code Administrators and Inspectors, against Edgar R. Nazario ("Respondent"), and alleges: 1. Petitioner is the state agency charged with regulating the practice of building code administration and inspection pursuant to Section 20.165, Florida Statutes, and Chapters 455 and 468, part XII, Florida Statutes. 2. Respondent is and hag been, at all times material hereto, @ licensed building code administrator in the State of Florida, having been igsued license number BU 1440. 3. Respondent's last known address of record was 2203 Gladys Street, Largo, PL 33774. GAOGC\Professions Boardstbullding coda\Libby Duffy's Law Clerks\AC\2008\Nazario, Edgar 0g-007045 (Nenad. dos a2/ar/2ala 1e:ae 8584146749 DEPR OGA Feb 8 2010 15:27 4. In 2007, a building permit was issued by the City of St. Pete Beach puilding Department for the renovation of the apartments at 1907 Gulf Way, which were severely damaged in 2004 by Hurricane Jean. 5. Complainant resided next-door to the damaged apartment complex. 6. The .Respondent was the Building Official who approved the permit for the renovation to the apartments. 7. The renovation of the building places Complainant's home in the path of windborne and waterborne debris and also places Complainant’s home in danger of future hurricane hazards because of wind and storm surge, 8. Complainant sued the city ef St, Pete Beach in the Sixth Judicial Cireuit, Circuit Court, Pinellas County, for the improper issuance of the construction permit and was victorious the suit. The court ruled that the City’s order for development and renovation of ‘buildings damaged by Hurricane Jean had expired on April 4, 2006 and any permit issued after said date could not be the result of hurricane damage and must adhere to the new standards. 9. The hurricane damage renovation permit here was issued after April 4, 2006. 10. Recording to FEMA yules, the building was 4 catastrophic loss and should not have been renovated. CF\OGC\ Professions Boards\building, code\Libby Duffy's Law Clerks\AC\W2008\Nazario, Edgar 08-007045 2 (WEKAC doe PAGE @5/@8 Feb 8 2010 15:27 a2/ar/2ala 1e:ae 8584146749 DEPR OGA PAGE a6 /ae 11- The court held that since the renovation permit was not obtained before April 4, 2006 the permit was improper and the renovation permit should be nullified. 12. Additionally, the complainant hired Bracken Engineering to review the renovation of the apartments. Bracken Engineering identified numerous code violations during the renovation construction of the apartment building. 13. Following an investigation by Pinellas County Building and Development, the owner ef the apartment building applied for a time extension for an expired permit, which was granted due to the hurricane. 14. The extension would allow him to renovate the pbuilding back to its original eondition; however, the renovation project was exceeding the scope of the original permit by adding 200 extra square feet. This deviation from the original building layout voided the permit and the owner was required to attain a4 new permit. 15. The owner of the apartment complex acquired a new permit, which transformed the project from a renovation due te hurricane damage To a project for substantial improvement. 16. Since the damage to the building exceeded 50% of the value of the property, FEMA quidelines and Pinellas Gulf Beaches Coastal Construction Codes applies along with the new construction laws. FEMA guidelines classify the damage to the GAOGC\Professions Reards\building code\Lihby Duffy's Law Clerks\ACA2008\Nazario, Edgar 08-007045 3 Chad. doc Feb 8 2010 15:27 a2/ar/2ala 1e:ae 858414 : 6749 DEPR OGA PAGE ar /ae apartment complex aS @ “complete loss” and a new permit should never have been authorized for it. 17. In the expert opinien of John J. Yanoviak, reliable evidence has been provided to corroborate the commission of negligence and misconduct in the enforcement et rules, regulations, and applicable building codes by Respondent. 18. Section 468.621(1) (g)- Florida Statutes, says: “The following acts constitute grounds for which the disciplinary actions in subsection (2) may be taken: failing to properly enforee applicable pbuilding codes by committing willful misconduct, gross negligence, gross misconduct, repeated negligence, or negligence resulting in 4 significant danger te life or property.” 19. Failing to adhere to FEMA or Florida Building Codes when issuing construction permits | would constitute gross negligence thai: establishes a significant danger to life or property. 20. Based on the foregoing, the Respondent violated Section 468.621(1) (9), Florida Statutes, by improperly issuing a building permit for the apartment. WHEREFORE, Petitioner respectfully requests the Board of Building Code Administrators and Inspectors enter an Order imposing one or more of the following penalties: revocation or suspension of Respondent’s license, restriction of Respondent's GAOGC Professions Boarda\building, code\Libby Duffy's Law Clerks\AC\2008\Nazario, Edgar 08-007045 4 (NAC. doo Feb 8 2010 15:27 a2/ar/2ala 1e:ae 8584146 : 749 DEPR OGA PAGE @8/ae practice, imposition of an administrative fine not to exceed $5,000 per violation, issuance of a reprimand, placement of Respondent on probation, assessment of costs association with the investigation, imposition of any or all penalties delineated within section 445.227(2), Florida Statutes, and/or any other relief that the Board 4s authorized to impose pursuant to chapters 455 and/or 468, Florida Statutes, and/or the rules promulgated thereunder. Signed this /O _ day of Eebeunry , 2009. Blizabéth Fle r Duffy Assistant General Counsel Florida Bar No. 0980404 Department of Business and Professional Regulation office of the General Counsel 1940 North Monroe Street Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2202 Phone: (6850) 487-9648 Facsimile: (850) 414-6749 EFD/j1m geo poet GAOGC Professions Boards\building code\Libby Duffy's Law Clerks\ACWOORINazario, Edgar 08007945 5 (WE NAC. doe

Docket for Case No: 10-000551PL
Source:  Florida - Division of Administrative Hearings

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer