~.

, Engineering Analysis and Site Visit Report

. For
700 West Bay Shore
St. George Island, Florida
November 30, 2006

This report is·an Addenda to preViouS: reports regarding the structure and workmanship on the
above residence. The limited demolition of the walls and ceilings, removed the gypsum board in
bands about two feet wide, prior to this' inspection so the deficiencies could be documented~ The
following was noted:

1. At Decks toward the Gulf of Mexico: The wooden joists are 2 x 12 notched to fit on a 2 x
2 wooden ledger nailer, but no face mount joist hangers. Joist hangers were shown on
the Clayton Anderson Drawings [CAl. The wooden joists have only [1] one toe nail from
top of joist into the rim joist,therefore the-aecks-are·l}QLadequate~y..:attached.::tQ::.ttLe:...hous~
~str-ucture;::::1

2. Main beam # 11 @ kitchen towards the Gulf: The beam appears to be misplaced
landward 1 X", or the joists are short 1 W'. The joist for the second floor from that beam
toward the Gulf are mounted to the misplaced beam with the bucket type face mounted
hangers that are attached to the beam with pieces of scrap wood used as spacers to
make up the 1 Yz" difference, therefore the joists as built bear on only 1/8" of the bucket,
whereas the minimum bracing should be 1 X". The measured bracing for all 'trusses is
between Yz" and 1/8 inch. This condition is causing the beam to rotate due to the

•
eccentric loading. See Sketch SK-1 attached .

3. The cable tie down system used has violated the various parallam beams by drilling a
vertical hole in the center of the parallam beam and then counter-sinking the bottom cord
with a large hole 2 to 2 Yz" in di<;lmeter, reducing the bottom chord area. This reduces the
load capacity to 30 to 50%. ;
1 .
4. The roof trusses where' could see them have Simpson H~ type straps that are not
installed over the top of the truss and are attached only to the double plate at the top of
the wall. The stud to double plate strap is not nailed on the reverse side, therefore
reducing the potential load carrying capacity of the assembly. Clayton Anderson
specified MTS20 as this hurricane clip @ 1000# rating the H6 or 18# 8 # nails equal 915
to 950 #; however, there are only 3 nails average, top and bottom, therefore reducing the
allowable load from 915 to 345#, well below the acceptable level.
nd
5. The seaward wall @ 2 floor is not braced laterally at the top and Yz" CDX plywood will
be req~ired on the interior walls.to give the wall support against hurricane force winds.

6. Exterior floor to floor flat strap~ MSTA36: I cannot verify if they are in place, due to
stucco exterior finish.

7. Seaward double door 2nd floor: Clayton Anderson called for LSTA18, 1095# load, to be
installed. There are no straps at left hand side looking outward. The framing is single
stud double cripple. The LSTA18 provides uplift and lateral load capacity.

8. HeaVcool air handler @ 2nd floor has no auxiliary drain pan, therefore, lit the AHU case
leaks, condensate will damage house interior.

• Tfo-r...~
 9. Tower room: No stairs to higher roof abo\!e the tower room. No proper way to attach
t~l railing to edge of deck. Upper deck at Tower: The deck material is cracking; owner has
temporarily repaired the crabks. Question whether final waterproof coating has been
applied.

10. Tower room: Floor was out of .plumb, but Contractor installed about 1W' of leveling
,..·compound to level the floor for ceramic tile to be installed. This added more weight.to,:an
'already weak structure.~ Beam 27 on the north of the tower and beam #26 on the south of
the tower were called for by (C.A.) and Seminole Trust Co., but were not installed. At the
north wall of the tower and at the bedroom below where the beam #27 is missing, the
wall/floor system is sagging to 5'8" to 7'4". On the south wall of the tower and the master
bedroom area below where b,eam #26 is missing, the floor sags about 1". The contractor
has added leveling compou'nd to level the defect, again adding more weight to the
already deficient structure. I
Directly below the master b~droom wall above the beam #11 at the kitchen floor, is
sagging 1 W. This is the area where the floor joists are not secured ·to beam #11
\properly..
.- _. J
See #2 above. 'The two walls, north and south, at the tower projecting
downward the structure, sags progressively more the lower in the structure you go.
/
11: Area of missing beam #27: Hurricane straps, which have been installed, have been
installed incorrectly. Each strap has a 90 degree bend from double plate to support
structure. This allows strap to flex; therefore, movement of entire tower structure. There
should have been no 90 degr~e bend.

12. Same area as #11 above: Section "AA" on Clayton Anderson's plan shows the 5 X x 14

~
, parallam beam to support small portion of the roof truss load and Y2 of the tower room
floor, walls and roof load. This beam is not in place. NOTE: Same for beam #26 on the
south side, B026 missing. These two beams were to carry the total load of the tower to
the outside wall to stud packs that would have transferred the tower load directly down
through the 2 floors to the concrete girder framing the first floor level. '

13. Dining room: Door header str~pping not properly installed. See note 7 above.

14. The stud to double plate connection (Simpson SPH6) a "U" shaped strap, was not 'used.
A much shorter strap was used. The installation on one side of the stud is as required by
SPH6, about 8" lap. However, the other side is too short to be effective. It does not lap
over the double plate and the ~tud. This condition reduces the uplift capacity by 50%.
,
15. Most door frames @ upper floors are out of plumb 1/16" to 1/8" in 2'-0", or about 3/16 to
3/8. This condition may indicCiite the structure has shifted, or is in the process of shifting.
Trim for doors is the last of the items to be installed in a residence and is most always
true and plumb.
,
16. Door framing at the 2nd floor north bedroom should have been for a load bearing wall,
however, it was framed as an interior no-load type wall. A double 2 x 12 with a W flitch
plate is needed with cripple studs to support tower wail and second floor load. This
condition has caused the frame to deflect above the door.

•;

"

--
, Tin!,!
e 17

18.
Same area as #11 above. ~he floor trusses are not blocked above the "now" load
bearing wall where B-27 is missing. The joist end at the wall in question should have
been blocked to prevent rotatibn.
nd
At 2 floor north bedroom, west wall, the truss strong back has been cut into to install
PVC pipe and has never been ,repaired.

f9:=-:-One-qtJestlon-wniC~::'has.::never.:t5eefl·add ressed _~by' theContractor,- ClayfCLn-Ande~son/or

<\:::seminore-TruSS·iS·tFle-changir1gonh-:~f160rjciist spacing:frem 16i'-to-24"-6n,c~nteL.:"'The
bum~time~was'reduced·to-Iess-than-ofle~
hour because~of·this-change:-lt'therefoiiLd6es
'net.c6nf6crn:te:"C>ne·h~ectecfstructure
;
.
nd
20. The Architect has shown shear walls @ the 2 floor bedroom wall that runs east to west
rd
and @ 3 floor level; 2 shear ),valls, east to west. ti0ll/ever, tbere are not shear.walls"in,
""the 'structure. The shear walls are required to support the house laterally, to take the
-stresses caused by wind. !
I

21. RV Port corner joist [off king rafter him framing] not strapped to the girders.

22. rihe':Staircase from the. tower room to the ground floor isnotbuift to·Code! There is a
reduction in width of the stairs from upper floors to ground level. A reduction in width is
not allowed by Code. The risers vary from 6 112 to 8 X inches in height. The variance
from one riser to the next is greater than allowed by Code. The maximum of 8 X inches
and the minimum of 6 112 inches do not meet the standard of 7 112 inches nominal riser
height. JNs,condition,is.a_hazard.to,anYQne·a$c~nding~ce(ldingJl1e_stairs'=::=J

The Contractor, Mr. Ulrich, hired Clayton Anderson, Structural Engineer, to redesign the

•
23.
complete structure. In my analysis, architectural plans were sufficient for construction of
the residence. The redesign ctlanged the direction of the concrete girders from north and
south to east and west, complicating the structure and caused the staircase problem #22
above. I can determine no rea~on for the redesign. Further: The staircase at the ground
level began with a design flaw in the placement of parallam beam #9 on the Truss Plan.
The beam was designed to be placed 6 inches too far into the staircase opening which
accounts for the asymmetrical staircase runs that makes the staircase nonfunctional
when moving large and long furniture items up through the staircase~
' - ' .-

24. After limited demolition: It.:was·noted·that beams·#6 and·#17· are not installed in the
exterior. wall, but were d.esignated 0r:t Clayton Anderson and~Seminole Truss plans:

25. After limited demolition: It was noted that 2 x 4 pressure treated sills at each concrete
girder did not have the anchor polts nut and washer tight to the wood. Many were about
3/8" to 112" loose'.llle r~u'~ ils_tbaUhe_stFuct.vre-:;was-::~ot;aa,~q1Jately-attacl:iea:to:tl:ie1
(:Eoncrete' support~w.~!!tth_aJ.ls.necessary- to· Feslst.the.uphft.Joad~

26. Window Framing: ~t was not~dJhat ~J1Jb~r=QfJhe_Windows~we[e_noUramed~co[rectly,J

in that, there are only single fulIJlength studs and one cripple stud under the header. The
framing, for these windows, should have been double full- length studs and single cripple
at header. Windows over four feet wide would have been double full -length studs and
double cripples at the header.

•
'17#/'"
 It
.'

, Conclusion:
. ·I

~
. I
.

The Carl and Sandra Bifano residence at 700 West Bay Shore Drive, St. George Island, FloridaJ§.)
r unsafEE for habitation. The multitude of framing errors, structural beams not installed, hurricane
. strapping omitted or installed incorrectly or the incorrect strap for the required service, has
i::'I
Po
~o

. compromised the structure. The construction does not meet the requirements of the FBC2001. If)
it did, the structure would not be failing, the fire rating would be correct for this residence.and ·the ;
stairs would have been constructed correctly. )

The residence, in its present state, will have areas to continue to deflect [sag] and because the
effects of all the items listed above, will be vulnerable to damage and possible destruction by
hurricane force winds, 140 mph, 3 second gusts and 120 mph~ustained. lihefir~g-s"!.Owj1
on the Arc~~t~s.d.:..sign~~!9i.~~~~d.t!.~hour~~ufr11Tme_]J~!.!ithe-sp~c~ng·ofJbe.~ol~ts
@2~~~and:~~~ of.common-Y2tgypsum ·board·for.the.wall· and~ ge~H,g finis~~!LQfJb~
sReclfleo - 5/8":;;flre~rated gypsum._ha~~rendered - the-strl.lctu(e_unsafe._by_not .. meetl ng.=!!!s.tJ
r~~

Thomas M. Driggers, P. E.
Florida P. E. # 13593
d .
November 30, 2006

.?¢'~ v~-? /TI . fiJir -

r.

•
 ., 0, ';1' jlO}/
....... - ..

~.f4 ~"~. -:Jdj~~~/";,, ':5 j~ 1/ o d .

.....L...s a"$:r p tl.'i.5
.
.) ,'-J'/'
.~ r"
~ .'~"-:> <-,'~~ '~ j j "4>
~-<-r'; t? :"
:J' :;?'/b~6;/~cJ licc-z/C7:;/-7)/7:9
;,. . ~

. T ...

',' .

.!'" .' .

L '

)./ J?- t:'L'-LG ~ ·'t' fJ7 i'o'

, , r

o ~bd .. ' 2i. i

I!
 qp
• January 23, 2007 . PRESCOTT ,
ARCHITECTS

Report on Observations Made During a Site Visit to Bifano Residence

700 West Bay Shore Drive - St. GeOrgelIsland, Florida on August 25, 2006
I

~ObseFVafkjn:#;P': T.E:J!!!~or_walls.and~Ceilingk-of~the.dwelling-are'covered-in-st~naard-~"
t~gyp~mJ;oard~The. se~Ii'~lr~~itectural'drawings' (!.~}rmit
d.@.wings) .specifyj5/8~ thi_ck type~gYQsum' board:-As:a:re~sUlt:the '
d.2~ing _d,oes not me~tJneJ'iquirement~fthe'FloridaBuilding'§9de
2.Q0J~able:60JtQf.th~G6deIrequires~tl:i_e':dwellingJ.Q:.lfe-']:ype-v.:CQ!!~~ur
p~cteA,_whic~eq~E~s·theli~~~tion-ot:5/8!!.-type·'x'-gy.psum,board;0n
al!:-ext"Wi:QfjValls,<interior-bearing-walls-and-:all~ilings.
--- ,- 1"
Observation #2: T~e.permitdrawing;s·~h?w-fI$lr trusses-at-16!.'...on~center;-the genefaIJlOtes
irvthe.pJ~·fi1iit:-draJii1giCall foffl oor' trusses at- r9':-2"· on center.
'-----+-- I -./
Observation #3: The permit drawir~gs called fdr either Simpson holdowns or the "go-bolt"
"' galvanized steel rbd holdown ·system. The structural drawings prepared by
Clayton Anderson, P.E., call ~or Simpson holdowns. A flexible cable

• Observation #4:
system was substituted. At the time of the site visit, the cable system could
not be observed and no inforrrtation onthe cable system was provided to
the Architect.
I

The permit drawings required 'interior shear walls on the first and second
floors. The shear walls were Jot installed. Structural Engineer Tom '
Driggers has stated that the sh'ear walls are necessary to keep the house
from racking.' I
I
Observation #5: The stairway within the house jdoes not meet the Florida Building Code
, I

200 I. The stair width in certain areas is less than the 36" required by
Section 1009.1 of the Code. The stair risers vary in height from 6-1/2" to
8-1/4", therefore not complying with Section 1009.3 of the Code.

The permit drawings called for! all portions of the stair-:.td;be-42"· wide from
the first floor to the tower. Th~ as-built stair is generally 35" to 37" wide,
making it substandard and ve~ difficult to move large furniture up into the
house. : I
I
I I

The structural engi~eer ClaytoA Anderson, who was hired by the

contractor to design and certifY the precast pilings and girders, re-oriented

•
the girders from what was shown on the architectural plans. There-
orientation of the girders created the problem with the stair width.. The
problem with. the stairrisersis simply poor construction. I
I
I
850-837-6494 • FAX 850-837-1268

625 HARBOR BOULEVARD. POST OFFICE BOX :n 78 ,

• DESTIN, FLORIDA 32540
 Observation Report
Bifano Residence
January 23, 2007

•
Page 2

Recommendations: ,

1.
I
Due to what was observed during this site visit, it is plausible, that this home may be more
severely deficient than what was uncovered./ Limited demolition (removal of sheetrock
and wood
. ,
trim) should be conducted to more thoroughly inspect the structure.

2. Since cracking stucco has already been found, the remainder of the exterior of the
structure needs close inspection. ,

3. ~ne-te~:~xi~'"-the'J:)re C~de Vi91~tion·.~s_to~~~move all gypsumboard':<?II~! ~~~_~i~

,,::alls~~aWll'!teIlQr lO~9 ~e~~ng-,-walJs an~lLcetlmgs"..::As
theft_oor trusses are 24. Incfieryn
.9~~ter;:-!- re~ommend.t~~w~~~File-~~.~~J~6~Qr_55,P-injljeXire .B-~si;~~aE~~~ign
(Ma~~a~Gypsum-=-~y~te.m~;ll'::eij,ltlQn_C?-A:.~?_O-03to-r~~y-t~e.f]oor~c~1t~-s~ste/ms.
1hen.~?ve~~ e!te~9alls,J.Q~d:~g~a11§.:~nd'ceIl~g~_Wlth~If_type-:x'- gypsqm
board,:rnstalled per',the-manufacturer's-Qubhshed.Instructtons.

4. The remed~fO~ t~:staircase i = :: i : l : :er st:ircase tower 3;djoining the existing

one. Then remove all of the staircase runs fr~m the existing tower, and redesign it to

• 5.
accommodate hallways leading to the new to~er with excess space to be used for closets
at each level. • I
I
'
The remedies for the structural and hurricane'deficiencies are to be addressed by the
structural engineers who wilJ thoroughly exarhine the structure. .

\,~\~t~~~-t7 i

Jeffrey Prescott, Architect

President - Prescott Architects, Inc.

JP:gg

•
 ...
J!
c;

"
,,"'
!;
II
~I
el
en
!!

nSd A~
I
z ...

Ii SW31SAS
~
11\1
~
C)

•
~~ ~

eo-~~

.
-:UOAI~a

,.•. ".tIL·"":~
....
. \' .. :.i.. ..,
.
~ ~._~
....,.
'OH~NO~ aNnas

. . 'VnN"W
- N~IS3a
3:>NVLSIS3~ i

. .
.
•
'1Vnf\l\/w '-'IC"\I~':'J" ..."'. AJ ...... _ _ • • _ ••, . -
, I
 ~

IY8TIIII
. .' .
~ ._.;~'E ;;'i:~_~.7 r:.~~V·t!.:;·,,,:· s·~~ ~;\' :~~~ '~i(:~;;.--":;~~~~~~?~::;:·':; :?)~:'j(; ~(:,:. ; ~ '.>, .'
,a
CIA'Jiij NO.FCf Iii' 'I;~~ .~··;::"'IM'i.·I."tf:·:' >';~):'(=rr~·~~
'~

. ' . . ., ,'. _." ~~ .-,. ~ . - ,- ".-0 ••. - _ ... ""

wOoD TRUSSES, GYPSUM WAL.L80ARD t

@ One layer 5/." proprietary type X gypsum wallboard or gypsum veneer base applied at right
anoles to rigid furring channels 24" a.c. witt11" Type Sdrywafl screws 12' a.c. and 11ft"
from edges. Gypsum board end joints located midway between COntinuous channels
and attactled to additional pieces of channel 60" Iong,with screws 12"o.c. Rigid furring
channels applied at right angles to 12& deep parallel chord wood trusses 24" O.C. witt1
double strand. 18 gage galvanized steel wire ties 48" ~.c. Wood trusses suppolting 3/." )"
nominal interior plywood with exterior glue. T&G edges~ applied at right angles to trusses v ~j
wltt1 construetlon adhesive and either 6d smooth shank: nails 6& o.c. at end join1a and 12"
o.c. al intermediate trusses or 6d ring shank nails 12' o.c. Adhesive applied to each top Approll. Ceiling
chord and grooved edges of plywood. End joints staped 48'. WeIgtIt 3 pst
Consult gypsum board manufacturer for truss details. Fire Test: FM FC10· 1 hour, MethOd B.

.\. \\
-"-LJ National Gypsum Company
PROPRIETARY GYPSUM BOARD
II" Gold Bof\dIl' Brand FIRE-SHIElD C'"
Gypsum wallboard
2-24-88,
Ft.1 Design FC-448;
Based on Ul R3501.
11-27-89,
Ul Design l528

'~.f:q"'1" .. ;
,.. ' .. :• ., t· ,."~!.:ii,~,~~1
'I . ; T\ .~ _.,.

WOOD TRUSSES, GYPSUM WAL.LBOARD

One tayer 'I." proprietary type X gypsum wallboard or gypsum veneer base applied at right
; ;.~::: .~... ;:' ;...
f"'
angIee 10 12" deep parallel ctlord wood truases 24' o.c. w/ttl P/.- Type S drywaJl screws .I :: :: :: :: ; ; ::;:::::::;,
S" o.C. to trusses and to 2 1I 4 wood blocking installed between trusses. centered behind
gypsum board edges and secured at eacfl end to the truaaes by nail attached 18 gage
Z-shaped steel clips. Wood trusses supporting 5/." nominal interior ptywood with exterior ,i .' ;:;. -~: _. .::>
1··'-- -, ...
a
gtue. T & edges, applied at right angles to trusses witt! construction adhesive and 6d
&l'1'1OOth SMnk nai\8 12" a.C. in field and 6" O.C. along ends. Adhesive applied to each top
~ and grooved edge$ of plywood. End jolnta staggered 48".
-; :;'~: ;~':;j
tl
,'7)
-.':r Consult gypsum board manufacturer for truss details. Apprcul. Ceiling
Weight: 2.5 pst
PROPRIETARY GYPSUM BOARD Fire Test: FaA FC 10 . 1 hour. Method A.
National Gypsum Company - ,/,- Gold f30nde Brand FIRE·SHIELD C'" 2-17·88.
Gypsum Wallboard FM Design FC-+42

~:UfU NQ:"PCIIOO ~t:~_~;)} K~ ;>:,)~r~,*;~:::~:,::i

WOOO JOISTS, GYPSUM WAllBOARD,
GLASS FIBER INSULATION
.... layer '!t' type X gypsum Wallboard or gypsum veneer base applied at right angles to
. ..'y·~.·,I . .~f=;':~.·;~····:.;-;·:=;'
j ,I \ • ,'. , .\ . . '.: r '( '~"'T""~;.)
I .' ' 1 • " I . ,\. I. 1, I; .' \;

t. 1 ' I ~ t i, i! I I J 1 I I \. I I ! J • 1_) ..
rigid furring channels 16" o.C. with l' Type S drywall screws 12" o.c. Gypsum board end
)1 . joints located midWay between conlinuous channels and attached to additional pieces
of channel 60" long with 1" Type S drywall screws 8' a.c. ,Rigld furring channels applied
j) at right angles to 2 It 10 wood joists 16" o.C. with 8d cooler or box nails. 17!t" long. 0.092"
diameter shank. '/." heads. or Pl.' Type S drywall screws, two per joist. FKe layer 5/."
. . .

type X gypsum wallboard or gypsum veneer base applied at right angles 10 furring
channels with P/.' Type 5 drywall screws 8" o.c. ati end joints and 12" o.C. at Approx. Ceiling
intermediate channels. Edge jOints staggered 1S" minimum from base layer edge joints; Weight: 5psf
end joints staggered B" min. from base layer end joints'. Wood joists supporting 1/1" Fir. Test: Ul ,R4024-15. 8-3Hl4.
interior plywood with exterior glue subfloor and 1'/a" lightweight concrete reinforced with UL Design l532
galvanized hellagonal wire mesh over film Of felt or l' sanded gypsum floor

•
undertayment. 3'/2" A·l1 unfaced glass fiber insulation. 0.6 pcf. supported against
subfloor by wire rods 12" a.C. Alternately. insulation may be 3' /2" faced glass fiber
insulation stapled in place against subnoor. f

118 , Contaet ltl8 rnanufactUllf( for more Qetaiied informalJCl/'l on pro¢.etaIy prcduct:!. GA-600-2003
- IN TIlE CIRCUIT COURT IN: AND FOR FRANKLIN COUNTY, FLORIDA
CARL BIFANO and SANDRA BIFANQ,
Plaintiffs.
, Case: 05 CA 227
vs. i
ULRICH CONSTRUCTION. INC, etc..!
Defendants. .
-~----- _ _~_-+---,I
iI
AFFIDAVIT OF JEFFREY PRESCOTI'
i
The Wldersigned. states as follows:

1. I have personal knowledge of the facts stated herein.

I

2. I,amaewfessional'archlt@Irc;eiiSec!aniip'mctitingiiiithe.State,oflEloridasirrcell.9.&1.'
I

3. Ildesim!e(,ittheoorig!nalJJllanSl.(!bejP,l~')Johtne,:.resNence:DWiiE'd.lbYl€arlliidlSMdYf

Btfano.locate4 a1J9.9.WestIBa}'lShQre1Da~Stroeorgelliliii'dJFl:ri~if(ih~R1ii(tar~").

e 4.

5.
On August 25. 2006, and July 16,2007, I inspected the Residence.

,,~@P~isltDr~tiabiDbl.e;m6.iies.

6. Attached are photographs that fairly and ac::eurately depict the Residence as

constructed. Photographs attached hereto as Exhibit A.

1. The Plans show that the Residence is a three stol)' building on pilings, and the

contractor later enclosed part of the grom.dftoor. See Plans auaehed hereto as Exhibit B.

8.

r_ _ in ilarelrue.
Date: August ~ 2007.
~
J -
tittT
Under penalty of perjwy, I declare that rhave read the foregoing affidavit and that the

List of Exhibits:
Exhibit A - Photographs of Residence
Exhibit B - Architectural Plans

•
,~ ...
• LN THE CIRCUIT COURT IN AND FOR FRANKLIN COUNTY. FLORIDA

CARL BIFANO and SANDRA BIFANO,

Plaintiffs.
Case: OS CA 227
vs.

ULRICH CONSTRUCTION. INC.• $.,

Defendants.
_ _ _ _ _ _~ --:I '

AFFIDA"IT OF JOHN BELL

I
The undersigned states as follows: :

J. 1 have personal knowledge oithe tKts stared herein.

2. 1 ama professional enginee.t.Ii~andpraetieing in the State ofFlorida sinc:e )995.

3. On November 7, 2006 and July 16.2007.1 inspected the residenceowned by Carl and

Sandy Bifano Ioc:ated at 700 West Bay Shore Drive. St. George Island, Florida (the ·'Residence").

e 4.

S.
The Residence is three habitable stories.

Auadted hereto are photogtapbs that fairly andaceurately depict the Residence as

c:onstrueted. Pbotognpbs a.ttKbcd hereto as:Exbibit A

6. J reviewed plans prepared by Jeffrey PrescottandCIaytQD Anderson fortbeResidence.

Attadled hereto as Exhibit B is a ~ of1be plans (the "'PIans").

1. The Plans show that the R.esldence is a thrce-stoay building onpiliogs. and the

contractor later enclosed part of the ground floor.

8. During my inspections of the Residen~ I ol»erved numerous instances ofdefeaive

eonstrueUOIl. 'Thesedef'ects c.onstiMe llsub$1antiallifc safety danger ofstruetUraJ coUapse. In~lder

::"'to correct the defects. the Biranos will need to ~sh most or,all oftile existing struCture and dien
'-.. - .

: rebuild theResidellc~P

•
 . .
,'C'

• Under penalty ofpeljury. I

stated in if are true.
I

dedant that 1have read 1he foregoing affidavit and that the facts
I •

Date: August30 .2007.

List of Exhibits:
Exhibit A - ~ of Residence
Exhibit B • Jobsite Plans

• I
b~2m2
~I
. I

I
I
I
.

..
.'. __ .~----. _---~ ...... --~--~
,

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT IN AND FORFRANKl.JN COUNTY. FLOlUDA

e CAIU. BIFANO and; SANDRA BIFANO.

PtaiDrifN>
Case: OS CA 227
va.
ULRICH CONSTRUCTION, INC•• Cle••
JJrimdanls
-l

, AFFIDAYIT OF WlLLIAM'THOMAS WATSON

The undersigned swes as follows:

1. I have personal bowledge ofthe: facts stated herein-

I

2. I am a Certified Building COntractor liceuse4 in the State ofFlorida

J. l-wsshired by earl and s~ B~ (1he"BU8I\Os") to performemergency sttucturai

a. Shore Drive; St Georgtrls1an~Florida)
e reiuf'on:ement of1heir residence located at 700W~
(tbe "ResidenC'e"). '
, ,

4. Tbe Residence is three habitable storieS.

5. Attadted hereto are photogmphs tllat fairly and ac.curately depie:t 1b.e Residence as

cmstructed. Photographs auadted hereto as B1cbibit A

UDder penalty of perjury, 1 declam that Ihave read 1be foregoing affidavit ancllbat the facts
stated in it are true.

Date: ~ ')J)()7. ~\ ~-==--=s; -

William Thomas Wamon

&Whit A • PhotDgrapbs ofResideoce

•
'. SECTION 1201
·1
I
CHAPTER 12
;INTERIOR ENVIRONMENT
GENERAL
1201.1 Scope. Provisions of this chapter shall govern light,
ventilation. sanitation and rodent-proofing of buildings.
SECTION 1202
DEFINITIONS
E'orjdefinitions;;seet,€hapterF2;J:)
SECTION 1203
LIGHT AND VENTILATION
1203.1 MlDimum requirements
1203.1.1 Every habitable room of buildingS hereafter
erected shall have one or more windows. unless otherwise
~ specifically provided lierein. to afford adequate light and
/ventilation. The requirements specified in this section
-shall be corisidered as minimum requirements s,",pplemen-
tary to aU state laws regulating light and ventililtion.
I
I
1203.1.2 Where windows are required. such windows
•
shall open on a street. public space. yard or approved open
space that will afford adequate air and light Required
windows shall be so constructed that when fully opened.
the total open space shall be not less than one-half the
required window area.
Exceptions: Operable windows shall not be required
in:
1. Group I occupancies equipped with an engi-
neered smoke control system. I
2. Group B and Group R high-rise: buildings
equipped with smoke control complying with
412.5.
1203.1.3 Attics not used for habitational purposes shall
have provisions for the emission of excess heat.
1203.1.4 Except as otherwise provided herein. required
windows shall have gl~ openings of clear glass of area
not less than 8% of the floor area of the room served by
them with the following exceptions: I
I. Storage room windows shall have an area not less
than 5% of the floor area. . 1203.2.6 The ceiling height in habitable rooms, hallways. 5
2. Obscure glass. glass blocks and similar glazed pan-
els that admit less light than clear glass shall have
their area increased to admit an amount of light
equivalent to the above requirement.
• 1203.1.5 Skylights. v~nts. louvers or mechanical ventila-
tion may be substituted for windows when approved by
the building official. provided adequate light and ventila-
tion is provided to meet the requirements of th~s chapter.
FLORIDA BUILDING CODE - BUILDING
. I
P81.- c/y(}tJ /
1203.1.6 Rooms where by reason of use or occupancy.
dust fumes. gases. vapors. odors or other hazardous.
obnoxious or injurious impurities exist shall be provided
with adequate additional ventilation to insure safe and
healthful conditions.
1203.2 Room dimensions
1203.2.1 Occupiable rooms and habitable spaces shall
have a ceiling height of not less than 7 ft 6 inches (2286
nun). Bathrooms. toilet rooms. kitchens. storage rooms, 5
screen enclosures and laundry rooms shall be permitted to 5
have a ceiling height of not less than 7 ft (2134 mm). ~
Exception: One- and two-family dwellings shall com- ~.
ply with the ceiling height requirements of 1203.2.6. i
0.1203.2.2 If any room in a building 'bas a sloping ceiling.
the prescribed ceiling height for the room is required in
not less than two-thirds of the ceiling area of the room or 5
space. provided the ceiling height of the remaining ceiling 5
area is not less than 6 ft 8 in. (2 m). For accessibility pro- 5
visions related to vertical clearance of areas adjoining an i
i
accessible route. refer to 11-4.4.2.
=
Exception: One- and two-family dwellings shall com- i
ply with th'e ceiling height requirements of 1203.2.6. ~
1203.2.3 If any room has a ceiling which is furred or i
dropped down to conceal items such as duct work. piping. i
or structural members. the prescribed ceiling height is 5
required in two-thirds of the area of the room. but in no §
case shall the height of the furred or dropped ceiling be 5
less than 7 ft (2134 mm). 5
a
Exception: One- and two-family dwellings shall com· §
ply with the ceiling height requirements of 1203.2.6.
U03~4 Every dwelling unit shall have at least one room
-5
which shall have not less than ISO sq ft (13.9 m2) of the·
net floor area. Other habitable rooms except kitchens shall
----
have a net floor area of not less than 70 sq (t (6.5 m2).
/
. '
1203.2.5 No habitable room other than a kitchen shall be
less than 7 ft (2134 mm) in any dimenSion. '
/
Corridors. bathrooms. toilet rooms. laundry rooms and §
basements shall have a ceiling height of not less than 7 ft §
(2134 mm). The required height shall be measured from §
the-finish floor to the lowest projection from the ~eiling. i
Exceptl~ns:
I. Beams and girders spaced not less than 4 feet
(1219 mm) may project not more than 6 in. (152
nun) below a required ceiling height.
12.1
§
i
3
§
 202

"'.
FLYGALLERY. A raised floor area above a stage from
which the movement of scenery and operation of other stage
effects are controlled.
FOOTBOARDS. That part of a raised seating facility other
than an aisle or cross aisle upon which the occupant walks to
reach a seat. Applies to reviewing stands, grandstands and
bleachers.
*:
GALLERY. That portion of the seating space of an assembly
room having a seating capacity of more than 10 located
above a balcony.
GROUP DAY-CARE HOME. A group day-care home is a _
day-care home in which at least 7 but not more than 12
clients receive care, maintenance, and supervision by other =
than their relative(s) or legal guardian(s) for less than 24 hr ;
per day with nO more than 3 clients incapable of self-preser- -
vation.
GROUT. Mixture of cementitious materials and aggregate to
which sufficient water is added to produce pouring consis-
tency without segregation of the constituents.
GUARDRAIL SYSTE~. A system of building components
located near the open sides of elevated walking surfaces.

§ GARDEN MAUSOLEUM. A mausoleum for thb public GYPSUM"BACKING BOARD. A gypsum board used for
~ built without heat or air conditioning but may cdntain an interior applications as a backing in multi layer systems for
~ open-air committal area. gypsum wallboard, acoustical tile or other dry cladding, man-
ufactured in accordance with ASTM C 442.
GLASS FIBER BOARD. Fibrous glass roof insulation con-
sisting of inorganic glass fibers formed into rigiq boards
GYPSUM SHEATHING. A gypsum board used as a back-
using a binder. The board has a top surface faced with asphalt
ing for exterior surface materials, manufactured ~ith water·
and draft reinforced with a glass fiber.
$ - repellent paper and which may be manufactured with a
water-resistant core, in accordance with ASTM C 79.
GRADE. A reference plane representing the average of fin-
ished ground level adjoining the building at all exterior walls.
GYPSUM WALLBOARD. A gypsum board manufactured
When the finished ground level slopes away from thb exteri-
in accordance with ASTM C 36 used primarily as an interior
or walls. the reference plane shall be established by :the low-

•
surfacing for building structures.
est points within the area between the building and the lot
line or between the building and a point 6 ft (1829 mm) from
GYPSUM'WALLBOARD, TYPE X. A gypsUm boardspe-
the building, whichever is closer to the building.
cially manufactured to provide specific fire-resistant char~c-
t~!isticsr· . " -
GRADE, LUMBER. The division of sawn lumber into qual-
ity classes with respect to its physical and mechanical prop-
HABITABLE SPACE. A space in a structure for living.
erties as defined in published lumber manufacturer's standard
r~leeping, eating or cooking. Bathrooms, toilet compartments,
grading rules.
r\ closets. halls. screen enclosures, storage or uti!ity space, atld _
GRANDSTANDS. Tiered or stepped seating facilities.
tsjmilaLar~as arenQtconsidered.habitablesp~~. S
HANDRAIL. A horizontal or sloping rail grasped by hand
GRIDIRON. The structural framing over a stage supporting
for guidance or support.
equipment for hanging or flying scenery and other stage effects.
HAZARD CONTENTS, HIGH. Contents which are liable
GROSS LEASABLE AREA: The total floor area designed
to burn with extreme rapidity or from which poisonous fumes
for tenant occupancy and exclusive use. The area of tenant
or explosions are to be feared in case of flTe.
occupancy is measured from the center lines of joint parti-
tions to the outside of the tenant walls.· AU tenant areas,
HAZARD CONTENTS, LOW. Contents of such low com-
including areas used for storage. shall be included in calcu-
bustibility that no self-propagating fire therein can occur. The
lating gross leasable area. I
only probable danger requiring the use of emergency exits
will be from panic, fumes, smoke or fire from some external
GROUND FLOOR DWELLING UNIT. A dwelling unit
source.
with a primary entrance and habitable space at grade.
HAZARD CONTENTS, ORDINARY. Contents which are
GROUND SIGN. An outdoor advertising display sign sup-
liable to burn with moderate rapidity or to generate a consid-

•
ported by uprights or braces in or upon the ground, or mount-
erable volume of smoke but from which neither poisonous
ed on a vehicle. trailer or mobile structure principally used
fumes nor explosions are to be feared in case of fire.
for the purpose of advertising.

~ FtO~DABLHLmNG;8lBUI~~/ Mpl ~ 2.7

 DBPR OGA p(:l££ 02/04

lB/23i2ee7 16:17 8504146749
•
,~

• JOHN. J. YANOVIAK
I,

10211 weST SAMPLE ROAD. sum: 201

CORAL SPAINGS, FLORIDA 33065
VOICe: 954-753-7252
FAX: 954-341~7116
~~c~ /
4f1G -:7~
~,,~ ~$ '-~j)
*~
~, ?OOS ..............
~i~
August 24, ,2005

JessJca leigh, Esquire :.

Assistant General Counsel
State of Aorida Department of
Business and Professional Regulation
1940 North Monroe Street
Tallahassee, Florida 32399..()720

Re: Case No: 2005-034904(Brinkley)

Dear Ms. Leigh;

'.

In accordance wlthyour request. examination of the DBPRllnvestigative Report and

Exhibits 1 through 18, consisting of 351 pages, was conducted to addreSs a complaint
• Issued by Mr. cart Bifano and Mrs. Sandra Bifano. on July 19, 2005.

At Issue is the completeness and adequacy of code compliance Inspections performed by

Mr. Robin Arthur Brinkley (Brinkley), BuDding Code Administrator, BU 1203. Franklin
County Building and Zoning Department. (FCSZ), for a new home erected on the property
of Mr. and Mrs. Bifano. located at 700 West Bayshore Driye, St George Island, Florida.
,
The Bifano's contracted with Ulrich ~n5tructJon. Inc., to construct a three story single
famWyhomewhic:h Is rounded on concretepites.and beams. Thesuperstruct1Jreisofwood
frame oonstruction consisting ofstandard solid framing lumber. manufactured wood beams
and prefabricated floor and roof trusses. The exterlor of the home was finished with lap
siding appBed over plywood sheathing and the interior cfaddingw8s standard %- gypsum
wallboard. .

During the construction process, when exterior finishes were nearty completed ,end interlor
d~1 work was ready for the application of final finishes, the Blfano's observed conditions
that eppelired to be abnormal for a new home. Initially there were concerns about stairway'
consfructJon,but more.lmPQrta!1tfy, e,levated floors were not level and appeared to be '\
(sagging;,

( Exhibit A)

•
 f

10/23/2007 16:17 8584146749 DEfIR OGA PAGE 63/64

•
"

• Jessica Leigh, Esquire

JOHN J. YANOVfAK

Case No: 2005-034904(Brinkley)

August24,2005
Page 2.

Dissatisfied wfth explanations received from Mr. Gary Ulrich, concerning sagging floors, tne
Blfano's contacted Prescott Architects, the design Architect for the home. Additionally, the
8ifa~'s co~ta~_FC.!'.:z"and. ~uested an j~e~tiof! ~ttheh:_fl~~m_e,r~ respo"-S8 to ,I
~,_l'equR~8tlJlldey-an~fJr~~<}l~me~I.~~E~~Z__B~!I~lng.~r£l~~Y'~lted ~tteJjoJDtrgn
Janu~_ 3t 2005~DurfngJbe,IO§p-eetfQn,.. it.wa$. c:onfir.med, by~_t~= ~ry~- !tIat'.W:gypsuffi?
lA(81!..board·was'tnstalled·il1·the·home·jn~lIeu·ofthe·sp-eclfieKf5L8~typeJLm_iiil'.

An FCBZ fnspeetion Report (exhibit 1, Page 17) for the Bifano homes Indicates that
Inspections were conducted. as follows:

Framing . October 26, 2004 Passed

Rough Plumbing October 26. 2004
1 Passed
. Rough Eleetrie . OCtober 26. 2004 Passed

• Rough Mechanical October 26, .2004

Roofing ~ber26,2004
Passed
Passed

The information contained on the referenced report indicates thatone;::(-1fVis;t~was~maae

~b~Brinkl.Yfrom:june:2;;20!M. the date that-the permit was issued for construction. The
most peculiar Inspection applies to Roofing. Based on the content of the Inspection
Report, it appears th~t::JOofin9Jnsta~~tions-Were-c.QJf1pleted..prior.::ta:io_sReQtion:ot:m.of,.:)
~9?rooLtn.lJJes,a~!lQth2!- struguf!IJra.ming.for-the.ho~. g'J.rthermore;:dunng
.Jtl~oJanuary3c1;2005,~lnspeetionf"d~Ulll$ta!!l:ltlons.werecompleterhoW$ver,.th., is no
(reconLofan:inspeaion:forJnsufatlon:roe:any:portionjlf,fhe.hqme. . .

Apparently unsatisfied with the results of the FCeZ i"spectlon conducted on Janual)' 31,
2005, 1be.. Bjfano'aeogagedJ~yH~rdDrlgg~~.·_~.As8OCiate$;_fn~;-,-~n1f:~und'~t!'Uctures:J
c.Et1gineering,-lnc.,-to-conduet. independenf..lnspectJons of the-home. and reviews=&
conStruction dOeumentSwhlch were-reVlewecrand approved'byfG~Z prlorto-is$ue-ofth~
bUildIng penn~~~~ne ~._2_0J):~. ~if re~~--:~~th ff~i; \y!ll~:~,!~cJ~d~ In· ~Xhib~t-1~
tlS.-vise' of ve~gn~Qt defi~e~Cles.whl~:s~usly-!mpact,thestry~J:lnt~rity;'of.the!
/lOJne'and:c.ompl'omlsefire,reSlStivecapaclUesof.instalied struetural'component~kAtsoll).tb
'focationsi'-CrittcatsttuCfiJrarcomp?ne[lts~weFft'mi~og~.f1.d!ltspeclflclo~~I~n~ •. ~sta~a.~
c::gyP8um.~!!!:!9ar<f"was.instafled.IO.IIe!tQt.~'~:518.:':rYJm·X·g~Ymwallboard')The
reports furtherlndicatethifooserved construction was not comiistentwith FCBZ approved
construction documents nor Wl;tS It In compliance wfth the Rorida Buildfng Code (FBC).

•
 .DBPR OGA PN3E B4/94
18/23/2807 16:17 8584146749
,
...

• Jessica lelg~. Esquire

JOHN J. YANOVfAK

Case NO; 2005-034904{Brinkfey)

August 24, 2005

Page 3.

Under the circumstances. correc6ve ~pairs will requJre demoJltion of significant portions
ofthe building to complete reconstNcUpn ofstructural elements and re'placement of drywall
'in accordance with the approved cons~ctlon documents and to achieve code compliance.

FOftWi!.te~for~l, Slgnificant,construC~ion'defiCiencies~'ob$erved;PflorJ9_ ocwpang,y

~~J!!~~ereforeetheJife_s.~~tY,,"ontle,~jfano~s=:pr-others· ~@~~nQ~mpromlsef'
ROWEtverl. t~Ial~,a~malter·of.eCQ!!Q.IDlc.loss,as.theJlome.is·n()tsultable~fOr.o~pancy if!}
-------.
Its:currenrooJiditiOn.
"
.'
, '
'
.
,
,--
Consistent with my review of provldeq documents. ,it fs evident that Brinkley impropeny
conducted code comptlance inspections applicable to construction of the Bifano home and
, faDed to ensure that a safe and sound living environment would be provided for occupants.
'The~ Is no e~anatJon for performa.n?8 of a roofing inspection on the sa,m"e day a,S., a, .-A-?

•
framing, inspection.) Such flagrant activity represents disregard for public safety and ~n: ~
only beconsJdered a5 gross negligence and willful misconduct in the performance ofdutles
as Building Code, Administrator for Franklln,County, Florida. It is the opinion of this.•
reviewer, thatBrlnkley made false statements and submitted false inspectionreporidata'
when inspections'were conducted on one (1) day, at 'the 'Bifano home, In vidatlan of
Chapter 61G19.. Florida Adm'nlstraqve Code. Section 61G19-5.002(2)(f) and (~).
Furthermore, Brinkley was negligent and felted to compry with provisions of Chapter 1.
Section 105.6. Florida euiidingCode arid Chapter 468. Part XU. sedion 468.604(1) (a) and .
(b) and (2), Aorida Statutes. in the oonduct of his duties as a BuDding Code Administrator
for FranJdin County, Florida.

•
 {)
~:::::'

e IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE SECOND JUDICIAL CIRCUIT

IN AND FOR FRANKLIN, FLORIDA

CARL and SANDRA BIFANO,

Plaintiffs, CASE NO. 05-227-CA

vs.

ULRICH CONSTRUCTION, INC., et al

Defendants.
-----------,----~/
AFFIDAVIT OF CHRIS GIAMETTA

State of Florida
County of Franklin

Before me, the undersigned authority, personally appeared Chris Giametta who,
being duly first sworn, deposes and states:

• 1. he has personal knowledge of the facts stated herein.

2. he is a Franklin County Building Official, and has been since II £~ and as part

construction.
la,
of his duties, he is knowledgeable about building codes applicable to residential

3. he is familiar with the Bifanos' residence on St. George Island, the one in dispute
in this litigation . ---•. ,

4. he has never viewed the Bffanos'

I
residence as anything more than a two story
.

building on pilings, and that is the interpretation of Franklin County for that
building, also.
5. although there is a tower or viewing room on top ofthe second story, that tower
or viewing room is not a "habitable floor". ..........'-

SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED BEFORE ME THIS /4 ~ DAY OF SEPTEMBER,

2007.

CHECK ONE
Personally known --....I..L:
a~~
• Produced identification - - - -

~~' "£10<.,
!~, ':
(describe)

Notary Public State of Florida

Roxie EAllen
~ c-~ ~ My Commission DD504415 1,
Notary Public
~0 t-i e.. G.
~
A If U'l
"

~ Of f~O~ Expires 01108!~~:: ... _~~~~

 , .

• IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE SECOND JUDICIAL CIRCUIT

CARL and SANDRA BIFANO,

IN AND FOR FRANKLIN, FLORIDA

Plaintiffs, CASE NO. 05-227-CA

vs.

ULRICH CONSTRUCTION, INC., et al

Defendants.
- - - - - - - - - - - - -/
AFFIDAVIT OF ROBIN BRINKLEY

State of Florida
County of Franklin

Before me, the undersigned authority, personally appeared Robin Brinkley who,
being duly first sworn, deposes an4 states:

•
I

1. he has personal knowledge: of the facts stated herein.

2. he is a Franklin County Building Official, and has been since/*~8, and as part
of his duties, he is knowledgeable about building codes applicable to residential
construction.
3. he is familiar with the Bifanos' residence on St. George Island, the one in dispute
in this litigation _
4. he has never viewed the Bifanos' residence as anything more than a two story
building on pilings, and that is the interpretation of Franklin County for that
building, also.
5. although there is a tower or viewing room on top ofthe secoq.d story, that tower
or viewing room is not a "habitable floor". .

&~)
Robin Brinkley /

SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED BEFORE ME THIS - - DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 14A

2007.
CHECK ONE

iiJ:~;tU~
Personally known y/

•
Produced identification - - - -
(describe) N Public Me1l1t'i-L lvi. ~c.J.~(\s
~'.~ 1-~--loo<J
i~~P~ Notary Public State of Florida
• ': ,Melanie MHutchins
~ ; '. My Commission 00447369
Of f\.~ 'Expires 07/0412009
 , . /
I

• IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE SECOND mDICIAL CIRCUIT.

CARL and SANDRA BIFANO,

IN AND FOR FRANKLIN, FLORIDA

Plaintiffs, CASE NO. 05-227-CA

vs.

ULRICH CONSTRUCTION, INC.; et al

Defendants.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _-----C 1

. AFFIDAVIT OF CLAYTON ANDERSON

State of Florida
County of Leon

Before me, the undersigned a~thority, personally appeared Clayton Anderson who,
.being duly first sworn, deposes and states:

e 1. he has personal knowledge of the facts stated herein.

2. he is a Professional Engineer licensed in the State of Florida (Fla. Registration
P.E. 26735) and has been since (~1' .
3. he has done the engineering work for over 100 homes on or near the coast of
Florida, and as a result, he is; knowledgeable about applicable building codes for
such houses jI _

4. he is familiar with the Bifan6s' residence on St. George Island, the one in dispute
in this litigation !
5. he considers the Bifanos' re~idence as two habitable floors on pilings. .
6. although there is a tower or {riewing room on top of the second story (the second
habitable floor), that tower o'r viewing room is not a "habitable floor".
I

~~~~~
Clayto Anderson

SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED BEFORE ME THIS lJ..- DAY OF SEPTEMBER,

2007.

fh~'A:.~
CHECK ONE /
Personally known _v
__

•
Produced identification - - - -
(describe) Notary IiIblic

~ ~ Mefy Katherine Robef1s

• ~
• My Commisllion 00336548
~o/;I Expirw 08, 2008
.,,~

July

• IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE SECOND JUDICIAL CIRCUIT -

CARL and SANDRA BIFANO,

IN AND FOR FRANKLIN, FLORIDA

Plaintiffs, CASE NO. 05-227-CA

vs.

ULRICH CONSTRUCTION, INC., et al

Defendants.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _----:1

AFFIDAVIT OF DOUGLAS R. BARKLEY

State of Florida
County of Leon

Before me, the undersigned <,!-uthority, personally appeared Douglas R. Barkley

who, being duly first sworn, depos~s and states:

• 1. he has personal knowledge bf the facts stated herein.

2. he is a Professional Engineer licensed in the State of Florida (# L.{ 907'0
and has been since L-// q19s= .
)

3. he has done the engille~ring work for many homes on or near the coast of Florida,
and as a result, he is knowledgeable about applicable building codes for such
~~ -
4. he has reviewed the plans of the Bifanos' residence on St. George Island, the one
in dispute in this litigation .
5. he considers the Bifanos' residence as two habitable floors on pilings.
6. although there is a tower on top of the second story (the second habitable floor),
that tower is less than 33% of the total roof areo/>1 and it is..too small to contain
living space, and thus, does not count as a flooj ~eY@L i
I
i
I

Douglas R. Barkley

SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED BEFORE ME THIS I, 1#'1 DAY OF SEPTEMBER,

2007. ~SoJJAd.L.,-\ k:~J-.l. -

• ,''..'?;~'!.
"\'"1,,
,o.;"~"~~'
:;':
•.!'.rJtf:, A nge '0 . NA',ms
~\~ Commission # 00429036
-:";~;, dR."l Expires May 12, 2009
'f;Pf,r."" ElondodTJ<lY Fain _lnsuranca,lnc. 800·385-7019 !
 . U/
}/~. 1rJL(L( 7
,

• IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE SECOND JUDICIAL CIRCUIT

CARL and SANDRA BIFANO,

IN AND FORiFRANKLIN, FLORIDA-- - - ------- - -- ---- ---------~------- --
.
.
I
I
1

i
,
I
I

Plaintiffs, I
CASE NO. 05-227-CA
vs. i

I
I I
ULRICH CONSTRUCTION, INC., et al
I

!
Defendants. !
------- '---'-------'1

AFFIDAVIT OF CRAIG HUFFMAN

State of Florida
County of Leon

Before me, the undersigned a~thQrity, personally appeared Craig Huffman who,
-being duly first sworn, deposes and states:
I

• I. he has personal knowledge of the facts stated herein.

2. he has reyiewed the construction drawings for the Bifano residence on St George
Island in relation to the requirements of the 200 I Florida Building Code; and in
particular the definition of habitable floors and fire rating requirements. My
statements below are based on research of the applicable code, the standards of
accepted practice in the design and construction professions, and historic ,..
definitions of ancillary architectural elements.

3. he is a licensedpracticing Architect in the State of Florida. He has been in

professional practice for 27 y~ar~( and currently, he is Design Principal of an
architectural firm in Tallahassee, Florida. His firm has designed over 75
residential structures that have been built along the Gulf and Atlantic coasts in
Florida. Many of these have included a tower, or small "lookout" space. In all
city and county jurisdictions where these buildings have been permitted, where
the tower was above two (2) primary floors, the code official did not require the
structure to be I hour protected.

4. he is also a professor at an accredited School of Architecture in Florida (Florida A

& M University), and his partner is serving as current president of The Florida
Trust For Historic Preservation. He and his partner have done extensive research

• of historical residential structures located in the coastal areas of the southeastern

U.S. This research has been documented in six (6) Design Guidelines and
• Architectural Standards forlcoJunercial and residential developments in Florida:
South Carolina and North <1arolina. Based on this research of Architectural-
historic precedent, a small towJr element is not considered a full story. The
correct designation is a cuppla br belvedere. A cupola is typically an unoccupied
floor and is used as a light )Yelll or ventilation shaft. A belvedere, as defined in
~~.

"The Dictionary of Architetture"

I I
by Fleming, Honour and Pevsner, is "a small
look out tower on the roof of a house" (page 132). Historical examples typically
establish 250 square feet as! a niaximum size of a belvedere (tower room). The
~ifano tower floor area, as Fee4 from the plans for ~e residence, (see sheet ~-.L2)
IS 167.1 square feet and therefore would not be consIdered a floor level, but It IS a
typical example of a historib bdlvedere.
! I
: I

5. In my professional opinion !reg¥ding the fire safety and egress, the Bifano
residence would not be c1~sifitd as a three (3) story structure. There are two (2)
habitable floors as indicated on sheet A-I.2 as the 1st and 2nd Floor Plans. The
tower or -"belvedere"
-
in andillaly
,I
space and does not fulfill the code's definition
of habitable space. The 2 :Goors conform with the standard for Type VI
../
unprotected construction. Thisiopinion is based on research of the applicable
codes, historic precedents, ~d rhe "standard of reasonable practice" which
establishes a pattern oftypi~al ~ccountability in the design and construction
professions. i i

•
!

1tJJ
I

SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED! B~FORE ME THIS 1~ DAY OF SEPTEMSER,

1 -

20O7. :

~~~~
.oarv Public {-

~ •••·~';f.\'N?·••,
4t/J.'J;,~;; JUUE KAY ROOERTS
MY COMMISSION 1/ DO 690014\;1 -,
l:~~.~.~l EXPIRES: June 28, 2011 Il~
]i "'~(;'; ",~~., Bonded Thru NotaJy Public Undorwriters
:::. hUUI'

• 2
•
I ~----- - - ---- -- ---

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THESECOND-JUDICIAL CIRCUIT..

1 I .
_~ . _ -...
- IN AND i
FOR FRANKLIN·FLORIDA---·-
i '
-
,
.1,
,
I
I
CARL and SANDRA BIFANO, 1

I
I

Plaintiffs, i ! CASE NO. 05-227-CA

vs. I I

ULRICH CONSTRUCTION, INC.!, et ~

I \
, 1

Defendants. i I

I: /

II
AFFIDAVIT OF GARY ULRICH
i
State of Florida
County of Leon ~ I
- i i - -
Before me, the undersigned a¥thdrity, personally appeared Gary Ulrich who, being
duly first sworn,
-
deposes and states: , I 1
\

- : I

e 1. He has personal knowledge hf tile facts stated herein.

2. He is one of the defendants illI this litigation.

I
1

- - I 'I

3. _Hehas been a licensed contr~ctor in the State of Florida since 1987, having been a
registered residential contractor from 5/26/87 to 11/5/04; a certified residential
contractor from 11/5/04 to th~ prfsent time; and a registered building contractor
from 8/8/06 to the present tite. \

4. He hasdone business ~ a cohtrabtor both as a sole proprietor using the fictitious

name of Ulrich Construction ;andlas part of a corporation by the name of Ulrich
Construction, Inc., a Florida ¢orRoration having been incorporated on 2/17/98.
I
!
5. Since the incorporation ofU!hchIConstruction, Inc., he has been the President and
sole shareholder of that corpdration; he is the only person within the corporation
who was licensed as a contra9torito perform construction activities of the-
corporation (see paragraph 3 ~boye).
i \
6. He has never been a part of any l~ted liability company by the names of "Ulrich
Construction, LLC" or "Gary\Ulrfch Construction, LLC"; he is part of a
corporation named "Gary Ulrich Construction, Inc., a Florida corporation, and as
stated above in paragraph 4, He
isla part of "Ulrich Construction, Inc."

• I,

:
I
I

I
1
_
• 7. Attached as Exhibit A is a copy of the license wmcnhe-had from the-Department-_-_~-_-~--_--­
of Business and Professional Regulation at the time of contracting for the Bifano
job in May, 2004; that license was the renewal of a prior and similar license from
the Department, a copy ofwmch his attached as Exhibit B.

8. Attached as Composite Exhibit C are copies of the registrations with Franklin

County, Florida during the year 2004.

9. Prior to 1115/04, he did not know that Ulrich Construction, Inc. had to be licensed
by the Department of Business and Professional Regulation, also, in addition to
himself being licensed; he learned this at the time he became a certified V
residential contractor, and he was notifying the Department of that change from
his prior status as a registered residential contractor; attached as Exhibit D is a
copy of the license issued to Ulrich Construction, Inc. in November, 2004.

10. He is more than familiar with the Bifano house on S1. George Island, as he
participated in the planning and building of the house; his license as a registered
residential contractor and as a certified residential contractor qualified him build
that house

11. In the planning stage for the house, the Bifanos made numerous changes to the
original plans as drawn by Prescott Architects, and when such changes were

e made, the Bifanos each time we!'e adamant that there was no need to go back to
Prescott Architects relative to th~ changes made.

12. There were no problems in the construction of the the Bifanos house until
December, 2004 when he pressed them for payment on past due draw requests; it /
was at that time the Bifanos (ipparently employed supposed experts to look at-the
house, and on one such occ~ion, it was reported to me by one of my
subcontractors on the jobsite Ithat Mr. Bifano instructed one the supposed experts
to find "code violations" i

13. When the Bifanos failed to p~y past due draw requests, Ulrich Construction, Inc.
filed a lien against the Bifanos' property, a copy of which is attached as Exhibit E;
I

that lien was recorded in the OffiCial Records of Franklin County, Florida, and the
attached shows the pertinent tecording information;

14. In the response to the filed lien, the Bifano's second attorney in this matter, Sten ~~ -

V~t;.
Sliger of Tallahassee, Florida: sent my lawyer, Nicholas Yonclas of Eastpoint,
Florida, a letter in March, 2006, and for the first time, raised the issue of a
possible "code violation" dealing with the width of the sheetrock used in the S!'A oU '?
house (a distinction between 112" versus 5/8" sheetrock); 'do

15. Also, in response to the filed lien, the Bifanos filed a Notice of Contest of Lien

• which required Ulrich Construction, Inc. to bring an action to enforce its lien
within 60 days of the date ofthe filing of the Notice, and attached as Exhibit F is

2
 , . \ ~.
'.

• a copy ofthat Notice; not knowing then for sure'whetherthe type -or thickness of -- ---_ ..... ---.
the sheetrock was a legitimate issue, Ulricli'Coristruction;Inc., chose not to ... '. -- ~- .' .-. .-.-
enforce its lien and allowed the 60 days to lapse without filing any enforcement
action.

16. Subsequently, he has learned that there is no legitimate sheetrock width issue, as
evidenced by three letters which he has obtained from architects and engineers in
the geographical area of the Bifanos house, copies of which letters are attached as
Exhibits G, H and I;.

17. There are no structural deficiencies in the Bifanos' hodse which imperils the
structure of the house or people who might reside inside it, as suggested by the
Bifanos and some of their supposed experts.

18. The Bifanos' house is a two story structure on pilings, with a tower (as shown on /
the plans) or a "belvedere" (see; Huffman affidavit submitted simultaneously with
this affidavit)..

19. The ground "floor" of the Bifanos' house is a parking area under the house, with a
small enclosed area for storage and for an internal stairway; this is not a habitable
floor.

• 20. The size ofthe "enclosed part of the ground floor" consists of no more than 300
square feet, and it is not considered as a floor for any purpose under Franklin
County codes or ordinances. ;
,
21. Above the parking or ground "floor", there are two habitable floors suitable for
living, containing bedrooms,llivibg,
I I
dining and bathrooms and a kitchen; ,..

22. Above the second habitable ~oot, there is a small room approximately by 10' x
16', for a total of approximat~lyi160 square feet; this area is called a tower or
"belvedere" room, and it is nOt sbitable or useable for ordinary .living, and in the
construction trade and practice, it is not considered a habitable floor, and for
building code purposes, it is not
I
considered
I
a floor or story;
I
, I

23. There is no fire code violation relative to the thickness of the sheetrock used in
the Bifanos' house; the Bifanos a:nd their supposed experts think that there is
because they are misinformed about the number of habitable floors in this house, /
and because there are only two habitable floors, the house does not need to be fire
protected in the same manner' as a house with three habitable floors.
-~___ ' J •

24. He comes to the conclusion and opinion stated above in paragraph 23 by reason of
his own independent study of the building code, buttressed by the opinion of other
architects and engineers (Exhibits G, H and I attached) in the construction

• industry, and it is common and appropriate in the construction industry a person

3
• I I
, .
-
• - -------
knowledgeable about building code mattersto-consUIfWilli-6lliersalso ------=~~~-=- -~ -~---=
knowledgeable about such matters. --- -~ ------ ---- --

25. The Bifanos have filed an administrative complaint against him and Ulrich
Consmction, Inc. relative t6, thisI matter, and the Department has dismissed that
complaint; as shown in the ~ismissal notice attached as Exhibit J..
i I
26. When this controversy first began, and before this lawsuit was filed, he offered to
fix all legitimate problems with'the house, but he was not allowed to do so by the
Bifanos; this "offer to fix" was done pursuant to Section 558.001-558.005, Florida
Statutes; sometimes referred to as Florida's Construction Defect Statute. lbis
offer to fix and such statute will be asserted as affirmative defenses to the
Bifanos' claims herein.

27. Further, he ~as not allowed by the Bifanos ~o finish t?e house, which e~pl~s . /.
why some things were never completed, which the Btfanos now complam m this -
lawsuit as being something which Ulrich Construction~ Inc. failed to do.

28. An example of paragraph 27:abd,ve relates to plumbing fixtures for the house,
which the Bifanos selected, rind -Fhich Ulrich Construction, Inc. paid for, took
delivery of, stored for a while, and then after this controversy began, tried to ./
deliver for the Bifanos' use at the house, but such delivery was not allowed or

• accepted by the Bifanos.

~
,...

SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED BEF([)RE ME THIS

2007.
CHECK ONE
Personally known
~
\ \
I L l <:20 -0..-DAY OF SEPTEMBER,

Produced identification _
(describe) Notary Public

;.... ~........ NICHO"""S YONC' AS

_.~~.rv.'l:' IIJ\
[.:""tb,'\f: MY COMMISSION # DO 302030
U\

~.~{Jj EXPIRES: June 15.2008

'lif,iif.~~"~ Bonded Thrn Notal"1 Public Underwriters

• 4
 I

Office qf the Attorney General

I I

~-- .-is sa- I

Please retuni cohtpleted consumer contact fOlm to:

. 'f'"

.':'
~.' <;
F."
.",;'..,;:-
': '3,r ;"."
L.".~ \
J Offi.ceo of ~?rney General Bill McCollum
State of Flonda:
' ~
;l~J..
. /JPN. I
,.
•
.

J.L J
• \

" PL..Ol, The PaPitol ""i..'; l

ThJIahas=, kniida 32399-1050. r
vr'~1{ fll't/'¢"I/f
ConstlIller Contact Form
The shaded infunnation MUST be provi~d¥we correspond via U.S~ 'mail. IncomPlete fPnns cannot be
'OCetled. PLEASE WRITE LEGIBLY: oqly Qnk.business per comolaint form.
, ..,. -~,. .,1

:~.~ . .·. .• ,;All>tl;§j,A,;

Mr&./Mt'.:,6rd_;/JHjJ,·:;"·.I:tJ.~,,,;;;;:· ·.,.,~t!~ .
, _ _ ",._' '. . _ . . . . .' _."~, •••.:.• , .•. ' ....... _ .. ' ..' - .- .• · : . __ ....:, ....... _·1·. _,·.:'·c'· ,:

•
8$: /l~ df{eeT I! ..
.\ .. \ . .
Arifuunt Paid:
L/JL-".
". i

?cJ~i~Tfijtr- ... " . ... . .

!

~:
, , , .. I was contacted
, I
--.-.-..4-tL.PhQne __ Mail _ Other
.J:'

Yes-a
. I I

Have you retained an attorney~ Q J~ fl.

a a1:j1.
!No II

• I

Did you sign a. contract or other papers, i.e. ~ates, invoices, or other supporting documents? Yes
I I

(ATTACH ~OP,~~:I J:>() NOT SEND OBlGINALS.)

.. HOtti: .. .' . ' , ' " ,. . •. ....; 'I' ...',)" . . .' .... ."'. ,, . .'.' '.
1. AD d9cuments. and~~1l1'lment$ su~e~ Y;lith~hl~ ~ornJll~tar~subJeet topubl~cjnsp~(rti()n pursu~ to· CU_t19,FIori(ia·

2•. =kt'1owlng~ilrt~ata~_~Jjn~,itt1jil1teilt~Jllf$I~f1.apUlJlicseriantlntbe~te·oftds··

• offiQiafdutY$halft)lJijgjltYiofa ·rnjsd8fuf)a~OtOf,1h'~$~o·~gre&;~PQnis~e .asfjrtlvi4ed In S. 775;0$2.s.775.Q83.or~

$..8a1Jl6Rodda~·f

Pleaseindi,ace ifyoo are over' the age of 66. ~tid

'

{PLBASB USE 0TllS1l SIDE Ol'l THIS FORM TO l)ESCB.lBE YOUR COMPLAINT &: AlTACH YOUll SIGNATUl\E}
,',J
I

,
! ••,<.;~ " '. ..'. '.'
fan be enhanced for victimizing senior citizens. Over 60 eyes 0
I
I

I
'
. . .....', .
No
 I I
I

I
I

. PI~c explain your complaiPt. Attach additional shccts) if necessaI)~

, -

I I.·-·~---~---·-"~'---··"fd~~·~"--·· '~~T~~iJl_ I _ _n

I _
.. __' .
I '

~"~-"~-"""""---~ -.' -'-,.,'-. ,-. - .~' -EJ!fd'dL tiliiili;~ -

~~--=""-··P;-htl/litJ ,~ , >:
I
5-,'~~. -~-~Si~~ ,
I

-~=-----il--'
,
"ttuJ· F n

+-
I
~,M 7i//N;7//II
. -"

-_.~.~ ~,*diL$lfj'iJM;;;#it.~~'~~
~_~!_-'-mo~-atr~77M~~~
, '1 . ~
U/ffA
~d~ ---'.--'-~L, .'~~~"
L.tL . . _-

. . . -~~tJ/i$O. P1ti1d; IMji#£ lf1fj/;;--, .

~:
• --.-#Hi1~ ~~~~fi11/ffE;t-
. __JI/I:'NJ?-lk l/ss ~ Ytii£ &¥Ilt?/ib .2G:1l~_~,'.
-'-'-'-~~1/iIii:---0ilJ-iIJ?,"-~~ I jp£'-~-'Li??l1!e-Zlil;-:---"'----"--"-' -.-
~ m+ -
, _~~Z~~ll&~~ lilf:C~-6~~
_.. , c_._~ .~___ _ . -----------_.._---------.--_._-

-----.,..-~;-.-'---~------._-" ......... .........

~ ~_._- -----_..
~---_. . .

My signature a11thQ~S the Attorney Gen.er~"'s Office to take any action deemed necessary for
purposes of investigation or enforcementr I rnderstand that the Attorney General does not
represent private citizens seeking the retUrn oftheir money or other personal remedies. I am fi1ing
this complaint to notifY.your office of tJJ ~vities of this company so that it may be determined if
• Jaw enrottemeDt or ~ is ~tedf
aa;m 6J..
Signature: ~ ~ Dare: ~ f <£t?jO
• As explained to you and demp~tratedthru the evidentiary documents
left in your possession on Fri4ay~ February 5,2010 the issue is the
conspiracy -between Franklin ;Co~nty and the State of Florida
(Department of Business and iPr.fessional Regulation) t() cover-up wide-
spread violation of Florida St~teIFirf? Code in those homes taller than
two stories built in Franklin ~o~nty particularly on St. George Island,
and surrounding areas of ~t Phint,. Carrabelle, etc bullt by Gary
Ulricb, Ulricb Construction I~c~ Gary Ulrich Construction Inc. Recall
the Ulrich Deposition-dated; ~ugpst,2009 -inwhicb he admits to never~
, Ilsing fire rated sheetrock or'i'x-board" prior to Deeember, 2004an'd
Franklin County neverrequi~edfit•.:. Please recan the folder labeled
"DBPR Audit Trail" thatwasgifen to you and the contents ofwhich
were discussed with you on Ftid,y, February 5,2010, DBPR was made
~ware by os of the fire cooeVlobltioJl- on our home as early as AprD of::;'
2005,and,ofotherth..ee"stor.y:homes'builtby thiscontraetorand .:b -
-illegallypeFmitted ~by Frankli~qounty as early as May/June, 2007•..::.
- I I
I I

This cover-up affects individual bome owners on St. George Island most

• of which are from other State~ a~ well as their insurance companies who
are carrying the fire insuran~ ()~ these structures and the lending
instutions who may still be invoJted in the finance of them. (fh~,
.-iIl4jvidu.als,.their·insurancecbmpanies, and their lending instution~
:hav.e-fraudulently been misled tllat these structures have met aD Florida.;
State Building Codes by the i~su,nce of a Certificate of Occupancy by.J
Franklin County DepartlDen~of;Building and Zoning. J
I

We are requesting that the Offi~ of Attorney General bring to justice

, I

all those individuals. involved 'in ~he cover-up both at the County and
State level that is, aU those in~iv~duals who wanton and willfully
disregarded and continue to 4is~egard the safety of public life and
property. We are also reque~tillgthat the State Fire MarshallJ
inv~tigate aU homes tall~r th~J~ ~o stories built in Franklin County as j
well_as all_homes taller tbant1v0"stories built in other counti~s a,s eitedj
.by this particular contractor in ~is sworn deposition dated August~ .I
~ 2009; We<are· requesting.. that your office notify all the home owners
- -l--!-' •
both iii State and- out""Of-'Stat~ asrwell as: their insurance carriers: and1
lending institutions. j We-are requesting_that your office notify all the·

•
... j 1.. . -
listhigagendes tnat list and FFntrthesehomes as vacation rentals to
unknowillg out-of-State as we,U ~s in State individuals and families. )We
are requesting that the appropri~te loeal fire departments benotined of
the fire code violation including the true "burn-thru" time of these
•
mcin.erator homes shoutd·a fire :break;.out and they risk their lives to
save life and property.

Attached are photos of four "o~es cited in the documents in the folder
titled "Other Houses" that y,u ~ere given on Friday, February 5, lOU).
These homes were also cited ~ ~ame in the Ulrich Depositions. We
only cited a few homes in our Ia}vsuit against the contractor and other
defendants to demonstrate t6at pur home was not ali anomaly. Also
included is a photo of our ho~e las it appeared during construction.
I .

I
i
I
I
,

•
~~/OIILODO ~l:D~ ll:lOob/olbll:l VONQ..AS PAGE 84

(C;(Q) lpYv
. I
Property Owner: BIfANO, CARL &: SANDY Penni! #: 17058
I I
Address: 6538 MAUNA LUA DR.rV1; [. Date: 61212004
City/State: DtA.MONDHEA~, ~S 3952$
I

Fee: $1,069.88

I
I

Development R.-1 DWELLING

.
I
,
!
I
Location: ST OEO ISL. LT 12, BLI< 69, US
!

Street A.ddress: 700 WEST BAYSHOREDRIVE

I I
Cost: I I $440.000.00
I I
GenIBldgIRes: GARY ULRICH CONST.~
I ,
INC
I I
, I

Electrical Cont ED SELLERS , : E-Pennit #: 17058£

I I
Plumbing Cent: TRJ COUNTY GARlY P~S P-Permit #: 170S8P
• I

MechIJNAC: EA1l.L CASH M-Pennit #: 17058H

Roofing Cont: BOBBY JAMES
q
R-Permit ##: l'}.053R "

INSPECTIONS
I

Foundation:
Framing: PASSEO 10-26--04
Rough Pluthb: PASSED 10-26-04
ROUgh Elect: PASSED lO-26.Q4
Rough MechIHVAC: PASSED 10.26;.04
Insulation:
Drywall:
Dl'ywaU SCTeW:
WindOWS/doors:
Siding;
Rooting: PASSED 10-26-04
MObile Home:
Pool Steel:
Pool Elect:
Pool Final:
Mise Final:
Final Bldg rnsp:
Elevation Cert:
Cen of Occup: