Page 1

Association of Licensed Architects

$6.00 Volume 16, No. 4 Winter 2012

LicensedArc hitect A Pu blica tion of

the A ssoc iatio n of

Licen sed Arch itect s

What’s Inside: • 2012 ALA Design Award Winners • Continuing Ed: Meeting Fire Codes with OSB • Legal Issues Arising Out of Green Design and Construction • Design Copyright Protection – Has it Worked? • Your Code Questions Answered • Disaster Preparedness in the Code • “New Feature” - Economic Outlook

Exteriors That Last!

Traditional stucco or exterior insulation and finish systems. Either way, you need qualified plasterers to be sure the job is installed correctly. Our highly trained plasterers know how to wrap openings, Identify correctly flashed windows and doors, and prepare surfaces for proper caulking to ensure the integrity of any stucco or EIFS system.



For information about exterior systems and the right professionals to install them, call us.

Chicago Plastering Institute 5611 West 120th Street Alsip, IL 60803 Ph. (708) 371-3100 Fax (708) 371-8290


Vol. 16, No. 4, Winter 2012

Photography: James Steinkamp


Patterson Technology Center, Effingham, IL Patterson Technology Center is a 98,000SF office building for a company that provides equipment and software solutions for the health care industry. The project is currently under review by the USGBC and tracking LEED Silver certification. The project features a unique, ecologically restorative landscaping concept, and a high performance rain screen façade.


Ask Kelly... Your Code Questions Answered Building code consultant Kelly Reynolds answers the most common questions asked by ALA members. by Kelly P. Reynolds, ALA Code Consultant


The "Really" Awards Its awards season – this entertaining article recognizes some design mishaps you will want to avoid. by Robert Stanton, Willis A&E


We Gotta Get Out of this Place – Disaster Preparedness in the Codes Planning for an emergency is the best defense – learn how codes help to mitigate disasters in many ways. by Kimberly Paalberg, RA, Staff Architect, ICC


Legal Issues Arising Out of Green Design and Construction Green design and construction has lead to some litigation. This article summarizes some of those matters as they relate to certain parties in the construction process. by Nissa Hiatt, Communication Manager for NAHB Remodelers


ALA 2012 Design Award Winners Congratulations to the 32 winning projects from this year’s ALA Design Awards competition.


The Outlook for Construction in 2013 Read what’s ahead for construction in the coming year. by Bernard M. Markstein, III, Chief Economist of Reed Construction Data


Continuing Education Article: Meeting Fire Codes with OSB Earn 1.0 learning unit in health, safety and welfare with this article on fire-rated OSB – oriented strand board. by Bob Palardy, Manager of Technology, LP Building Products


Design Copyright Protection and the Architectural Profession: Has it Worked? Twenty two years ago the Architectural Works Copyright Protection Act became law. Two decades later, has the Act really helped? by Bob Greenstreet, Dean of the School of Architecture and Urban Planning, University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee LICENSED ARCHITECT • VOL 16 NO. 4 • WINTER 2012




2012 ALA Design Award Winners


ADA Advice

ALA, Inc.

BOARD OF DIRECTORS Jeffrey N. Budgell, FALA - President James K. Zahn, Esq., FALA, Vice President Mark Van Spann, FALA - Secretary Patrick C. Harris, FALA - Treasurer Joanne Sullivan, Executive Director Steven H. Pate, FALA Past President

6 45

Architecture Conference & Product Show


Chapter News

DIRECTORS: James J. Belli, FALA Judith Brill, ALA David Dial, ALA Doug Gallus, FALA Rick Gilmore, FALA Tom Harkins (Affiliate) Kurt Hezner, FALA Darrel LeBarron, ALA Pat Manley, ALA David Roth, ALA Jeff Whyte, ALA

ALA New Members


Code Corner


Continuing Education Article


Contributed Article


Insurance Info


Legal Issues



EDITORS Lisa Brooks Jeffrey N. Budgell, FALA Robert Davidson, FALA Patrick C. Harris, FALA Steven H. Pate, FALA

ADVERTISING SALES Joanne Sullivan Peg McLean

GRAPHIC DESIGN/MAGAZINE Midwest Type and Imaging ALA, Inc. serves the architectural profession. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted, in any form without the express written consent of the publisher. Published in the U.S.A.,© 2012 by ALA, Inc. All rights reserved. Opinions expressed in articles are not necessarily those of ALA, Inc. Any reference to a product or service is not to be construed as an endorsement of same. Advertising published in Licensed Architect does not constitute nor imply an endorsement or recommendation of the advertiser’s products by ALA, Inc., or any of its members. ALA reserves the right to review all advertising for acceptability. For advertising, or membership information, call or write Joanne Sullivan at:


Reed Economic Review

- Advertisers Thank you to our Advertisers. They make this magazine possible. A & E Group of Willis HRH . . . . . . . . . . 35 Andersen Windows . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 Berg Engineering Consultants, Ltd. . . . . . 8 CertainTeed. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 Chicago Plastering Institute . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Chicagoland Roofing Council . . . . . . . . 18 Coleman, Hull & van Vliet, PLLP. . . . . . . 47 Crivello, Carlson, S.C. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47

If you have an address correction, wish to submit news items, press releases, or an article, contact:

ALA, One East Northwest Highway, Suite 200, Palatine, IL 60067 Phone: (847) 382-0630; Fax: (847) 382-8380; E-mail: ALA@alatoday.org Web Site: www.alatoday.org


Kelly P. Reynolds & Associates, Inc. . . . . 44 MasterGraphics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Moshe Calamaro & Associates. . . . . . . . 43 Northfield . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Back Cover SJS Components . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 SABO & ZAHN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 Tee Jay Service Company . . . . . . . . . . . 15 The Hill Group. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11


Joanne Sullivan One East Northwest Highway, Suite 200, Palatine, IL 60067 Phone: (847) 382-0630 • Fax: (847) 382-8380 E-mail: ALA@alatoday.org




t is hard to believe 2012 is quickly winding down and soon the New Year will be upon us. ALA has had a very successful 2012 and for that I would like to send a big thanks to all of our members for your continued support! Just recently we had our most successful Annual Conference and Product Show to date. There was almost a sellout on the exhibitor booths and for that I send a big thanks to our Affiliate Members for their continued support! Our keynote speaker, Stanley Tigerman, gave an outstanding keynote which was based on his upcoming book. Our Annual Design Awards Banquet was also one of our best to date. However, with Geoffrey Baer as our Emcee and a venue like the spectacular Medinah Country Club it’s hard to go wrong. The 2012 Design Awards Program winners are showcased in this issue of Licensed Architect. Please take the time to view the outstanding projects. In addition to the regular informational articles, this issue of Licensed Architect has

the first "Economic Outlook" article. The Economic Outlook article is the result of a new and expanding relationship between the ALA and Reed Construction Data. Please take the time to read it and let the office know that you enjoyed it. Also, courtesy of Reed Construction Data you can now view current construction market news and information on the ALA website. Visit our homepage, alatoday.org. Lastly, I would like to remind all of our members to renew their membership to continue receiving the many benefits provided by membership in the Association of Licensed Architects. On behalf of the ALA Board, our Executive Director, Joanne Sullivan and the entire office I would like to extend to all a warm, happy and safe Holiday Season and a happy and prosperous New Year.

Jeffrey Budgell Jeffrey N. Budgell, FALA, LEED AP President

ALA Welcomes New Members - Winter 2012 Professional Members Mr. Kinman Auyeung, ALA Mr. Donald Banas, ALA Ms. Jennifer Costanzo, ALA Mr. Scott Cowdrey, ALA Mr. Donald Dudrow, ALA Mr. Thomas Kleinheinz, ALA Mr. Timothy LeVaughn, ALA Mr. Stephen May, ALA Mr. William Morris, ALA Mr. Michael Pusich, ALA Mr. Brent Schipper, ALA Mr. Kirk Stevens, ALA Mr. James Toya, ALA Mr. Paul Turner, ALA Mr. George Vartzikos, ALA Ms. Heather Wogsland, ALA Mr. Thomas Zordan, ALA


Chicago, IL Hartland, WI Chicago, IL Springfield, IL Cincinnati, OH Belleville, WI Chicago, IL Herrin, IL Pleasant Prairie, WI Itasca, IL Des Moines, IA Chicago, IL Wilmette, IL Brentwood, MO Chicago, IL Menomonee Falls, WI Barrington, IL


Student Members Mr. Nicholas Casaleto Mr. Rob Fosness Mr. John Maher

Champaign, IL Wauconda, IL Barrington, IL

Senior Members Mr. Suber Bhabhrawala, ALA Roselle, IL Mr. David Gustafson, ALA Minneapolis, MN Affiliate Members Mr. Joe Dupree Mr. Neil Faulkner Ms. Amber Hitch Mr. Garrett Hovest Mr. Scott Niesen Mr. Thomas Ozzello Mr. A. J. Parrino Mr. Richard Serenda

Bella Citta Floors USP Structural Connectors LP Building Products Dupont Tyvek WaterFurnace Stone Design, Inc. Pergolas By Parrino Larson Engineering, Inc.



Your Code Questions Answered by Kelly P. Reynolds, ALA Code Consultant

Here is a compilation of code questions I have received from ALA members. They are sorted by disciplines: BUILDING & MEANS OF EGRESS. BUILDING ■ QUESTION? "We have two buildings on the same lot line. Each building has a different use group. How do we determine which use group to use for construction type, height and area limitations?" ANSWER: The exception in Section 705.3 of the 2009 International Building Code states that when such differences occur,"the area shall be that allowed for the most restrictive occupancy or construction". ■ QUESTION? "When does a carport become a garage?" ANSWER: Carports must be open on at least two sides. If not, then they are a garage (Section 406.1.3). ■ QUESTION? "Do conveyor systems require a permit?" ANSWER: Yes, a permit is required per Section 3005 of IBC. ■ QUESTION? "When designing for a high piled storage area, are additional aisles above the exit aisle requirements to be considered when calculating the floor area?" ANSWER: No, the additional aisles that are above those required by NFPA No. 13 (Fire Sprinkler Standard) are not included in the floor area calculation. Only those aisles separating racks and storage piles are included in the calculated floor area. ■ QUESTION? "Is an ATM within an enclosure considered a building?" ANSWER: This is a good one! I would considered it a U (Utility) use group. It does have electrical and possible mechanical equipment installed. This would not include an ATM that is weather protected by just an awning. ■ QUESTION? "We have a stand alone restroom building that has been classified as use group "U" (utility). Does that mean that we are exempt from providing the accessibility requirements in the code as stated in Section 1103.2.5 of the 2009 IBC?" ANSWER: No, you are not exempt. By placing an accessible appliance (toilet, sink, etc.) in the unit you have triggered the code handicapped requirements.

■ QUESTION? "What is the difference between a dormitory and an apartment?" ANSWER: An apartment has individual restroom, sleeping and cooking facilities. A dormitory instead has common restroom and common cooking facilities. ■ QUESTION? "Where does the 30-inch height parapet wall requirement come originate?" ANSWER: Section 705.11.1 of the IBC requires fire wall parapets to prevent the horizontal spread of fire from one building to another. The 30-in. requirement also provides a protective vertical barrier for firefighters to use as a heat and flame shield from the fire side of the building. ■ QUESTION? "Under the 2006 International Residential Code, what is the distance that HVAC equipment must have access in a crawl space?" ANSWER: Section M-1305.1.1 of the 2006 International Mechanical Code requires access to under floor (crawl space) HVAC equipment to be within 20-ft. of the access door or opening and large enough to remove the largest piece of equipment. There is an exception if the passageway is unobstructed and not less than 6-ft. high and 22-in. wide for the entire length, the passageway is not limited in length. ■ QUESTION? "Why does the National Electrical Code require canopy lights in gas stations to be a minimum of 15 feet above the ground surface?" ANSWER: The height requirement is based on the fact that if a heated bulb or lens breaks, by the time it falls within the ground level of the gasoline vapors, it will have cooled enough not to cause ignition. ■ QUESTION? "Is a public bathroom in a gas station or convenience store required to provide hot water at the lavatory sinks? In today’s economy, some business owners want to eliminate the cost of providing hot water." ANSWER: Yes, for hand sanitizing after restroom use, culinary uses and maintenance. Refer to Section P-607.1 of the International Plumbing Code. In today’s germaphobic society, everyone is concerned with preventing the spread of germs. (Continued on page 8)



CODECORNER (Continued from page 7)

■ QUESTION? "We have a building that requires fire rated columns to support the roof. The roof is more than 20 ft. above the floor level and therefore is not required to be rated. Can the column fire proofing stop at the 20 ft. level, or must it continue to the full height until it reaches the roof?"

MEANS OF EGRESS ■ QUESTION? "Does the International Building Code allow scissor stairs for exits?" ANSWER: Yes, but they count as only one exit stairway.

ANSWER: The fire rated column must extended it’s ratings until it connects to the roof. The fire-rating cannot stop at the 20 ft. level.

■ QUESTION? "Are access corridors required in buildings?" ANSWER: No, they are not required. If they are provided, then they must comply with the fire-ratings in Table 1018.1 of the IBC. A corridor is created if it limits the occupants movement or vision.

■ QUESTION? "We want to build a mezzanine in a Type 2-B building. Table 601 indicates that the floor construction rating is "zero". Therefore, can we use fire-retardant treated wood for this project?"

■ QUESTION? "Can an office space exit through a warehouse? Our client says No, because the warehouse is a higher hazard".

ANSWER: No, you cannot. Fire-retardant treated wood is considered combustible and therefore not permitted in that construction type. However, you could use this material in Types 3, 4 and 5 buildings. ■ QUESTION? "What is the difference between a code and a standard?" ANSWER: The Code sets the minimum requirements and the referenced Standard is the guideline for compliance. The Standard is not enforceable by itself without the authority of the Code.

ANSWER: Another use group cannot exit through a High Hazard (H use group), not a higher hazard. The condition you presented is acceptable (Section 1014.2.1). The code now permits H uses groups to exit into other H use groups. ■ QUESTION? "Do walking surfaces for slip-resistance of the means of egress apply to the exit discharge?" ANSWER: Yes, the means of egress is comprised of the exit, exit access and exit discharge. Therefore, the exit discharge must comply with the slip-resistance requirements of the code. ■ QUESTION? "Where in the 2006 IBC did they move the requirement for protecting exit discharges from snow and ice accumulation?" ANSWER: The requirement has been transferred to Section F1028 of the 2006 International Fire Code. ■ QUESTION? "Where in the code does it prohibit guard rails from having horizontal members that can create a ladder effect?" ANSWER: That requirement does not exist in the current IBC. It was a requirement in one of the legacy codes (BOCA). It was removed because no one could define "non-climbable". ■ QUESTION? "Can a mechanical equipment room open into an exterior stairway?" ANSWER: No. The stairway, whether interior or exterior, must meet the same requirements of no equipment openings permitted. (Section 1026.6) ■ QUESTION? "Can an exit passageway be used as a path of entry into a building?" ANSWER: Yes it can. The exit passageway is an exit component that is separated from all other interior spaces of a building by firerated construction and protective openings (fire doors, windows, etc.). It provides a protected path of travel in a horizontal direction to the exit discharge or public way. It is treated just like a stairway enclosure and limited to what can open into it.

As a member of ALA you can contact Kelly P. Reynolds anytime with your code question at 1-800-950-2633 or codexperts@aol.com.




Association of Licensed Architects

Join now and become a member of a dynamic growing organization of architects ALA (The Association of Licensed Architects) is an organization open to all architects and professions related to architecture. It represents architects registered or licensed in any state, territory or possession of the United States, and foreign countries. ALA was founded in 1999 by a group of architects who formerly served as Board Members of other Architects’ Associations. Later that year, ALA was joined by ISA (Illinois Society of Architects), the oldest independent state organization in the country, which brought valued expertise and historic significance to the Association. ALA has experienced rapid growth, continues to maintain affordable dues and publishes a professional magazine for its members. ALA’s mission is to advance the Architectural Profession through education and by supporting and improving the profession’s role in the built environment. ALA’s vision is to positively impact the Architectural Profession through the power of organization. Its purpose is to unite, educate, promote, and advance the Architectural Profession and address critical issues confronting it. ALA will support the efforts of other Associations, when combined efforts will produce benefits for all. ALA will work and speak for members of the Architectural Profession and improve communication with the community through programs offering information, education and cooperation. It proposes to advance and contribute to the health, safety and welfare of the general public and believes in stimulating and encouraging continuing education plus the advancement of the art and science of architecture.

What ALA can do for YOU!

BENEFITS FOR MEMBERS: Professional, Senior & Emeritus Members • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

Professional Designation Project Referral Legislative Monitoring Continuing Education Programs at Reduced Rates Quarterly Magazine – “Licensed Architect” Hot Lines: Legal, Code, Insurance, and ADA 2011 Short Form Electronic Contracts Membership Wall Certificate Job Posting Mediation Annual Design Awards Program Student Merit Awards IDP Assistance Networking with Affiliate and Professional Members Online Member and Resource Directory Annual Conference and Product Show Logging of ALA Program Hours Volunteer Opportunities Voting Privileges

Associate, Student, Honorary & New Graduate Members Same as professional members with the exception of voting privileges, professional designation & short form electronic contracts.

Affiliate Members • Same as professional members with the exception of voting privileges and professional designation plus... • Networking with Professionals • Special Member Rates at Annual Conference and Product Show • Sponsorship Opportunities • New! Buyer’s Guide Listing in June issue of Licensed Architect

ALA’s motto is:

“Architects united to advance the Profession of Architecture”


Involvement is an Investment in your Future! Share Experiences, Write an Article, Publish Design Work, Serve on a Task Force







Collective strength provides a wellspring of knowledge



What the Association of Licensed Architects can do for YOU! ALA will provide you with:

JOIN NOW Reap the Benefits! SUPPORT your PROFESSION!

• • • • •

Information Education Research Networking Referral Service

Please complete the application below and mail with your tax deductible check made out to ALA, One East Northwest Highway, Suite 200, Palatine, IL 60067 For information call 847-382-0630 or E-mail: ALA@alatoday.org Registration is also available on-line at www.alatoday.org

2013 ALA Membership Application One East Northwest Highway, Suite 200, Palatine, IL 60067 (1) Full Name

(Please print)



(2) Current Professional Status: ■ Partner/Principal

■ Firm Architect

M.I. ■ Academic ■ Other

(3) Information for Association records (Please check ONE box for desired mailing address): ■ Office ■ Residence Firm name



City / State / Zip

City / State / Zip


E-mail Address

E-mail Address

Phone: (


Fax: (


(4) States of Licensure


License No.

(5) Project types: (6) Number of employees in firm/corporation: (7) Current Membership in other Professional Organizations: (8) Referred by: (9) ALA Membership Category Applying For: Make Check payable to ALA

■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ Signature of Applicant


PROFESSIONAL - Licensed architects = $150.00 SENIOR - Licensed architect 65 or over = $65.00 AFFILIATE - Industry or related professionals = $250.00 ASSOCIATE - Architecture degree/non-licensed = $65.00 STUDENT - Full time/Architecture Schools = $25.00 International Members - add $40.00 dollars for postage NEW GRADUATE - 1 year free membership with Professional degree. Please provide a copy of your diploma with this application. Date All dues may be deducted as a business expense but not as a charitable contribution.



The "Really?" Awards by Robert Stanton, Willis A&E

The calendar indicates it’s getting near that time of year…yes, it’s awards season. Tis the season to start watching any number of awards shows for entertainers and athletes. However, it’s also time for recognition of some of the fine design work taking place in the Architect and Engineering community. I say both because Architects and Engineers must work hand-in-hand to create some of the stunningly magnificent designs which grace our skylines and neighborhoods.


he American Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences (AMPAS) has its Academy Awards (aka: Oscars). The Entertainment Sports Programming Network (ESPN) has their ESPY Award (short for Excellence in Sports Performance Yearly Award). However, AMPAS has their counterpart called the Razzies, which awards the worst movies of the year. ESPN also has their Sports Bloopers Award. While those of us in risk management have found that most claims asserted against design professionals are based on failure to meet the client’s expectations, there are those claims in which the designer actually errs in the design of a project. Few and far between they are, but alas, we must admit they happen. And…lest we forget, for every dollar spent in the defense and settlement of design claims, eighty cents is for failure to properly document. The Association of Licensed Architects is bestowing awards upon some deserving design brethren for outstanding design work. In fact, this issue features the winning designs from this year’s competition. It only seems fitting that we also recognize those who have not quite hit the awards dais for their accomplishments. Actually, they probably aren’t even in theater. So…without further ado, here are the "Really?" Awards.

hither and yon until the engineer pulled up in front of a house and proclaimed, "This one looks familiar." Before heading up to the door, the adjuster read through the engineer’s file. It did not take long since there was only one page, a hand-draw sketch with a couple calculations on it. No contract, no letter agreement, no name, address or phone number of the client.

The "Where was that project anyway?" Award: A structural architect was retained to perform an analysis of an old house in an exclusive suburb. He performed the work and deemed the house was structurally sound. When problems arose, the owner filed a claim against structural engineer for failure to properly analyze the house. The intrepid claims adjuster boldly requested, "Can you give me the address of the house? I’d like to schedule an inspection by our expert." "I don’t know the address," the engineer replied, "but I’ll remember it when I see it." The adjuster met with the engineer near the neighborhood and followed him

The "I Can’t Let You Off At That Floor" Award: Retained to design an office building, the architect completed his plans and submitted them for permitting approval. Obtaining the permit, work commenced and was going along well until when one day the contractor called and advised, "You might want to get out here as soon as possible." Upon his arrival, the architect noted the contractor was on schedule, and only the finishes needed to be installed before they could begin the punch-list process…or so it seemed. He turned to the contractor and asked, "What’s the problem?" The contractor walked him over to the elevator banks where he



The "Matchbox" Award: Retained by a large developer to design a ten-plus story office building with underground parking, the architect was thrilled to have landed what was truly a choice project. Once the permit was obtained, work commenced, starting with excavation and foundation work. When site preparation was complete and the foundation poured for the underground garage, the architect visited the site and noted progress to the owner. The following week, the construction superintendent called and advised, "We have a problem. You might want to come out here." The architect arrived at the site and asked, "What’s wrong?" The contractor showed him that the clearance for the entrance ramp to the subterranean parking garage was under three feet high. The question is, "Even if the design was bad, shouldn’t the contractor have noticed the opening to the underground garage wouldn’t allow for vehicles much larger than Matchbox Cars?"

noted the control buttons, but no elevator doors. The architect asked, "Um, where are the doors?" Hitting the button, the contractor advised, "Facing the side wall." The elevators were installed at a ninety degree angle from the lobby and faced the side wall of the elevator bank. Our stunned architect asked, "And why are the elevators opening to a wall instead of into the lobby?" The contractor pulled out the drawings and pointed to the elevator bank on the plans, "Cuz that’s how you drew it." The "Do As I Say And Not As I Do" Award: Retained to design two multi-story condominium buildings, the architect prepared his designs which were permitted for construction. Construction went along without a hitch and the project was completed relatively on time and on budget. The owner was thrilled with the outcome. A year later the owner called and indicated he had received a Notice of Non-Compliance from the Department of Justice for failure to meet the FHAA standards for multi-family dwellings for the project in question. An FHAA compliance expert was retained by the architect’s insurance carrier who conducted a review of the plans and specifications. The expert’s findings were that there were significant shortcomings in the designs. There were inadequate clearances in the kitchens and bathrooms, and the doorways were too narrow. The bottom line of the expert was that the architect did not even consider FHAA requirements when designing the building.

When the architect reviewed the findings, he gasped, "I can’t believe it. I’m actually the FHAA compliance consultant for other architects in the area. I never even considered the FHAA requirements when I designed the buildings." The "I Love It, But…" Award: "I want you to design me a house where I can really feel at home," the customer requested when speaking to the architect. "I’m sure you will love what we have to offer," the architect replied. The custom home was going to be one of the first houses constructed in a new, exclusive suburb. The owner loved the architect’s designs and enthusiastically gave him the green light to proceed before leaving the country on an extended vacation. When the project was completed, the owner returned to see the finished product. He arrived and was thrilled with the insured’s design. He declared, "It’s exactly what I wanted. I love it, but…" The architect picked up on his "but" and asked, "But what?" The owner looked confused, "Why did you build it on this lot? I bought the one next door."

Willis A&E has been the leading broker specializing exclusively in Architects and Engineers risk management and insurance for over 30 years. For additional information, please call (877) 272-9817 or visit us at www.WillisAE.com.




Disaster Mitigation

We Gotta Get Out of This Place Disaster Preparedness in the Codes by Kimberly Paarlberg, RA, Staff Architect, ICC The Animals first sang "We Gotta Get Out of This Place" back in 1965. Rolling Stone magazine named it one of the greatest 500 songs of all time. While everyone loves the blues guitar riffs, it also may be something that pops into one’s head when thinking about evacuations. Mention evacuation and many people think first about getting out of a building during a fire. While that does apply, there are other disasters that need to be considered: floods, storms with high winds (including hurricanes and tornadoes), wildfires, earthquakes and tsunamis, just to name a few. Building and fire safety codes can greatly help mitigate the effects of a disaster. However, codes and regulations are not effective in isolation. Communities and individuals are a major part of the equation. They can decrease the impact of a disaster by taking steps to prepare before the event occurs. That way, they can address what will happen during the emergency, as well as recovery issues — getting people back in their homes, back to work and the community viable again.

What Is in the Codes? Buildings designed and constructed to reduce the impact of disaster also will help speed a community’s recovery. The adoption and enforcement of codes in your community can be an important part of preparation and recovery. The codes help to mitigate disasters in many ways by providing requirements for construction based on anticipated risk.

Fire and Lock-Down Planning for an emergency is the best defense. The International Fire Code® (IFC) requires many buildings to have fire and safety evacuation plans for emergencies. In addition, many types of buildings have evacuation and lock-down plans for other types of emergencies. These plans are developed in cooperation between the fire department and the building owners/renters. These plans are required to be reviewed annually or when necessitated by changes to the layout or occupants of the building. These plans must include all occupants, including everyone who may have any mobility issues where they might need assistance in evacuation. And there are requirements to practice these evacuations and provide informational signage so everyone will know how to evacuate safely. The taller the building, the higher the percentage of people who will need assistance. In addition to the persons using mobility devices, there are persons with other physical problems (i.e., asthma, heart issues, arthritis, sprained ankle, pregnancy) who would make moving down multiple levels very difficult, if not impossible. This is where the require-ments in the



Informational signage assists building occupants in evacuating safely and easily.

International Building Code® (IBC) Chapter 30 for fire service access elevators and occupant evacuation elevators can be a valuable aid during evacuations. The United Spinal Association has a great brochure on this topic, called Fire Safety for Wheelchair Users.

Floods Floods are the most expensive natural disasters in terms of lives, money and duration. Several of the International Code books include provisions for floodresistant construction for both new buildings and reconstruction after a flood. This includes mitigation measures, such as elevating living spaces above the anticipated flood levels, using water-resistant materials, designing for water infiltration and designing for flood loads from water, waves and debris. Additional technical information is referenced in Hurricane Katrina caused mass flooding across much of New Orleans. the ASCE 24, Flood Resistant Design and Construction. By adoption of IBC Appendix G, Flood-Resistant Construction, a jurisdiction can fulfill the floodplain management and admini-stration requirements for the

National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP).The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) continues to work with the International Code Council (ICC) to coordinate the building code requirements with federal requirements. FEMA and the ADA technical assistance centers also are hosting Emergency Management and Preparedness — Inclusion of Persons with Disabilities, a series of webinars.

Storm Shelters Storm shelters offer protection during high-wind events, such as tornadoes and hurricanes. ICC 500, ICC/ NSSA Standard on the Design and Construction of Storm Shelters, provides design, construction and performance regulations for community shelters and residential safe rooms that can protect people during a highwind event. This standard includes information on wind loading and size requirements based on the location and anticipated users. ICC worked with the National Storm Shelter Association (NSSA) and FEMA to develop these requirements.

High Winds

wildfires, as well as the spreading of building fires to surrounding vegetation. The extent of these regulations is intended to be tiered relative to the level of hazard present.

Earthquakes Earthquakes come with no warning, destroying buildings and endangering lives in and around those buildings. To reduce the likelihood of people being hurt due to building failure during an earthquake, the IBC includes requirements for buildings erected in areas subject to earthquakes. The IBC establishes the likelihood of a severe earthquake at a site and assigns a seismic design category based on this likelihood, the type of soil at the building site and the type of occupancy. The IBC references ASCE 7 for building design and construction requirements related to seismic loading. Structural design for buildings subject to seismic events must consider building movements, as well as strength. Buildings assigned to higher seismic design categories are subject to more requirements and limitations than those assigned to lower seismic design categories.

Tsunamis Earthquakes can result in tsunamis that affect areas far removed from the original earthquake sites. IBC Appendix M, TsunamiGenerated Flood Hazard, allows the adoption and enforcement of requirements for tsunami hazard zones that regulate the presence of high-risk or high-hazard structures in those zones. Using building codes specific for tsunami risk for all types of construction in a tsunami hazard zone would not be cost effective, making tsunamiresistant construction impractical at an individual building level.

Additional Resources The high winds and debris associated with hurricanes can be devastating.

The high winds and debris that come with hurri- canes and other storms can be devastating. The I-Codes include provisions for structures located in hurricane and other high-wind areas. In addition, ICC 600, Standard for Residential Construction in High Wind Regions, specifies prescriptive methodologies of windresistant design and construction details for residential buildings sited in high-wind regions.

Wildfires Wildfires are uncontrolled fires that spread through forests, scrubs and fields that also can consume homes and neighborhoods. Wildfires are becoming increasingly more common and extensive in the Western United States. The International WildlandUrban Interface Code® (IWUIC) provides regulations for mitigating the hazards of wildfires in Wildfires, which have become increasingly areas where structures and more common, are regulated by the IWUIC. other human development meets or intermingles with wildlands. IWUIC requirements are based on data collected from tests and fire incidents, technical reports and mitigation strategies from around the world. The objective of this code is to establish minimum regulations consistent with nationally recognized good practice for safe-guarding life and property. Regulations in this code are intended to mitigate the risk to life and structures from

As mentioned at the beginning of this article, communities and individuals are a major part of the equation for disaster preparedness. Planning to limit the effects of disaster is crucial. Organizations, such as the Red Cross, FEMA and the National Organization on Disabilities (NOD), include information on their websites for preparing for an emergency. All recommend that everyone should have a Ready Kit that allows you to make it a couple of days on your own, and a Go Kit that has immediate necessities if you need to leave your home. See each website for recommendations based on different disabilities. NOD has information on emergency planning on its website. The Red Cross, in cooperation with FEMA, also has helpful information.

Lessons Learned Be prepared. Know your plan. Practice your plan. Determine what worked, what could have been better and revise the plan as needed. In case of emergency, we want everyone to get out safely. This article originally appeared in the October 2012 issue of the Building Safety Journal Online, copyright International Code Council, and is reprinted with permission.

TEE JAY SERVICE COMPANY PEDESTRIAN DOOR EQUIPMENT AND SERVICE • Automatic Swing Door Operation • Automatic Sliding Doors • ICU/CCU Manual Sliding Doors • Automatic Revolving Doors • Automatic Windows http://www.TeeJayDoors.com E-Mail: TSafran@TeeJayDoors.com

951 N. Raddant Road Batavia, IL 60510 Phone (800) 654-6144 Fax (630) 406-1456

HORTON AUTOMATICS AUTHORIZED DISTRIBUTOR (Northern Illinois and Northwestern Indiana)




Legal Issues Arising Out of Green Design and Construction

by Shawn E. Goodman, Sabo & Zahn, Attorneys at Law


overnmental bodies have tried to incentivize so-called “green” design and construction. Governmental projects in particular often carry required green standards. Private projects, on the other hand, are tending to at least be nudged “green” through tax or contract-related benefits. Those who tout green building tend to promote what they assert are cost savings arising out of green features or, at a minimum, the marketing and promotion available for a property which reaches a level of green certification. Predictably, green design and construction has lead to some litigation. While the actual volume of cases has not yet been as high as some might have predicted, there already is a small, burgeoning body of law being developed, and the future will bring more, not less, such cases. This article will provide a summary of some of those matters as they relate to certain parties in the construction process. Many of the issues which have arisen have to do with certification of buildings as meeting the standards set by an independent organization, the United States Green Building Council (“USGBC”). That organization promulgated what it calls its “Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design” (“LEED”) rating system which includes four certification levels: Certified, Silver, Gold and Platinum. In order to reach each certification level, certain, specific requirements must be met and a certain number of possible points must be accumulated. Factors which go to determine whether a building or project is able to achieve one LEED certification level or another include the skill of the project contractors, the nature and extent of the documentation in support, and the materials and design, respectively. There are several LEED rating systems related to the type of construction or structure. There are also other green rating systems, e.g., the Environmental Protection Agency’s Energy Star program and the Green Building Initiative’s Green Globes, respectively. Although the rating systems were originally set by independent organizations, many of their standards have been incorporated into building codes or otherwise been adopted by agencies of government, including at the local, state and federal levels. Illinois, for example, has a Green Buildings Act. California



has what it calls “California’s Green Building Standards Code” (“CALGreen”) which was enacted last year. Indeed, a new International Green Construction Code just came out in March 2012. Green buildings, of course, are favored for non-monetary, i.e., environmental, reasons. Nevertheless, when a project does not include certain green features, or if it does not meet a certain level of certification, adverse financial implications can result, e.g., lost development, or tax, incentives. While not overwhelming in number, some of those LEED-related cases which have been filed give a sense of the kinds of liability which can be posed to the various involved parties. Southern Builders v. Shaw Dev., No. 19-C-07-11405 (Md. Cir. Ct. 2007), was the first piece of green construction litigation between private parties. The project encountered significant delays in general. When it did not timely receive LEED certification, the owner did not obtain tax credits. Maryland offered such credits to LEED-certified projects. To qualify for the tax credit, the builder was required to file an application which could result in certification of the final construction. When the builder recorded a mechanics lien claim and tried to obtain allegedly due and owing amounts, the developer counterclaimed for some $635,000.00, asserting that the building was to have, but did not achieve, a certain LEED certification. The matter eventually reached settlement on terms that have not been disclosed, so technically there was no prevailing party. However, just based on what was filed, it was clear that the parties did not clearly communicate by their contract an express understanding of the significance of LEED certification for financial purposes, or which party would bear the risk in the event such certification was not met. They did not do so even though a requirement to construct to a LEED Silver level was included in both the project specifications and the scope of work which accompanied the contract. Representations that a certain level of green certification will be accomplished can serve as the basis for a fraud action. For example, in Keefe v. Base Village Owner, LLC, No. 2009 CV 273 (Colo. Dist. Ct. 2009), sixty-one condominium unit buyers sued the developer, based in part on the marketing of the building which included statements that it would be LEED-certified and

would be part of a LEED-certified neighborhood. The purchasers specifically alleged that neither of these turned out to be the case. They rescinded their respective purchase contracts and sought the return of their deposits as well as damages arising out of alleged violations of the Colorado Consumer Protection Act and the Interstate Land Sales Full Disclosure Act (“ILSA”), respectively, and also tort claims for fraud and misrepresentation. The litigation was ultimately resolved on different grounds, with the court holding in 2011 that the developer did violate the ILSA when it sold the units with false statements concerning the square footages of the respective condominiums, which statements were filed with the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development. Nevertheless, the Keefe case helps shine a light on the kinds of risks a party can face when it promises the achieving of LEED certification, but then fails to deliver. Furthermore, this risk can extend to green building consultants. Owners increasingly are recommending particular LEEDaccredited professionals to, for example, assist the architect when it comes to obtaining LEED certification. Consultants such as these will usually recommend specific systems and materials. If this, in turn, leads to construction quality issues, delays, or increased costs, the party which actually hired the consultant may itself be held liable, e.g., for claims of additional compensation put forward by the contractor. Of course, if directly retained by the owner, the actions of the consultant could possibly also serve as a defense to owner-initiated causes. Oftentimes, disputes break out towards the end of a project, related to the release of retainage funds upon completion. Considering that the LEED certification process can go on for an extended period, and well exceed the end of construction, the chances of conflict breaking out are even greater. This is all the more reason to make certain, at the outset, that all parties have a good understanding of not only the project goals, but their timing. Bidding is another area in which green construction, and LEED certification in particular, has lead to some litigation. In Burchick Constr. Co. v. Pa. State Syst. of Higher Educ., 2010 Pa. Commw. Unpub. LEXIS 749 (Pa. Commw. Ct. Nov. 3, 2010), a general contractor challenged the rejection of its protest when a public university took bids not in compliance with standard bidding procedures. Pennsylvania law requires sealed, competitive bidding unless such a practice is not advantageous or otherwise not practicable for the government. Also, if standard operating procedure is not to be followed, the governmental official must indicate with some specificity why sealed bidding was deemed not appropriate. Burchick submitted a bid protest, asserting that the university should have been required to use sealed bids. The university justified its decision to deviate from standard bidding practices due to the desire to obtain LEED certification which, further according to the university, required the cooperation and coordination of the prime contractors and an alternative procurement procedure. After the university denied the protest, Burchick filed an appeal and won, the court holding that the officer’s explanation did not sufficiently explain why, despite the LEED-related project aspects, sealed bids would be impracticable. By way of contrast, Hampton Techs. v. Dept. of Gen. Servs, 22 A.3d 238 (Pa. 2011) was a case in which another disappointed bidder protested, this time alleging that the

consideration by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania of the winning bidder’s LEED project experience was not appropriate because such a factor was not spelled out amongst the selection criteria in the RFP for the $20 million electrical portion of a public project in Philadelphia. The challenging bidder asserted that considering this factor was arbitrary and capricious. The protest failed and the bidder, in turn, filed suit to stay the award. However, the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania upheld the denial of the protest, pointing out that experience on LEED projects was indeed mentioned in the RFP. When it comes to design professionals themselves, green issues are probably even more likely to arise. Architects now commonly advise their clients when it comes to sustainable design features and green building in general. AIA contracts, e.g., AIA Document B101 - 2007, §§ 3.2.3, (2007), include clauses which require the designer to take into account and present green building options. Obviously, cost-benefit tradeoffs come into play whenever an owner is considering green building elements or certifications. Again, some standard form contracts, e.g., AIA B214, now allow for additional specificity, via contract addendum, when it comes to green project services. Green design work raises the potential for expanding the scope of the architect’s liability beyond its ordinary bounds. Actually getting a project LEED-certified is not entirely within the control of the architect. That, in and of itself, however, will not prevent a damaged party from attempting to hold the architect liable for a failure to obtain, or timely obtain, LEED certification. The Illinois case of Bain v. Vertex Architects, No. 2010 L 012695 (Ill. Cir. Ct. 2010), provides an early glimpse into the kinds of legal pitfalls which green architecture can present. In Bain, a homeowner in Cook County brought suit against an architect. The plaintiff’s cause of action for breach of contract alleged, among other violations, the failure to pursue and actually, successfully secure LEED certification for a farm house renovation. The contract in question included, as a project objective, the creation of “a sustainable green modern singlefamily home.” The case was dismissed in March 2012, presumably pursuant to a settlement. Again, the terms are unknown. The cases discussed above are in all likelihood just the proverbial tip of the iceberg. The amount of green litigation will only increase as contractors, owners and design professionals encounter ever greater efficiency and sustainability demands. The caselaw in this area is only just beginning to develop. This is all the more reason for those involved in green construction to make sure that their contract documents are carefully drafted. The Southern Builders case and the Bain case, in particular, really demonstrate how essential it is to clearly set forth, and reach consensus on, the parties’ expectations, at the outset of the project, and also the problems which can pop up when it comes to trying to determine responsibility for not getting LEED certification. The place to address all of this is right up front, in the contract. The time to address all of this is right up front, before the rendering of services. Shawn E. Goodman • SABO & ZAHN, LLC 401 North Michigan Ave. • Suite 2050 • Chicago, Illinois 60611 (312) 655-8620 • Fax: (312) 655-8622 Website: www.sabozahn.com • Email: sgoodman@sabozahn.com LICENSED ARCHITECT • VOL 16 NO. 4 • WINTER 2012




2012 Design Award Program On September 28, 2012 five well-respected architects studied every entry and selected the winning projects for the 2012 ALA Design Award Program. Out of 90 entries, 18 projects were awarded an Award of Merit, 9 projects were awarded a Silver Medal, and 5 projects a Gold Medal, with the top honor being the Don Erickson Presidential Award. Projects were entered in eight categories: Residential I, Residential II, Commercial/Industrial, Interior Architecture, Institutional, Religious, Renovation and Unbuilt Design. Each entry was judged on its own merit based on: Program Solution, Site and Space Planning, Overall Design Solution and Construction System and Details. LeRoy B. Herbst III, FALA of L.B. Herbst & Associates served as jury chairperson. Rich Barnes, ALA of Barnes Architects, Ltd. and Matthew Kramer, ALA of MKA Design Studio were assistant chairpersons. ALA would like to thank the Design Award Banquet Sponsors: • Andersen Windows • Euclid Insurance Agencies, a USI Company & a/e ProNet • IMAGINiT Technologies • Marvin Windows and Doors

• Moen/Creative Specialties Int’l

ALA wishes to thank the following judges for their hours of volunteer time and their dedication to the program and profession.

Daniel P. Coffey, FAIA Daniel Coffey is Chairman and CEO of Daniel P. Coffey & Associates, Ltd., a leading architectural firm with specialty in Adaptive Re-Use, Mixed Use, Performing Arts and Preservation, founded in 1984. The firm is a Chicago Firm of the Year (2004) - American Institute of Architecture. A graduate of the Harvard University Graduate School of Design, Mr. Coffey did his undergraduate work at the University of Illinois-Champaign. He has been a Crain's Chicago Business Who's Who for the past 18 years, and with Barack Obama was a 40 under 40 leader in 1994. Ernst & Young has named him an Entrepreneur of the Year for the atypical design practice he has built which has always included services well beyond traditional architecture. Noted was his pre-development activity on many notable Chicago area projects, several of them Urban Land Institute Honor award winners. Mr. Coffey is also Chairman and Founder of Sustainable Cities Development Company, LLC and has recently patented an innovative wind turbine for large scale urban wind generated power through his Coffeymille, LLC, a Wind Power Company.

Mark Nevenhoven, AIA Mark Nevenhoven has 27 years of architectural and construction experience. Mark has lead INVISION - Des Moines for nearly ten years as partner and his experience has proven to provide an invaluable perspective for INVISION’s team. The combination of his background and leadership style has fostered firm growth, from eight to 25, and regional recognition of the firm’s work. Mark’s approach to projects is on both the macro level as he participates in the overall planning and programming, to the micro level of detailing. The character of his work is concentrated on space; composing flow and light in the purest and most simplistic way.

David F. Schultz ALA, AIA, NCARB, IFRAA David Schulz is a graduate of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. David is the founding principal and CEO since 1986 of David F. Schultz Associates, Ltd. in Barrington, IL. The firm has a general practice with a specialty in the design of churches, schools and other facilities for church-based ministries. The firm is the recipient of numerous international, national and regional design awards, including four ALA awards in 2006 and has been published in over 30 books and journals. Mr. Schultz serves as a jurist and lecturer for the Judson University School of Architecture.

Melanie B. Soos, FALA Melanie Soos is the Co-Founder and Principal of Soos & Associates and serves as the firm’s chief designer with responsibilities for building and zoning issues with heavy concentration on due diligence, compliance and new business development. Soos & Associates Inc., founded in 1993, provides a broad and expanding range of services which include corporate, retail, and Federal Government. Soos attended Illinois Institute of Technology (IIT) earning a Bachelor of Architecture with a minor in city and regional planning. Melanie is a licensed architect in 12 states, served as Vice President for ALA, holds NCARB registration, is a member of S.A.M.E. – Society of American Military Engineers, Great Lakes Region and was an Adjunct Professor at IIT. Melanie is also Vice President and co-founder of Legend + White Animal Health, Corp.

Dan Wheeler, FAIA Dan Wheeler is a principal of Wheeler Kearns Architects and a Professor of Architecture at the University of Illinois at Chicago. He has served as Interim Director for the UIC School of Architecture and the Graham Foundation for the Advanced Studies in the Fine Arts, and has been a collaborator with Auburn University’s Rural Studio for the past ten years. A graduate of RISD, he worked in the early studio of Machado Silvetti in Boston. Prior to founding WKA in 1987, he was a Studio Head/Associate at Skidmore, Owings, and Merrill in Chicago.



Photo: James Steinkamp

Don Erickson Presidential Award Patterson Technology Center, Effingham, IL Category: Commercial Firm: DLR Group; Steve Cavanaugh, ALA Contractor: S.M. Wilson Patterson Technology Center is a 98,000SF office building for a company that provides equipment and software solutions for the health care industry. The project is currently under review by the USGBC and tracking LEED Silver certification. The project features a unique, ecologically restorative landscaping concept, and a high performance rain screen façade.



Photo: Christoper Barrett Photography

Gold Award DuPage AME Church Chapel and Administration Wing, Lisle, IL Category: Religious Firm: Harding Partners Contractor: Moreton Construction Company The new DuPage A.M.E. Chapel and Administration Wing support the Church’s mission to engage the community while enhancing the worship experience of the growing congregation. The program includes a Children’s Church, Chapel, Classrooms, Offices and Fellowship room. The project supports the growing congregation through a delicate balance between the character of the existing building, the attributes of the site, and the welcoming nature of the Church.



Photo: JGMA

Gold Award UNO Soccer Academy, Chicago, IL Category: Institutional Firm: JGMA Contractor: Ghafari Associates This highly innovative design turns a conventional school inside out. By locating the corridors along the largely glass perimeter, while framing classroom spaces with glass walls, the design dramatically increases daylight and views inside the classrooms. Furthermore, this arrangement provides increased teaching surfaces, and a heightened sense of community connectivity.



Photo: Michael Robinson

Gold Award Streibich Residence, New Buffalo, MI Category: Residential 1 Firm: Morgante Wilson Architects, Ltd. Contractor: Ted & Son Construction This vacation home was designed to embrace the dramatic lake setting. A smooth curve is used in the home’s beach elevation to provide a stunning lake view from all interior rooms. The curved exterior is transferred to the open floor plan through a dynamic play of curves on floors, walls and soffits.



Photo: John Faier

Gold Award The Universe: A Walk Through Space & Time, Chicago, IL Category: Interior Architecture Firm: Muller + Muller, Ltd.; David Steele Contractor: Troop Contracting, Inc. The Universe: A Journey Through Space and Time takes visitors back 13.7 billion years to the beginning of the universe. Visitors embark on a journey through how stars, planets, galaxies, and even the atoms in your body all came to be. The gallery features multi-media interactive displays that get users of all ages engaged with the wonders of our universe.



Photo: Malgorzata Czerniejewski

Gold Award Rashkow Residence, Highland Park, IL Category: Religious Firm: Bugaj Architects; Anna Bugaj, ALA Contractor: Fettner Development & Construction Company Tucked away on an EDGE of local prairie, the structure reflects HORIZONTALITY of surrounding environment. Strong movements of deep overhangs, appearance of multi-levels and earthy colors inconspicuously blend into the environment. Usage of transparent, soft and hard materials; strengthens the idea of an EDGE, of modern ideology within natural landscape.



Silver Award Terry Trueblood Boathouse, Iowa City, IA Category: Commercial Firm: ASK Studio Brent Schipper; ALA Contractor: Tricon Construction Group Situated on the edge of a lake, the structure serves as a public park structure and functions as the park’s marina. It is an exercise in expressing simplicity through a sophisticated assemblage and allowing a structure to be understood in a common language and more deeply understood through a dialect.

Photo: Bruce Van Inwegen

Silver Award Hanover Park Police Headquarters, Hanover Park, IL Category: Institutional Firm: Dewberry; Brian Meade, ALA Contractor: Leopardo Construction The state of the art Hanover Park Police Headquarters triples the size of their previous facility and accommodates all police department needs. The building’s exterior relates to the context of the adjacent municipal campus, while the transparent public entry and corner community room create an inviting, light filled beacon of safety for the community.

Photo: Mariusz Mizern



Silver Award Parker Hannifin, Elk Grove Village, IL Category: Renovation Firm: Heitman Architects; Karl Heitman, ALA Contractor: Peak Construction Bold design revitalizes this 30 year old industrial building into a “world class” research and product development facility, with high client visibility. Extensive use of glass transparently integrates engineering, sales and shop functions and infuses natural light into a high quality work environment.

Photo: Mark Ballogg

Silver Award Edgebrook Lutheran Church, Chicago, IL Category: Renovation Firm: Jaeger, Nickola & Associates, Ltd. Contractor: Bulley & Andrews, LLC After suffering a major fire, the sanctuary was restored in the spirit of the original design, with new glue-laminated arches, elaborate stenciling, terrazzo flooring and a modified chancel design integrating new organ pipes and a salvaged Last Supper carving. The scope also included a new access stair, elevator and MEPFP systems.

Photo: Douglas E. Lasch

Silver Award Our Lady of the Most Holy Trinity Chapel, Santa Paula, CA Category: Religious Firm: Duncan G. Stroik Architect, LLC and Rasmussen & Assoc.; Duncan G. Stroik, ALA Contractor: HMH Construction Co. Inc. The design for the Chapel of Our Lady of the Most Holy Trinity is inspired by churches of Southern California as well as the broader Catholic tradition and features a carved limestone façade, a 135 foot bell tower, monolithic Botticino marble columns and a cast bronze baldacchino.

Photo: schafphoto.com



Silver Award Thermos Headquarters, Schaumburg, IL Category: Interior Architecture Firm: Torchia, a NELSON Company; Theresa Williams Contractor: Leopardo Companies This iconic manufacturer of lunchboxes and beverage containers has been a part of growing up for generations. Its new headquarters highlights the aesthetics of products known more for their utility. At the same time, it gives employees a highly effective workplace where they can take pride in both the form and function of their products. Photo: Jamie Padgett

Silver Award University of Southern Indiana Residence Life Community Center Addition, Evansville, IN Category: Institutional Firm: Three i Design Contractor: Lichtenberger Construction, Inc. The addition’s curved plan and exterior aesthetic creates a flowing pedestrian path to the building’s entrance and minimizes the invading feeling towards existing site elements. The limestone “slash” provides two design functions by visually reducing the tall wall height to a more human scale and inverts the building’s masonry banding. Photo: Three I Design

Silver Award Private Residence, Highland Park, IL Category: Residential 1 Firm: Fraerman Associates Architecture; Jim Fraerman, ALA Contractor: S/H Builders Nestled into a wooded lot, this residence offers easy flow between interior and exterior space, serving as both a recreational base and gathering place for the owner’s extended family. The open floor plan culminates in a tall family room with dramatic two-story windows which invite the outside in. Photo: Bruce Van Inwegen



Merit Award St. Mary of the Lake Catholic Church, New Buffalo, MI Category: Renovation Firm: ALDS Architecture and Design; Evan Leduc, ALA and Alex Adekambi Contractor: CPM Construction, Inc. St. Mary of the Lake required upgrades of all mechanical systems; necessary structural repairs; and enhancements of the liturgical spaces including: acoustics, seating, altar furnishings, devotional items and refurbishing of the stained glass windows. Done within a design concept that make the interior space better reflect the building’s original neo-classical exterior. Photo: Anthony Dugal Photography

Merit Award Iowa Prison Industries Showroom, Des Moines, IA Category: Commercial Firm: ASK Studio; Brent Schipper, ALA Contractor: Edge Commercial, LLC The structure serves as a wholesale showroom of products made by prisoners in the Iowa State Prison System. The unique challenge of this project was to design and build a building in six months with a budget of $85 per square foot that also is resistant to vandalism.

Photo: Cameron Campbell, Integrated Studio

Merit Award Elgin Community College Library, Elgin, IL Category: Institutional Firm: Dewberry; Michael Mackey Contractor: IHC Construction Companies, LLC The overarching concept for the Elgin Community College Library is at a fundamental level about connection. In addition to a requirement to link three campus buildings, we sought to create a spirited, environmentally conscious design to connect students with educational resources and peers while also promoting relationships to nature and art.

Photo: Dave Huh and Mark Ballard



Merit Award Engine Company 109: Chicago Fire Dept, Chicago, IL Category: Institutional Firm: DLR Group; Steve Cavanaugh, ALA Contractor: George Sollitt The Chicago Fire Department’s Engine Company 109 facility employs a geothermal well field in concert with a high-performance envelope and intelligent day lighting controls to achieve a remarkable 41% reduction in modeled energy use compared to the previous, LEED silver certified Engine Company 121 facility, built in 2009. Photo: Connor Steinkamp

Merit Award Michigan Technological University Great Lakes Research Center, Houghton, MI Category: Institutional Firm: Fishbeck, Thompson, Carr & Huber, Inc. Contractor: Granger Construction Company The new 54,800-sf, multi-story Great Lakes Research Center supports and enhances freshwater biological, chemical, and physical research; instruction; and outreach in waterrelated studies. With a prominent waterfront location connecting to Lake Superior, MTU is well-positioned to advance research into the Great Lakes.

Photo: Andrew Schwallier

Merit Award Private Residence, Grand Junction, CO Category: Residential 1 Firm: GMK Architecture, Inc. Jim Gempler, ALA - Architect; Dan Wolter - Project Architect Contractor: Lopez Construction and Design, Inc. Inspired by the rugged beauty of this Colorado high desert site, abstract rock forms link together with simple roof planes, to frame the stunning views in all directions. The natural beauty of this idyllic landscape is as much a part of this home, as the bold geometry of its architecture. Photo: Jim Gempeler



Merit Award 1801 W. Ohio, Chicago, IL Category: Residential 1 Firm: Hanna Architects, Inc. John Hanna, ALA; Tomasz Sokolowski Contractor: Denmax Wide open sunlit spaces, high ceilings, crisp detailing and economical construction characterize this comer postage stamp size city infill lot residence. Clad with stucco and wood, this house blends into the neighborhood while speaking its’ own mind. Photo: John Hanna

Merit Award Waubonsee Community College Plano Classroom Building, Plano, IL Category: Institutional Firm: Holabird & Root LLC; Rusty Walker Contractor: Turner Construction The Waubonsee Community College Plano Classroom Building was designed to create the experience of a traditional multibuilding campus within a singular building – a facility that would have its own identity while extending the mission and vision of the College to the surrounding community. Photo: Steinkamp Photography

Merit Award San Jose Obrero Mission, Chicago, IL Category: Unbuilt Firm: JGMA This project strives to break down the stereotypes afflicting homeless people and provide a “transitional" living facility to re-integrate themselves into society. The stereotypes associated with the homeless are typically derogatory. This project attempts change these perceptions by creating a series of programmatic elements including education, community, living, and play.

Merit Award Bill Jacobs BMW-MINI Automotive Facility, Naperville, IL Category: Commercial Firm: Lynn Bichler Architects; Lynn Bichler, ALA Contractor: Robert Breest The striking glass rotunda of the BMW showroom is held close to the street in a sensitive urban design showcasing the BMW and MINI automobiles in this state-of-the-art energy efficient facility. Photo: Eric Oxendorf



Merit Award Tripp Residence, Sawyer, MI Category: Residential 1 Firm: McCollum Architects; William McCollum, ALA Contractor: Hunt Construction A new owner's suite, screen porch and enclosing the swimming pool area were program requirements for this 100 year old, vintage farm house addition. The connecting link to the addition contains an intimate gallery and library with a window seat for a pleasant place to read a book. Photo: Agnes Donnadieu Photography

Merit Award Private Residence, Evanston, IL Category: Residential 1 Firm: Myefski Architects, Inc.; John Myesfski, ALA Contractor: S.J.Bacik Construction Company The design of this 2,000 square foot addition, completed in 2011, seamlessly ties into an existing turn of the 20th century single-family residence and incorporates the addition of a living space typically found in a contemporary home. Modern amenities include a large family room, kitchen and breakfast area, and a new master suite. Photo: Tony Soluir Photography

Merit Award Jewel Box Addition, North Shore, IL Category: Residential 1 Firm: MGLM Architects; Elizabeth McNicholas, ALA & Mark Garzon, ALA Contractor: Bloomfield Development This delicate North Shore addition adds six new rooms and an elevator that now function as petite gallery spaces for the homeowners’ Asian Art collection. Each room was conceived in an entirely different aesthetic, including Japanese, Chinese, western European - even one room in the form of the Europeaninterpretation-of-Asian: a whimsical muraled “Chinoiserie. Photo: Mark Garzon

Merit Award Wakefield Memorial Building, Wakefield, MI Category: Unbuilt Firm: Myefski Architects; John Myefski, ALA This 34,000 square foot project was designed to replace the aged, existing facility with a state-ofthe-art building that would be equally inspirational as the original. It celebrates the heritage of the Wakefield community while looking to the future in its use of technology for both design and environmental sustainability.



Merit Award Federico Garcia Lorca Elementary School, Chicago, IL Category: Institutional Firm: SMNG-A Architects, Ltd. Contractor: Leopardo Reyes Group Federico Garcia Lorca Elementary School is a 900 student Elementary school in the Avondale-Irving Park neighborhood on Chicago’s northwest side. Part of SMNG-A’s challenge was to design the new replacement school to conform to a small, irregularly shaped building site. This building has achieved a LEED Gold rating. Photo: John Faier

Merit Award Near North Montessori School, Chicago, IL Category: Institutional Firm: SMNG-A Architects, Ltd. Contractor: The George Sollitt Construction Co. The recently completed improvements to the near North Montessori School involved a significant renovation of existing facilities and construction of the new gymnasium addition. The renovation portion included a junior high suite and reorganized main community space. The gymnasium addition included new ground level and rooftop playgrounds. Photo: Leslie Schwartz

Merit Award Discovery Church, Sauk Rapids, MN Category: Religious Firm: Station 19 Architects, Inc.; Nicole Thompson, ALA; Erik Johnson and Ann Kuntz Contractor: Winkelman Building Corporation

Photo: Saari & Forrai Photography

The new relocation for Discovery Church brings together their mission and unique site characteristics. This new facility is positioned as a welcoming “Hand Shake” to the community. Along the “Path of Discovery,” the 400 seat worship overflows into a generous lobby which expands to anadministration suite, nursery, children’s, youth and adult education spaces.

Merit Award La Casa Dormitories, Chicago, IL Category: Residential 2 Firm: UrbanWorks, Ltd. Contractor: DENCO This six-story, 33,000-square-foot cast in place concrete structure is clad in floor to ceiling glass, exposed concrete and masonry elements along with colorful exterior fiber cement panels. The La Casa Dormitory provides housing for 100 students and 5 resident assistant units and also includes a ground floor fitness room, laundry room and retail space. An adjacent resource center provides support in navigating the complexities of college life, leadership development and academic support. Photo: Anthony May






The Outlook for Construction in 2013 Bernard M. Markstein III, Reed Construction Data U.S. Chief Economist

From the end of 2007 through second quarter 2009 the United States experienced its worst recession since the Great Depression. The post recession recovery has proved to be a long, slow slog. It wasn’t until fourth quarter 2011 that real (inflation-adjusted) gross domestic product (GDP) topped its prerecession peak. In 2012, the economy has continued to grow steadily if not spectacularly. From the end of the recession through third quarter 2012, real GDP grew an average of 2.2% a quarter at an annualized rate. Despite the progress in overall economic growth, employment as measured by nonfarm payroll employment has not returned to its pre-recession peak. From peak nonfarm payroll employment in January 2008 to its post-recession trough in February 2010, the economy lost 8.8 million jobs. From the February 2010 nadir through October 2012, 4.5 million jobs were created, leaving the economy 4.3 million jobs short of its previous peak.

Nonresidential construction held up reasonably well in the early part of the recession as it usually does since projects underway are generally continued to completion. With funding typically in place at the beginning of a project, stopping a project midstream is more costly than finishing it. Thus it is not surprising that construction spending for nonresidential buildings did not peak until third quarter 2008. Heavy (civil) engineering construction spending tends to hold up better through a recession given the longer-term nature of these projects with funding often secured through government bond issues ahead of the start of construction. The federal stimulus package also helped sustain heavy engineering construction activity this time around. Heavy engineering construction spending peaked in third quarter 2009. It did not fall nearly as much as nonresidential building construction spending did and as of third quarter 2012 was only 5% below its previous peak. (continued on page 36)



ECONOMICOUTLOOK (continued from page 35)

It was the housing bubble that helped propel the economy in the early 2000s and it was the popping of that bubble that precipitated the painful recession. Residential construction spending peaked ahead of the recession and fell precipitously throughout the recession. Single-family construction spending peaked in first quarter 2006. Multifamily construction spending did not peak until fourth quarter 2006 as projects underway were completed and projects that had already secured their funding proceeded despite the deteriorating economic landscape. The main change for multifamily projects was reconfiguring condo projects to apartment projects. With the housing market now on the upswing, residential construction is finally taking on its traditional role as one of the forces that boosts the economy in the early stages of a recovery. The Reed forecast is for the economy to perform somewhat better in 2013. Reed forecasts real GDP to grow 2.3% in 2012 and advance 2.7% in 2013. Nonresidential building construction bottomed in first quarter 2011 as the improving economy increased demand, encouraging businesses to revive abandoned projects, refurbish and upgrade neglected buildings and production facilities, and invest in new projects. Since much of nonresidential construction is tied to developments in residential construction, the revival of the housing market and residential construction has given businesses additional incentive to invest in new plant and equipment, propelling nonresidential construction activity upward. Continued improvement in housing is one of the factors in our positive outlook for this sector. Heavy engineering construction continues to struggle with the challenge of reduced government funding. Some of the slack is being picked up by public/private partnerships. Also, businesses are involved in some heavy construction activity (e.g., connected to extraction of oil and natural gas through fracking). Total construction spending is projected to rise 8.3% in 2012 and 7.7% in 2013. The nonresidential construction spending part is forecast to increase 5.2% in 2012 and 4.2% in 2013. Heavy engineering construction spending is forecast to increase 7.2% in 2012 and 4.7% in 2013. It is residential construction that will show the biggest gains, though from a low base. New residential construction spending, which excludes improvements, is forecast to increase 18.4% in 2012 and 19.7% in 2013. Unfortunately, this forecast is not assured. The forecast faces some serious risks. These include the following. • A European debt default. A European debt default would ripple through the financial markets hurting banks around the world. A single default, such as by Greece, would likely put pressure on other weak countries, such as Spain or Italy. That could throw all of Europe into recession (several countries already are in recession) and pull the U.S. into recession as well. However, European policymakers are unlikely to allow a debt default to occur given the threat to their economies. A Greek debt default would prove most tolerable, but even that probably represents too great a risk as it could quickly spread, spinning out of control.



• Dissolution of the euro. This is less of a threat to the U.S. or Europe, but would still hurt both economies. A total abandonment of the euro by Europe is unlikely. But one or more countries could abandon the euro or be pushed out by other countries, with Greece the most likely candidate in both cases. • The fiscal cliff (tax rates jumping on January 1 and drastic cuts to many federal programs, agencies, and departments). The rhetoric has been flying, with hopes rising and falling with each politician’s statement. Despite the rhetoric there does seem to be the possibility of a resolution since failing to successfully resolve the issue is a big risk for both political parties. Nonetheless, the possibility of no immediate resolution and going over the fiscal cliff for several weeks to a month or two remains. To date, the failure to work out an agreement has disquieted the financial markets and added unneeded uncertainty to business planning. • The debt ceiling. The federal debt continues to rise, pushing it towards the debt ceiling. Hitting the debt ceiling would be disruptive to federal government operations and cause turmoil in financial markets. On the positive side, there is talk of including a higher debt ceiling with legislation addressing the fiscal cliff. However, this is yet another chance for both political parties to play chicken with the threat of an unnecessary disruption to the functioning of the federal government and yet again injecting uncertainty into the business environment. • Higher energy prices. Oil prices have stabilized of late. Nevertheless, the perennial threat of a sharp increase in oil prices (50% or more) and staying there for several months remains. Such an increase in energy prices for a prolonged period would send the U.S. economy into recession. Many of these factors are already adversely affecting businesses, reducing their willingness to invest and slowing economic growth. Were one or more of the worst cases outlined to come to pass, then the U.S. economy would fall into recession. Reed Economics is reasonably confident that the worst case scenarios will not occur. However, the risk of recession from these events remains.

Association of Licensed Architects Continuing Education

Meeting Fire Codes with OSB by Bob Palardy, Manager of Technology, LP Building Products

On average, a structural fire occurs once every 61 seconds—almost once per minute. Fire-resistant construction aims to preserve the structural integrity of a building long enough to allow evacuation and prevent the collapse of key load-bearing elements. That’s where fire-rated cementitious coated (FRCC) OSB comes in. FRCC OSB sheathing can offer a cost-effective means of meeting firerelated and structural code requirements.

Learning Objectives • Describe the components and manufacturing process of fire-rated cementitious coated (FRCC) OSB. • Discuss handling and installation considerations. • Describe how FRCC OSB meets code requirements. • Illustrate common construction applications relevant to FRCC OSB.

FRCC OSB: The Basics OSB is made by blending rectangular wood strands with thermosetting, water-resistant adhesives and wax. These strands are arranged in cross-directional layers that are then pressed together under heat and pressure, resulting in an engineered panel that is stiff, strong and durable. Not only will OSB not cup, warp, split or delaminate, it carries an Exposure 1 classification, which means it’s designed to withstand moisture during normal construction delays. In order to gain its fire rating, FRCC OSB is tightly bonded on one or both sides with a layer of fiberglass-reinforced, noncombustible magnesium oxide cement. This non-combustible layer resists the spread of flames and the transfer of heat through the panel while the fiberglass reinforcement, along with a small amount of synthetic polymers, improves structural performance and impact resistance. Water is chemically bound within the structure of the cementitious coating of each panel, which acts in concert with the inert cement to slow the progress of heat and flames.

Installation Considerations FRCC OSB installs similarly to other structural panels, using standard fasteners, following the same handling and safety requirements and cutting with standard blades (although carbide blades are highly recommended). Saw blades will wear somewhat more quickly as compared to cutting standard panels. Gapping between panels is the same as that used for OSB and plywood to allow for linear movement of the OSB substrate. Although none of the current listed wall assemblies using FRCC OSB require fire-caulking of the panel joints, it is necessary to block all panel joints with nominal 2x framing lumber.

Dimensions, Weight and Structural Performance FRCC OSB panels are available in standard OSB thickness and performance categories, including Struct 1. They can be made in in 7/16", 15/32", 19/32", and 23/32" OSB performance categories and in 4’ x 8’, 4’ x 9’ and 4’ x 10’ lengths. Thicknesses up to 1-1/8 inch are also available by special order. Like standard sheathing, the panels are sized to 3’ 11-7/8" x 7’ 11-7/8"



dimensions (reduced 1/8" from 4’ x 8’ to allow for proper spacing during installation). From a panel weight perspective, the cementitious coating adds approximately 0.7 pounds per square foot, per side. Thus, a 4’ x 8’, 15/32 Category FRCC OSB panel treated on one side weighs approximately 66 pounds, and a panel coated on both sides weighs about 85 pounds. Use of FRCC OSB typically results in lighter wall assemblies, as compared to conventional methods employing layers of both shear panels and fire-resistant sheathing. As a comparison, the combined weight of a 4’ x 8’ x 5/8" gypsum board (80 lbs) plus a 4’ x 8’, 15/32 sheathing panel can easily be over 125 pounds. The fiberglass-reinforcement of the product increases the strength, bending stiffness, shear capacity, and impact resistance of the panel, as compared to the underlying substrate, resulting in a panel that carries full load/span and shear design ratings. Structural design values for FRCC OSB are the same as those of wood structural panels in the same thickness category. FRCC OSB combines fire resistance and structural performance in a single panel-a key advantage in wall and roof sheathing applications. The span and strength ratings are verified by an independent, ISO-certified testing laboratory and quality certification service. The major panel certification agencies, APA and TECO, do not certify treated panels. Like FRT plywood, the structural performance of FRCC OSB is therefore certified by another agency after treating. The coated surface of the panel will show the thickness category and span rating, and span and load tables can be accessed from the manufacturer’s website.

construction application can be evaluated. Committees operating under organizations such as ICC-ES review the test results and publish Evaluation Service Reports (ESRs) that are often referenced by manufacturers and required by code agencies and municipalities. In assessing the suitability of a material or product for a given application, builders, specifiers, architects, and code officials should consider the following:

“Once a product has been tested by an approved laboratory against the criteria, its fitness for a given construction application can be evaluated.”

Code Compliance Requirements for fire-resistant construction are specified in the International Building Code (IBC), International Residential Code (IRC), and state and local building codes. Standard fire tests are referenced in the IBC with regard to ratings of individual products and entire assemblies. To be considered code compliant, materials must pass a variety of fire and physical property tests. Agencies such as the International Code Council Evaluation Service (ICC-ES) consider the performance requirements of products in various construction applications and establish Acceptance Criteria (AC reports) to evaluate a product’s suitability for a given use. The test procedures are standardized and regulated by organizations such ASTM, Underwriters Laboratories (UL), and associations of manufacturers. Once a product has been tested by an approved laboratory against the relevant acceptance criteria, its fitness for a given

• Was the test done at an approved, accredited lab (UL, Intertek/Omega Point, FM Approvals)? • Is the use of the product in this application covered by an evaluation report from a credible agency?

• What ratings are relevant and which were achieved? The applications for which FRCC OSB is code-compliant are listed in Section 4.2 of the FRCC OSB code report, ESR-1365.

Fire Ratings There are two main categories of fire testing referenced and required by the IBC: Flame Spread and Fire Resistance. Flame Spread is a measure of the speed of travel of flame on the surface of a given product or material under a standard set of conditions. Fire Resistance, on the other hand, refers to the ability of an assembly of materials to resist burning through the assembly, often while supporting a given load for a specified time period under standardized fire conditions. Flame Spread Classifications: • Class A is defined as a value of 25 or less. These are usually synthetic materials. Concrete, for example, has a value of 0. The IBC requires fire-retardant treated wood to have a Class A rating. • Class B is defined as a value of 26 -75. Some naturally fireresistant woods, such as redwood, fall into this category. • Class C is defined as a value of 76-200. Most wood materials fall into this category. It is important to note that Flame Spread does not measure burn-through resistance. A material can have a Class A rating for flame spread, and very little burn through resistance. Flame Spread is measured in a "Tunnel Test" developed over 60 years ago at Underwriters Laboratories. The test material is supported within a 25-foot-long tunnel as the ceiling of the tunnel and is subjected to a standard flame and draft, as the rate of flame progression and smoke development are recorded. The standard duration of the test, according to ASTM E-84 (Continued on page 40)



Association of Licensed Architects Continuing Education (continued from page 39)

(aka UL723), is 10 minutes, but it may be extended to 30 minutes. To be recognized as fire retardant treated (FRT) wood, Section 2303.2 of the IBC requires flame progression of no more than 10.5 feet in the 30-minute test. Smoke development must also fall within standard limits. FRCC OSB sheathing achieves a flame spread index of 0 to 10 in the 10-minute test, and flame progression of well under 10.5 feet when the test is extended for 30-minutes. It easily satisfies the requirements for smoke development. Based on these certified test results and meeting manufacturing requirements, every panel of FRCC OSB carries a stamp indicating that it meets the flame spread and smoke development requirements of Section 2303.2 of the IBC on the treated sides. The other category of fire testing is burn-through resistance, which refers to the time that a material or assembly can resist degradation due to high heat or flame. In many cases, this is measured while the material is supporting a load. The ASTM E-119 test method is the basis for standardizing fireresistive-rated construction in the IBC and is used to determine the fire resistance ratings for bearing and nonbearing wall and floor/ceiling assemblies.

Section 706.6 for vertical continuity of fire walls, which states that fire walls must extend for 30 inches above the roof line (parapets), or, as an exception, that FRT wood or gypsum be installed in the roof deck for a distance of 4 feet on either side of the fire wall, in which case the fire wall may terminate at the underside of the roof deck. In this application, FRCC OSB sheathing provides a good alternative to FRT plywood or gypsum panels, offering a single panel solution that is designed to withstand exposure to moisture during normal construction delays. In this application, the FRCC OSB should always be installed with the coated side facing the interior of the building. It is important that attic spaces be properly ventilated to building code.

“The fire ratings of exterior walls in the IBC are based on the assumption that fires form within the interior of buildings. This is why many fire-rated wall assemblies carry ratings for exposure from the interior side only.”

FRCC Applications

■ Exterior Rated Walls The fire ratings of exterior walls in the IBC are based on the assumption that fires form within the interior of buildings. Accordingly, many fire-rated wall assemblies carry ratings for exposure from the interior side only. In cases where fire separation distance is less than 10 feet (for the most common use and occupancy categories), however, the IBC requires exterior walls to be rated for fire exposure from both sides. Some municipalities and fire districts, however, require all exterior fire-rated walls to be rated equally for exposure from both sides, regardless of fire

FRCC OSB is used primarily in Types III and V construction. It can also be used, with the fire-rated treatment on both sides of the panel, in the roof decks of Type II structures and in nonbearing applications (such as curtain walls) in Type I and II construction. ■ Vertical Continuity of Fire Walls FRCC OSB is most commonly used in roof decking in town homes, condominiums and apartments in Type V construction, where it provides superior weather resistance, requires less labor than a gypsum option, and the panels lie flat with no delaminations. In addition, panels are available in a 7/16 thickness category. In this application, FRCC OSB is installed on either side of a fire wall, satisfying the requirements of IBC FB Construction Low Angle



separation distance. UL listing BXUV.U305 is perhaps the most commonly referenced 1-hour exterior wall assembly. It is a generic, load-bearing assembly which calls for 5/8" Type X GWP on each side, and is rated for 1-hour from both sides. Insulation, shear panels and exterior cladding may be installed without affecting the fire rating. The current 1-hour rated wall assembly using FRCC OSB is the LPB/WA-60-01 assembly listed on Intertek’s Spec-Direct website. The assembly is rated for fire exposure from both sides and consists of: • 5/8" Type X GWB on the interior side, 2 x 6" framing with 5.5" mineral wool in the cavities, • FRCC OSB installed against the studs with the cementitious side facing the exterior, • Weather-resistant building wrap, • And wood, fiber cement, steel, or stucco (3-coat or certain 1coat types—see the listing) as the exterior wall covering. Vinyl siding and EIFS are not permitted with this assembly. Additionally, the assembly is load limited to 2,145 pounds per stud. Compared to more traditional assemblies, the use of assemblies like the LPB/WA-60-01 in load-bearing walls may offer labor savings, faster construction time, reduced dead loads, reduced wall thickness, and a better substrate for the fastening of exterior cladding. The UL BXUV.U350 listing describes a 2-hour rated, doublestud common wall utilizing FRCC OSB. Its primary advantages are good STC ratings and cost and speed of assembly, as compared to a fire separation wall approach. It requires fire-rated penetrations, however, as well as protection for the areas at the intersection of floor-ceiling assemblies to preserve the fire rating. This is done in a number of ways, including the use of mineral wool insulation or gypsum panel cut-outs between floor supports. Consult the UL listing for more information on this assembly. ■ FRCC OSB and Type III Construction Type III construction usually utilizes five or six stories of FRT wood framing, often on a concrete podium. Floors, interior structural framing, and roofs are typically wood or other combustible material, often in 1 or 2-hour rated assemblies. Exterior walls, however, require non-combustible materials. As an exception, IBC Section 602.3 permits the use of FRT wood complying with IBC Section 2303.2 within exterior wall assemblies of a 2-hour rating or less in Type III buildings. Exterior walls are required to carry a 2-hour rating for bearing and a 1-hour rating for non-bearing for exposure from the inside. Ratings for exposure from the exterior depend on fire separation distance and local code requirements. The BXUV.U349 assembly provides a cost-effective alternative to common approaches to building exterior bearing walls in Type III construction requiring 2-hour resistance to fire exposure from the inside. While it still utilizes two layers of Type X GWB on the

interior side, the 2-hour rating for exposure from the interior is achieved with a single layer of FRCC OSB (treated on both sides) on the exterior side of the studs, rather than two separate layers—one for shear and one for fire resistance. The BXUV.W408 assembly is very similar, but uses mineral wool insulation rather than fiberglass, and carries a 1-hour rating from the exterior in addition to the 2-hour rating from the inside. A wall rated for 2 hours of fire exposure from both sides is under development. Compared to more traditional exterior wall assemblies, the use of BXUV.U349 and BXUV.W408 may offer labor savings, faster construction time, reduced dead load, reduced wall thickness, and a better substrate for fastening of exterior cladding. ■ FRCC OSB in Type I and II Buildings FRCC OSB is used in the roof decks of Type II structures and in non-bearing applications in Types I and II construction, such as curtain walls. IBC Section 603.1 describes areas where combustible materials are allowed in Type I and II buildings (Note that neither FRT wood nor FRCC OSB are considered noncombustible materials). FRT wood is permitted in: • 25.1: Non-bearing partition walls rated 2-hours or less • 25.2: Non-bearing exterior walls where no fire rating is required • 25.3: Roof construction, including girders, trusses, framing, and decking (Except in most IA buildings above 2 stories) Section 4.2 (b) of ESR 1365 describes code compliance of FRCC OSB, with treatment on both sides of the panel, in these applications. Additionally, FRCC OSB satisfies the IMC, UMC and IRC requirements for plenum construction and return ducts not exposed to condensation, provided the cementitious layer faces the air stream (ICC Listing: PMG-1089). Additional Applications FRCC OSB may also be utilized for a number of additional applications, including commercial roof decks and SIPs. It is a listed component in assemblies for Class A- and Class C-rated low-slope commercial roof deck assemblies under single-ply membranes, as labeled and listed by UL. It also meets the 15-minute thermal barrier requirement for foam core plastics. For detailed information on test results or performance ratings for specific fire-rated panels, consult manufacturers. To learn about LP FlameBlock Fire-Rated OSB Sheathing, visit LPCorp.com/FlameBlock. (Continued on page 42)



Association of Licensed Architects Continuing Education

ALA Continuing Education Questionnaire -

Meeting Fire Codes with OSB Learning Objectives: • Describe the components and manufacturing process of fire-rated cementitious coated (FRCC) OSB. • Discuss handling and installation considerations. Program Title:

Meeting Fire Codes with OSB ALA/CEP Credit: This article qualifies for 1.0 LUs/ HSW (health, safety, and welfare) of State Required Learning Units and may qualify for other LU requirements. (Valid through December 2014.) Instructions: • Read the article using the learning objectives provided. • Answer the questions. • Fill in your contact information. • Sign the certification. • Submit questions with answers, contact information and payment to ALA by mail or fax to receive credit. QUIZ QUESTIONS 1. The non-combustible, non-hazardous, fiberglass-reinforced coating applied to FRCC OSB sheathing contains which of the following? A. Aluminum oxide and chemically bound water. B. Zinc oxide and chemically bound water. C. Magnesium oxide and chemically bound water. D. Chromium oxide and crystallized water.

• Describe how FRCC OSB meets code requirements • Illustrate common construction applications relevant to FRCC OSB

3. What is the term used to express the time (in minutes or hours) that a material or assembly can resist degradation due to high heat or flame? A. Heat resistance B. Fire spread C. Burn-through resistance or fire resistance D. Flame resistance 4. Which of the following construction scenarios typically requires, by code, a fire-resistant wall assembly? A. The party wall between units in multi-family residential construction. B. Walls between a garage and a living space. C. The exterior walls of buildings within 5 feet of a property line. D. All of the above E. A & B only 5. Approximately how much weight does the coating on one side of FRCC OSB sheathing add to a 4’x8’ sheet of standard sheathing? A. 5 pounds B. 10 pounds C. 15 pounds D. 20 pounds

2. Which of the following products carries an Exposure 1 rating, meaning that it is designed to withstand exposure to moisture during normal construction delays? A. Fire-rated gypsum B. Fire-retardant treated plywood C. FRCC OSB D. B and C

6. The most common application for FRCC OSB is in roof decking, on either side of a fire wall in Type V construction to satisfy IBC requirements for: A. A Fire Resistance Rating B. Standard Load Design C. Vertical Continuity of Fire Walls D. Fire Separation Distance

7. Which of the following is the Standard Test Method for Fire Tests of Building and Construction Materials, in which wall assemblies are evaluated for fire performance in 1, 2, 3, and 4-hour tests? A. ASTM E-119 B. ASTM E-84 C. ASTM E-96 D. ASTM E-108 8. FRCC OSB sheathing carries which flame spread rating? A. Class A B. Class B C. Class C D. Class X 9. What is the advantage of using FRCC OSB sheathing in multi-family construction? A. It can often eliminate the need for one layer of 5/8-inch gypsum in exterior bearing walls. B. Dropped trusses are not required to accommodate a layer of fire-rated gypsum in roof decks adjacent to fire-rated walls. C. Panels carry full load and span ratings with no strength reductions. D. All of the above. 10. Fire Separation Distance (FSD) is the distance measured from the building face to: A. The closest interior lot line B. To the centerline of a street, an alley or public way C. To an imaginary line between two buildings on the property D. All of the above

PAYMENT: ALA/CEP Credit or Certificate of Completion: Cost: $15 (ALA Members) $20 (non-members) ■ Check or ■ Credit Card

Contact Information: Last Name: First Name:

Middle Initial:

■ Please send me a certificate of completion (required by certain states & organizations) that I may submit. Your test will be scored. Those scoring 80% or higher will receive 1 LU HSW Credit.

Firm Name:

Fax: 847-382-8380 Address: Association of Licensed Architects, One East Northwest Highway, Suite 200 Palatine, IL 60067 Attn: ALA/CEP Credit

Address: City:




Credit Card No:


Expiration Date:




Certification: (Read and sign below) I hereby certify that the above information is true and accurate to the best of my knowledge and that I have complied with the ALA Continuing Education Guidelines for the reported period. Signature:



Design Copyright Protection and the Architectural Profession: Has it Worked? by Bob Greenstreet, Dean of the School of Architecture and Urban Planning, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee


wenty-two years ago, the Architectural Works Copyright Protection Act became law, ostensibly providing greater protection for original architectural work. Before the Act, there was very little architects could do to stop copyright infringement beyond the prevention of unauthorized use of actual drawings, so the new legislation was generally believed to be a great step forward for the architectural profession. However, two decades later, has the Act really helped? A brief review of the history of the legislation and its subsequent implementation suggests that, in many instances, it may have led to unanticipated and unwelcome consequences and may be of limited value to the architectural profession at all. The History of the Act Prior to the 1990 Architectural Works Copyright Protection Act, most architectural work received limited protection from the 1976 Copyright Act, which tended to deal only with drawings rather than the buildings and the actual design ideas themselves. The new Act, which was designed to bring the United States into compliance with the Berne Convention, extended copyright protection to the design of buildings which could be shown to be original works of authorship. There were some perceived shortcomings with the provisions of the Act,1 notably the exclusion of some three dimensional structures (bridges, walkways), ambiguity about others (garages, silos, freestanding walls, etc.), the legitimacy of copyright ownership and the exclusion of non-original, but nevertheless integral building elements. Now, after a couple of decades there is ample evidence of its application in a number of cases over the past few years to enable an assessment of its value.3 Some of these cases indicate a legitimate pursuit by designers to protect their original ideas from being used by others without attribution or compensation. However, there is a disturbing trend that has emerged in one sector of the construction industry that suggests that the Act is being used for market protection and outright opportunism rather than the preservation of design originality, and this is in an area with relatively little connection to

architectural creativity or the original intentions of the Act. In the housing industry, particularly the market rate sector, the number of architects involved is relatively small.2 While no doubt successfully meeting market need in both price and consumer demand, housing units (exclusive of customized, larger and more expensive models) are not usually known for their originality. They are unlikely to garner many architectural housing awards, receive much attention in the architectural press or be lauded for their creativity. Their very names, culled from websites, brochures or newspapers evoke standard, recognizable and traditional styles — Georgian, Saltbox, Cape Cod, Colonial, Williamsburg, etc. — and they do not seek to set themselves apart from the existing stock of comparable housing. And yet it is this field which is yielding a considerable degree of legal action as the owners of enforceable copyrights seek to prevent other homebuilders and developers from building houses that approximate to their own, or sue their competitors for building houses similar to their protected models. Obviously, copyright protection is entirely justifiable when unique designs are being used without permission, and there have been some high profile names and buildings involved in legal tussles.4 However, the modest end of the housing scale, (continued on page 44)



A S S O C I A T E S ,


structural engineers YOUR • • • • • •




Design of New or existing Buildings’ Modifications Resolutions of Building Code Violations Façade, Iron & Porch Inspections Evaluation of buildings’ Distresses & Accidents Consultants to Building, Fire & Police Dept’s. Peer & Plan Reviews 930 Pitner Ave., Suite #7, Evanston, IL 60202

847-733-0015 www.moshecal.com LICENSED ARCHITECT • VOL 16 NO. 4 • WINTER 2012


CONTRIBUTEDARTICLE (continued from page 43)

where very little design originality is evident (or, to be frank, often desired by prospective buyers) seems an unlikely battleground for establishing the concept of originality. Most housing, and certainly the housing involved in a number of recent cases, is modest in size, mass and detail. The units exhibit much the same number of rooms, have a similar overall appearance and contain few or no original details that could be categorized as ‘creative.’ As the Act specifically excludes functional requirements, standard architectural features and traditional spatial relationships, it could be argued that, in the typical market rate house design, there is very little left to copyright. However, this has not deterred countless house builders and plan sellers from successfully applying for and receiving copyright protection from the Copyright Office of the Library of Congress by demonstrating their ownership of the work and claiming that their models were original to their creators. As long as they aver that they (or their assignee) is the originator of the drawings being submitted for registration, they will receive automatic copyright protection without having to prove further originality or creativity beyond a statement that the work is not derivative — perhaps a startling claim for many of the buildings that are so clearly derived from widely known, existing styles developed long before the creation of the Act, and may even bear their names (Colonial, Traditional, etc.). The fact that these ‘original’ works look remarkably similar to many other models — ‘Mediterranean’ or ‘Cape Cod’ styles will inevitably share common physical characteristics that are rooted in traditional understanding of the terminology — is perhaps not important in a design sense. However, when the owner of the copyright then sues other builders or developers for building very similar models, the question of appropriateness of the protection arises, as well as the legitimacy of the copyright owner claiming that the copyrighted material is not derivative, one of the few requirements for legitimate copyright protection. Why should one owner of a home based on traditional, recognizable and well-used design elements that have existed long before the 1990 Act be able to exclude others from the market and even claim damages for comparable built work because they hold the copyright for a design that is questionably creative or original? Certainly, if a builder has deliberately used the design drawings


NATIONWIDE PHONE 1-(800) 950-CODE (2633) Fax (866) 814-2633 Email: codexperts@aol.com www.codexperts.net Free hot lines (members only)

Corporate Office 616 Executive Drive Willowbrook, IL 60527-5610


16182 W. Magnolia Street Goodyear, AZ 85338-5518


of his/her competitor to build and sell a house so that the latter has suffered financial loss as a result, there should be legal redress, which the Act provides. However, when the owner of numerous copyrighted designs systematically reviews the websites and promotional materials of homebuilders across many states, often homebuilders who have no former connection to the plaintiff, and sues them for copyright infringement, the misuse and relevance of the Act must be questioned. Do these cases succeed? Many of them are settled before a court hearing and so it is hard to assess the overall impact. Certainly, there have been many instances of expensive litigation involving unsuspecting builders and designers who discover that, without any previous knowledge of their accuser, they are forced to defend their work because it bears a strong resemblance to the work of others which has prior legal protection. These aggressive tactics, possibly exacerbated by the recession and a weak housing market, causing some groups to favor legal action over actual construction as a major part of their business plan, are costly and timeconsuming and have little to do with actual design originality or creativity, the protection of which was presumably the primary intention of the Act. There do not appear to be any moves afoot to revise the provisions of the AWAPA (itself a costly and time-consuming venture), or to strengthen the implementation of the copyright process to address the issues of originality and creativity. Accordingly, designers (including those architects who venture into the housing design market) should be aware that they are not immune from legal action should their work be regarded as derivative, regardless of any intent or previous knowledge of comparable designs owned by other copyright holders. Furthermore, as a matter of good practice, all architectural work should be systematically copyrighted to protect against not only unauthorized use but the possible threat of ownership challenges by competitors. Notes 1. Greenstreet, R., Klingaman, R. "Architectural Copyright: Recent Developments" Architectural Research Quarterly (Cambridge University Press) Vol. 4, No. 2, 2000, pp. 177-183. 2. La Barre, S. "Truth in Numbers" Metropolis Magazine.com, January 1, 2012. Depending how the question is framed, the number of architects involved in housing design varies from 2% to 28%. 3. The author is an architect specializing on the impact of law on architecture and architectural practice and has served on numerous cases as an expert witness, many of which involve market rate housing as described in the article. 4. Greenstreet, R. "Who Really Owns Your Design?" Progressive Architecture April 1985, pp. 63-64.

2012 Architecture Conference and Product Show ALA hosted our 14th Annual Architecture Conference and Product Show on October 16th at the Drury Lane Conference Center. Over 300 attendees enjoyed the day visiting exhibitors at the product show, networking, and attending educational seminars. Thank You to our 2012 Conference Sponsors: Keynote Sponsor: Pella Windows and Doors, Inc.

Breakfast Sponsor: Roseburg/Cook County Lumber

Tote Sponsor: IMAGINiT Technologies he day began with seminar classes as architects are able to earn up to 6 learning units throughout the day. Architects had the opportunity to choose three classes out of a panel of twelve in various disciplines, as well as attend our keynote presentation. Our keynote speaker, Mr. Stanley Tigerman, spoke to "AuraThe Ineffable in Architecture". His inspirational and dynamic presentation was illustrated by images of his own work as well as that of others from time immemorial. His insightful and candid words were perfect for professionals in these economic times. Over seventy-eight companies and manufacturers were on hand to showcase new products and demonstrate available technology in the building and architectural fields. We are happy to announce that over 27 new exhibitors joined the product

Lunch Sponsor: Water Furnace International Lanyards: M.G. Welbel & Associates

show this year and became affiliate members of ALA. We look forward to a continued partnership with each of these new exhibitors and hope to continue to bring both architects and exhibitors together to exchange new developments and information throughout the industry. Our show would not be complete without the loyal sponsorship of several companies as well as the generous contributions of raffle items by other exhibitors. Be sure to see our list of sponsors, exhibitors and raffle winners on these pages.

Next year’s show will be on Tuesday, October 22nd at Drury Lane. We look forward to seeing you there!

Congratulations to our Raffle Winners and Thank You to the Donating Companies Jill Deichmann, Primera Engineers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Two Bears Tickets vs. Houston Texans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . J.N. Lucas & Associates Michael Collins, Sharp & Assoc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . One night stay at Radisson Blu Aqua Hotel . . . . . . . . . . . ALA Nick Casaletto, Architectural Consulting Group . . . . . . . . . . . Two theatre tickets for the Drury Lane Theater . . . . . . . . . Drury Lane and Dennis Cabala, Interplan LLC Dana Auman and Tom Hopkins, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Two Tickets for a Chicago Architecture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Chicago’s First Lady Cruises TMH Architecture Foundation River Cruise Mike Pusich, Heitman Architects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . One Year ALA membership . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ALA Carissa Wendt, W-T Engineering . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Bosch Laser Distance Measurer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Home Depot, Palatine John Kern, Premier Architecture and . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 iPod Nanos . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Moen Incorporated Sam Salahi, APS, Ltd. Victor Lew, Jeremy Lew & Assoc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Arbor Chrome Pull Down Faucet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Moen Incorporated Chris Goode, Architecture & Conservation, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . $100 Lettuce Entertain You Gift Card . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Chicago Regional Council of Carpenters John White, Harris Architects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $75 Gift Card to Capital Grille . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Cosella-Dorken Products, Inc. Jon Bergstrom, Sher-Bergstrom Architects . . . . . . . . . . . . . $75 Lettuce Entertain You Gift Card . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Huber Engineered Wood Products Werner Brisske, Partners in Design Architects . . . . . . . . . . . $50 Best Buy Gift Card . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Marvin Windows and Doors Walter Matusik, Architect . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $50 American Express Gift Card . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . M.G. Welbel & Associates Edward DeSas, Edward T.N. DeSas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $50 and $25 iTunes Gift Cards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Tubelite, Inc. and Paul Bouchard, Primera Ernest Strestrop, Stenstrop & Assoc.; . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Fleece Jackets and a sweatshirt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Maze Nails, Inc. Steve DeLattre, SD Contractors Inc.; Gary Mol, Dimensional Enterprises, Inc. Maureen McHugh and Heather Dalskov . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Ladies Polar Fleece Jackets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . NSG Group-Pilkington North America John Weis, Harris Architects and . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Men’s Hooded Nylon Coats . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . NSG Group-Pilkington North America Kazem Nemazee LICENSED ARCHITECT • VOL 16 NO. 4 • WINTER 2012


October S M




2013 S F


3 4 11 12 10 6 7 19 16 17 18 13 14 15 26 23 24 25 20 21 22 30 31 27 28 29 1 8

2 9

Save the Date for next year’s Conference:

Tuesday, October 22, 2013 at Drury Lane Conference Center, Oakbrook Terrace, IL

Attention Exhibitors! Call Rosemary at 847-382-0630 to book your space for 2013

Thank You to our 2012 Exhibitors Abatron, Inc. Airfloor Inc. Alcoa Architectural Products All About Access Amerimix Ameristar Fence Products Andersen Windows, Inc. ARC Imaging Resources Architectural Products Magazine Association of Licensed Architects Bella Citta Floors Cambridge Architectural CavClear/Archovations, Inc. Certain Teed CETCO Chicago Plastering Institute Chicago Regional Council of Carpenters Chicagoland Roofing Council Cook County Lumber Cosella-Dorken Products, Inc. CPI Daylighting, Inc. Custom Building Products Daltile Doors For Builders, Inc. Dryvit Systems/NexGen Building Supply Dupont Tyvek Fox Valley Associated General Contractors H.B. Fuller Construction Products Inc. Hoover Treated Wood Products, Inc. Huber Engineered Woods Illinois Brick Company Image Grille IMAGINiT Technologies Ingersoll Rand Security Technologies InPro Corporation International Leak Detection

International Masonry Institute Leatherneck Hardware, Inc. LiveRoof, LLC Locinox USA LP Building Products M.G. Welbel & Associates Major Industries, Inc. Marvin Windows and Doors MasterGraphics, Inc. Maxxon Corporation Maze Nails Metl-Span Metropolitan Architectural Brick, Inc. Moen Incorporated Morin Corporation Mortar Net USA, Ltd. Northfield an Oldcastle Company NSG Group-Pilkington North America Passive House Alliance Chicago Pella Windows & Doors, Inc. Pergolas By Parrino PerMar Ltd. Pittco Architectural Metals, Inc. PPG Industries, Inc. Prosoco, Inc. Rauch Clay Sales Corp. Raynor Garage Door Simpson Strong-Tie Company, Inc. SPEC MIX/QUIKRETE Chicago Stone Design, Inc. Tesko Custom Metal The Sherwin Williams Company TOTO USA Tremco Barrier Solutions Tubelite, Inc. USP Structural Connectors Water Furnace International Weyerhaeuser Wojan Window & Door Corporation WoodWorks

Keynote Presenter Stanley Tigerman presented “Aura - The Ineffable in Architecture”

Past ALA student merit winners Shannon Jones and Mathew Owens attended the conference. Pictured above with Norm Lach of SIU and Jeff Budgell, President of ALA.




(L to R) Presenter Mike Jackson of the Illinois Historic Preservation Agency with Judy Brill, ALA, President of ALA Illinois and Karl Heitman, ALA, Heitman Architects.

ALA Illinois board members Lew Wilson, ALA, Sullivan Goulette Wilson (left) and Mike Coan, ALA, M.G. Coan & Assoc. enjoyed the evening and program on historic preservation.

Legal Services for Architects (Referred by ALA Chapter Boards)




Helping design professionals find creative, common sense solutions to their legal problems.



ALA One East Northwest Highway Suite 200 Palatine, IL 60067

Change Service Requested


PRSRT STD US POSTAGE Permit No. 43 Berne, IN 46711

Profile for Lisa Brooks

Licensed Architect Winter 2012  

quarterly magazine for architects

Licensed Architect Winter 2012  

quarterly magazine for architects