Issues & AdvocacyIssues & Advocacy

Contact | Federal Relations | State Relations | Local Relations |Codes Advocacy | Communities by Design | Advocacy365

AIA headlines this week include:

• Results Matter: Port Angeles, Washington, Inspires a Region

• New ADA Guidelines to Become Effective in March

• How Architects Shaped the SBA Size Standard through Grassroots

• AIA’s Advocacy Efforts Help States Prepare for Disaster

• Congress Reaches Payroll Tax Cut Deal

“In the News” – links to other news sources:

• Springfield SDAT Looks to Bring Residents Downtown

• Vermont SDAT Outlines a New Vision for Commercial Corridor

• Robert Ivy Discusses Importance of Advocacy AIArchitect

• State Department’s Design Excellence Program Takes its First Steps in China

• AIA, Allies Oppose Threat to Transit Programs

Since 2005, the AIA’s Sustainable Design Assessment Team (SDAT) program has worked in over 53 communities across the country. Participating communities often repeat a common saying, illustrating the challenge facing America’s communities today: “We don’t need another plan. We have plans—they all sit on the shelves. We need an implementation strategy.” The simple fact is that most communities today are struggling under the weight of severe economic recession, ever decreasing public resources, and public distrust and apathy. The SDAT program provides a transformative public process and a platform for innovative partnerships that transcend ‘business as usual’ and unlock community potential.

In 2009, the City of Port Angeles, WA (pop: 19,000), hosted an SDAT to focus on downtown revitalization and waterfront development. Port Angeles had suffered declining fortunes as the result of mill closures and reduced productivity from natural resource industries. The three-day charrette process created enormous civic energy to pursue a vision for the city’s future. “Just two weeks after the SDAT presented more than 30 recommendations, the Port Angeles Forward committee unanimously agreed to recommend 10 of those items for immediate action,” said Nathan West, the City’s Director of Community and Economic Development. “Public investment and commitment inspired private investment, and, less than a month later, the community joined together in an effort to revamp the entire downtown, starting with a physical face-lift. Community members donated paint and equipment, and residents picked up their paintbrushes to start the transformation.”

During the first summer of implementation, over 43 buildings in the downtown received substantial upgrades, including new paint and other improvements. This effort led to a formal façade improvement program that extended the initiative exponentially. The city dedicated $118,000 in community development block grants (CDBG) for the effort, which catalyzed over $265,000 in private investment. The city also moved forward with substantial public investment in its waterfront, which had a dramatic impact in inspiring new partnerships and private investment. Today, in the midst of uncertain economic times nationally, the city has over $75 million in planned and completed investments and has turned the corner by producing huge civic momentum across the community.

As West concludes:

“The City of Port Angeles SDAT experience was far more than just a planning exercise. This opportunity for our community was a catalyst for action, implementation and improvement. Three years after the SDAT team arrived, the progress and excitement continue. A primary outcome has been that the process awakened community pride and inspired a “together we can” attitude. Today the inspiration remains and the elements and recommendations of the program continue to be the driver for publicly endorsed capital projects and investments in our community. More importantly this sustainable approach has tapped into the core values and priorities of our citizens to ensure a better and more balanced future for our City.”

Port Angeles is now inspiring other communities across the region to convene their residents for similar action. This year, the Center will hold SDATs in Stanwood and Wenatchee, Washington.

New changes to the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) will become effective on March 15, 2012. The changes, which were originally published as the “2010 ADA Standard for Design,” will become mandatory for all new construction and all alterations to existing buildings. The Department of Justice has released official guidance to explain the code changes, and has also prepared a Primer for Small Businesses to explain the changes.

The devil will be in the details of the new guidelines, says David Collins, FAIA, NCARB. “This new standard is much more comprehensive than the 1992 standard, and covers many more aspects of design and construction.” Collins says that the accessibility requirements have been greatly altered, and that he expects most of the design challenges to arise in that area. “New clearance requirements for restrooms means a typical restroom design just won’t work.”

Collins led a panel presentation at the 2011 AIA Convention that addressed the changes to the ADA. Click here to watch the recording of the presentation, and to take a quiz for Continuing Education credit. The sessions are free to view, and $29.99 to purchase the corresponding quiz for AIA/CES credit. You must be signed in prior to viewing the course to be eligible for CE credits.

The U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) released final size standards for architecture firms on February 10, representing a significant change in course from their original proposal to lump architecture and other professions into a massive $19 million standard. SBA’s decision shows the impact grassroots advocacy can have on issues AIA members mobilize around.

The new architecture size standard of $7 million in gross annual receipts is 63 percent lower than the originally-proposed $19 million.  With engineering increasing from $4.5 million to $14 million, the SBA’s move represents the first time that architecture and engineering have been separated into two individual categories. 

Originally, the SBA proposed to lump architecture, interior design, landscape architecture, engineering, mapping, and other related services into one category with a $19 million cap.  However, 90 percent of architects who wrote to the SBA opposed the change. In fact, the SBA noted that, even though the proposed rule covered one third of all industries, more than 60 percent of comments submitted were about the architecture proposal. The new standard will go into effect on March 12, 2012.

Architects’ voice for a lower size standard was not confined to the SBA. Thanks in part to testimony on February 8 from the AIA about the size standard, Reps. Joe Walsh (R-IL) and Gerry Connolly (D-VA) introduced the Small Business Protection Act of 2012 (H.R. 3987). This bill prohibits the SBA from forcing any profession into a group size standard unless the individual size standard fits that profession. Effectively, it would prohibit the SBA from trying to force architecture and engineering into one common size standard.

Although the SBA’s February 10 announcement abandoned the proposed $19 million size standard for architecture, passage of H.R. 3987 would ensure that such a move could not happen in the future.

For more information or to read the SBA’s size standard comment, click here. For more information on the AIA’s activities protesting the SBA’s proposed $19 million size standard, see the size standard web page. 

For many years, the AIA has recognized the important role architects can play in post-disaster situations. Helping to survey widespread damage can reduce strain on emergency shelters, provide emergency managers with valuable data, and offer a rare opportunity to see how buildings perform, or fail, under real world stresses. Grassroots efforts in several states are already making an impact in 2012 and increasing the preparedness of our communities.

Just as a doctor can be liable for his or her efforts to render aid at the scene of an accident, architects and other building professionals can be liable for services that were provided in good faith, with no expectation of compensation. Good Samaritan legislation can remove this risk. It is also a necessary step toward establishing an AIA Disaster Assistance program, and a few state components are actively promoting laws in their state.

In Indiana (SB 393) and South Carolina (H 4745), bills have been introduced and AIA grassroots leaders are working to speed their passage. Both bills provide immunity for services in an emergency when those services are provided at the request of public officials, law enforcement officials, or building inspection officials acting in an official capacity. This provision is important because it encourages a relationship between the architect and emergency managers, eliminates any perceived ‘ambulance chasing,’ and ensures that the architects are clearly instructed on when, how, and where to respond in what can be a chaotic environment.

In Mississippi, state officials are not sure whether or not architects are protected under current law, but AIA leaders are demonstrating a commitment to preparedness in other ways. The local components in Biloxi and Jackson have arranged continuing education sessions to train dozens of architects in building assessment techniques. They have also invited officials from the Mississippi Emergency Management Agency to join the sessions and see first-hand the services architects are capable of providing.

In times of crisis, many architects are moved to offer their services to help communities recover. These are just a few recent examples of AIA components taking important steps to prepare for the next disaster before it strikes.

In a rare, bipartisan consensus, lawmakers agreed to extend for 10 months the 4.2 percent Social Security payroll tax rate, extend and modify unemployment benefits for the jobless, and prevent a big cut to doctors’ Medicare reimbursements. The President is expected to sign it into law.

The agreement reflected pressure on both parties to come to a deal in light of Congress’ dismal approval ratings and the possible realization that the current agreement was likely the best deal they could achieve.

Some notable details of the deal:

• The $100 billion cost of the payroll tax cut will be added to the budget deficit, a significant concession by GOP leaders that has provoked opposition on the right.

• The 99-week unemployment benefit maximum will fall gradually to 73 weeks by late summer in states with the worst unemployment. Republicans had wanted to cut the maximum to 59 weeks.

• States are permitted to require a drug test from unemployment applicants who lost their job because they failed a drug test or are seeking a job that requires one. Democrats had initially opposed drug testing unemployment applicants.

• Welfare beneficiaries will be banned from accessing public assistance funds at ATMs in strip clubs, liquor stores, and casinos.

An array of measures would finance the unemployment benefit and Medicare payment provisions, including wireless spectrum auctions, cuts to an Obama health care program aimed at preventing smoking and obesity, and requirements that new federal workers pay more into retirement benefits — all issues that were points of contention late into the deal making.

Some Democrats are claiming a victory, touting the fact the deal did not include provisions from a House-passed bill that would have required the jobless to pursue a high school equivalency degree to get benefits. Lawmakers also dropped other House-passed language forcing low-income people to have Social Security numbers to get government checks by claiming the children's tax credit, a move that was aimed at illegal immigrants and caused a furor among many Hispanics. However, other Democrats complained that the jobless benefit extensions were not generous enough.

Republicans also claimed victory, pointing to their rejection of early Democratic efforts to pay for the payroll tax cut by boosting taxes on millionaires, and to the cut the length of current unemployment benefits that Democrats had originally wanted to renew.

Perhaps the biggest victory here is the coming to an agreement by a divided Congress after months of inaction on many issues. But with more challenging issues ahead – including the budget, transportation reform, and the looming expiration of the Bush-era tax cuts in December – this battle may have been the easy part.