Department of Busiiess ant Frafesslonal Reguletior Deputy Agency Clerk CLERK Evette Lawson-Proctor Date 11/29/2016 File # STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULA’ DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, BOARD OF ARCHITECTURE AND INTERIOR DESIGN, Petitioner, vs. CASE NO.: 2015-011707 GERARD J, VERMEY, Respondent. / ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLAINT Petitioner, DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, ("Petitioner"), files this Administrative Complaint before the Board of Architecture and Interior Design against GERARD J. VERMEY, (“Respondent”), and says: 1, Petitioner is the state agency charged with regulating the practice of architecture pursuant to Section 20.165, Florida Statutes, and Chapters 455 and 481, Florida Statutes. 2. Respondent is and has been at all times material hereto, a licensed architect in the State of Florida, having been issued license number AR 4630. 3. Respondent’s address of record is 420 3 Street South, Jacksonville Beach, FL 32250, 4, Respondent is the qualifier and architect in responsible supervisory control of Lazo Designs, Inc., located at 14067 Pine Island Drive, J acksonville, Florida. 5. Respondent is the qualifier and architect in responsible supervisory control of Actech Architects, Engineers and Planners, Incorporation, located at 126 W Adams Street, Suite 450, Jacksonville, Florida 32201. 6. Rule 61G1-23,010 requires each office offering architectural services to have a full time resident architect, 7. Respondent cannot provide proper responsible supervisory control over more than one office at two different locations. 8. Respondent entered into a contract to provide architectural drawings for a commercial project known as Las Tapatias Panaderia Restaurant located 9735 Old St. Augustine Road, Jacksonville, Florida 32257. 9. Respondent prepared drawings for the project for the purposes of obtaining a building permit. 10. Respondent signed and sealed the drawings on or about February 17, 2015 and submitted the drawings to the Jacksonville Building Department. , | 1]. The drawings were rejected by the Jacksonville Building Department three times. 12, The drawings submitted by the Respondent were deficient on the following grounds: a, Toilet room signs are not indicated on the drawings. b. Exit door capacities are not indicated. oc Emergency lights with battery backup are typically required in toilet rooms but none are shown. d, No door hardware has been scheduled. e The door hardware does not comply with the Florida Building Code. £ The clear door width is unknown since no door schedule exists, g. Door thresholds do not comply with the Florida Building Code. h. Door opening force does not comply with the Florida Building Code. i. Drinking fountains or watercolors do not comply with the Florida Building Code. j. No room finish schedule was provided. 13. In preparation of the drawings, Respondent was negligent in that he failed to exercise due care to conform acceptable standards of architectural practice in such a manner as to be detrimental to the public. 14. The plans and drawings were not of sufficiently high standard to clearly and accurately indicate or illustrate all essential parts of the work to which they refer. COUNT I 15. Petitioner hereby realleges and incorporates paragraphs one (1) through seven (7) as if fully set forth herein. 16. Rule 61G1-23.010(2), Florida Administrative Code, states: The architect providing responsible supervisory contro! must be a full time employee within that office location in responsible supervisory control for projects in that office. Therefore an architect can only provide responsible supervisory control over one location. 17. Rule 61G1-23.010(3), Florida Administrative Code, states: An architect may be the qualifier of several business entities but can only be the architect providing responsible supervisory control over one business location pursuant to subsection (2) of this rule. Every office offering architectural services must have a resident full time architect meeting the requirements of this rule. 18. Respondent is the qualifier and architect in responsible supervisory control of Lazo Designs, Inc., located at 14067 Pine Island Drive, Jacksonville, Florida and is the qualifier and architect in responsible supervisory control of Actech Architects, Engineers and Planners, Incorporation located at 126 W Adams Street, Suite 450, Jacksonville, Florida 32201. 19. Respondent is attempting to provide responsible supervisory control over two locations in violation of Rule 61G1-23.010. 20. Section 455.227, Florida Statutes, states in pertinent part that violating any tule adopted by the board or the department constitutes grounds for disciplinary action. 21. Based upon the foregoing, Respondent has violated Section 455.227, Florida Statutes and Rule 61G1-23.010, Florida Administrative Code, by attempting to act as the architect in responsible supervisory over multiple offices. COUNT IL 22. Petitioner hereby realleges and incorporates paragraphs one (1) trough three (3) and eight (8) through (13) as if fully set forth herein. 23. ‘Section 481.225(1)(g), Florida Statutes, states in pertinent part that committing any act of fraud, deceit, negligence, in competency, or misconduct in the practice of architecture constitutes grounds for disciplinary action. 24, The drawings submitted by the Respondent were deficient on the following grounds: a. Toilet room signs are not indicated on the drawings. b. Exit door capacities are not indicated. c. Emergency lights with battery backup are typically required in toilet rooms but none are shown. d. No door hardware has been scheduled. é The door hardware does not comply with the Florida Building Code. f. The clear door width is unknown since no door schedule exists, g. Door thresholds do not comply with the Florida Building Code, h. Door opening force does not comply with the Florida Building Code. L Drinking fountains or watercolors do not comply with the Florida Building Code. i. No room finish schedule was provided. 25. In preparation of the drawings, Respondent was negligent in that he failed to exercise due care to conform acceptable standards of architectural practice in such a manner as to be detrimental to the public. 26. Based upon the foregoing, Respondent has violated Section 481 .225(1)(g), Florida Statutes by committing negligence in the practice of architecture. COUNT Il 27. Petitioner hereby realleges and incorporates paragraphs one (1) through three (3), eight (8) through twelve (12) and fourteen (14) as if fully set forth herein, 28, Section 481.221(8), Florida Statutes, states final construction documents or instruments of service which include plans, drawings, specifications, or other architectural documents prepared by a registered architect as part of her or his architectural practice shall be of a sufficiently high standard to clearly and accurately indicate or illustrate all essential parts of the work to which they refer. . 29. _ The drawings submitted by the Respondent were deficient on the following grounds: a. Toilet room signs are not indicated on the drawings. b. Exit door capacities are not indicated. G Emergency lights with battery backup are typically required in toilet rooms but none are shown. d. No door hardware has been scheduled. a e The door hardware does not comply with the Florida Building Code. f. The clear door width is unknown since no door schedule exists. g: Door thresholds do not comply with the Florida Building Code. h. Door opening force does not comply with the Florida Building Code, i. Drinking fountains or watercolors do not comply with the Florida Building Code. j. No room finish schedule was provided. 30. The plans and drawings were not of sufficiently high standard to clearly and accurately indicate or illustrate all essential parts of the work to which they refer, 31. Based upon the foregoing, Respondent has violated Section 481 .221(8), Florida Statutes by signing and sealing plans that are not sufficiently detailed. WHEREFORE, Petitioner respectfully requests the Board enter an Order imposing one or more of the following penalties: Irposition of probation, reprimand the licensee, revoke, suspend, deny the issuance or renewal of the certificate or registration, require financial restitution to a consumer, impose an administrative fine not to exceed $5,000 per count, require continuing education, assess costs associated with investigation and prosecution, impose any or all penalties delineated within Section 455.227(2), Florida Statutes, and/or any other relief that the Board is authorized to impose pursuant to Chapters 481 and 455, Florida Statutes, and/or the « rules promulgated thereunder. XK Signed this 2¥ t day of ALowroab eo“ , 2016, PCP: November 18, 2016 | Hall ~ Smith Toppe a ae DAVID K. MINACCI Smith, Thompson, Shaw, Minacci & Coldén, P.A. 3520 Thomasville Road, Fourth Floor Tallahassee, Florida 32309 FL Bar No.,0056774 Ph: = (850) 402-1570 Fax: (850) 241-0161 davidm@stslaw.com

Docket for Case No: 17-000243PL