Advocacy

Amendment of the California Existing Building Code

December 7, 2021| Advocacy, Codes| AIA California

To incorporate all three compliance paths that exist in the International Existing Building Code

BY: Michael Malinowski, FAIA

AIA California mirrors the architectural profession in making environmental stewardship and climate action central to its strategy and actions. We believe that the issue of climate change is urgent—a perspective shared by more than 1,700 governments around the world that have declared a climate emergency.[1]

Our 11,000 design professionals recognize that the urgency of climate action requires a new mindset in shaping our environment, with a high degree of sensitivity to how our choices can impact greenhouse gas emissions, both from operation of buildings, but also from embodied carbon. When looking at total greenhouse gas emissions for new buildings built over the next ten years — the critical period for action to address the global climate emergency — Architecture 2030 estimates that 80 percent will come from embodied emissions, so lowering embodied carbon emissions is now even more urgent than lowering operating emissions.[2] This means that in the coming years, leveraging our existing building infrastructure is going to be increasingly important. AIA CA believes this triggers a need for new focus on our California Existing Building Code.

The International Existing Building Code is unique among the ICC National Codes in having a focus on flexibility, presenting users with three compliance paths from which to choose.[3] Each of these paths: Prescriptive; Work Area, and Performance lead to safe, code-compliant buildings. Their differences allow design professionals to match the code path to the unique circumstances a particular existing building challenge can present. Like all ICC Codes, the IEBC has been developed over many years in a national open, transparent, consensus environment.[4] Thus, its provisions are well vetted and are already in use across the United States.

The Title 24 (T24) Part 2 “regular” building code is focused primarily on new construction, which involves predictable materials, systems, and process. Reusing existing buildings often requires increased flexibility and deep code analysis to ensure both feasibility and safe, functional and code-compliant outcomes. While we do have a robust Historic code (T24 Part 8) many older properties cannot access it. This leaves the California Existing Building Code (CEBC) as a primary tool.

Unfortunately, in its current state, the CBEC lacks key code path options that make the International Existing Building Code (IEBC) such a powerful and useful tool. The CEBC today only includes the Prescriptive methods, which have the most limited range of options. Other important code concepts, even those that had previously been in Chapter 34 of the IBC prior to the establishment of the IEBC as a separate code in 2005, are missing. We believe this lack of code flexibility in California makes reuse of our existing building stock less feasible due to higher costs and greater uncertainty – which in turn deprives us of the many benefits that come from updating, reusing and retrofitting existing buildings. Throughout our state, one can look up at empty unused downtown upper floors, and drive down obsolete commercial corridors, and appreciate the huge unrealized potential. The importance of having a robust and complete existing building code is addressed in detail in a white paper by the National Institute of Building Standards.[5] “The adoption of the IEBC in particular has broader community benefits by becoming a key element and driver of economic development; promoting affordable housing; allowing the reuse of existing building stock; and fostering the revitalization of older, often blighted and vacant neighborhoods. Building owners, developers and economic development authorities have flexibility to use methodologies that make the most sense for their project. The blighted or decaying communities become livable and vibrant again and the existing buildings become safer.”[6]

With more than 40 percent[7] of design professional work involving repair, alteration, renovation, and adaptive reuse of existing buildings, having additional flexibility will encourage and support additional adaptive reuse. While Architects and Code Officials find reusing existing buildings can present unique code challenges, these projects also can bring many important benefits to our communities:

Existing buildings are packed full of embodied carbon, which stays in place when they are repurposed. This makes a large virtual contribution to decarbonization when contrasted with demolition and replacement.
When Architects retrofit existing buildings – more than half of which are over 40 years old – we boost their energy efficiency, resiliency, function, and sustainability.
Reusing existing buildings leverage the vast investments that have been made over many decades in existing infrastructure of our communities, such as streets, sidewalks, utility and service grids, and civic institutions like parks, schools, hospitals and more.
Architects take pride in using the power of design to help connect our modern needs with our heritage and past. When we repurpose obsolete buildings in our urban centers for such new uses as attainable housing, mixed use lofts for live work, and other innovative new patterns of urban design, we breathe new life into our urban cores with walkable, sustainable, and resilient design solutions. Adaptive reuse supports progress in addressing such pressing issues as our state’s housing crisis, our decarbonization challenge, and our transportation bottlenecks.

AIA CA believes that adding all three compliance paths to the CEBC will benefit communities statewide, with the most likely immediate benefits to include a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions and the creation of more infill walkable housing. We are aware that this proposed change may be challenging to implement, but we believe the benefits in addressing California’s climate and housing crises make action important in this current code cycle. The AIA CA stands ready to assist with this process in any way we can. We also commit to fully informing our design professional members so they can make effective use of this new tool as soon as possible.

The AIA CA believes that the framework of the IEBC provides for protection of citizen health, safety and welfare while also supporting reuse, repurposing and retrofitting of our huge existing building stock to benefit our citizens. We also believe that building codes and Standards play a critically important role in environmental stewardship.

This is the basis for our petition to amend the CEBC

Outline of Proposed Code Changes

Adopt Chapter 6 Classification of work

Adopt Chapter 7 Alterations – Level 1

Adopt Chapter 8 Alterations – Level 2

Adopt Chapter 9 Alterations – Level 3

Adopt Chapter 10 Change of Occupancy

Adopt Chapter 11 Additions

Adopt Chapter 13 Performance Compliance Methods

How Can you Support this Effort?

The AIA CA welcomes letters of support for our code change petition. A CC to the AIA CA would be appreciated:

California Building Standards Commission

Mia Marvelli

Executive Director, California Building Standards Commission

Mia.Marvelli@dgs.ca.gov

CC to

Nicki Dennis Stephens, Hon. AIA

NDennis@aiacalifornia.org

[1] Over 1700 governments around the world have declared a climate emergency https://www.theclimatemobilization.org/climate-emergency/

[2] Embodied Carbon: what is it, why is it so important, and what can we do about it https://aiacalifornia.org/embodied-carbon-definitions-and-facts/

[3] IEBC overview https://www.structuremag.org/?p=10665#:~:text=The%20beauty%20of%20the%20IEBC,%2C%20and%20(3)%20Performance.

[4] The ICC Code Development Process How it Works; and By the Numbers https://www.iccsafe.org/products-and-services/i-codes/code-development/

[5] https://cdn.ymaws.com/www.nibs.org/resource/resmgr/ncgbcs/NCGBCS_IEBC_WhitePaper_2016.pdf

[6] The Role of Existing Building Codes in Safely, Cost-Effectively Transforming the Nation’s Building Stock A White Paper by the National Institute of Building Sciences National Council of Governments on Building Codes and Standards (NCGBCS) https://cdn.ymaws.com/www.nibs.org/resource/resmgr/ncgbcs/NCGBCS_IEBC_WhitePaper_2016.pdf

[7] American Institute of Architects, Renovate, retrofit, reuse: Uncovering the hidden value in America’s existing building stock (Washington, D.C.: AIA 2019)

Finger Printing Required of All Candidates Seeking an Architectural License

October 22, 2020| Advocacy, Relevance| AIA California

If you are a candidate for an architects license you probably received an email from the California Architects Board (CAB) notifying you that beginning January 1, 2021, you must submit a full set of fingerprints in order to receive your initial license. The purpose is allow the CAB to conduct a criminal background check.

That email may have caused you to ask a simple question: why?

Well, it is because the California Legislature amended the law last year to require the CAB to require candidates for an initial license to submit their fingerprints. The CAB considered adopting the fingerprinting requirement in 2011 and 2012, but chose not to. SB 608 from last year removed the decision from the CAB and mandated it implement this requirement.

And this might cause you to again ask that simple question: why?

It has become the policy of the State of California, with the support of the California Legislature, that applicants for an initial state license provide fingerprints for a criminal background check. The justification is public protection. For example, a person with convictions for embezzlement may not make the best Certified Public Accountant and the Board of Accountancy may wish to deny that person a license.

Candidates for an initial license in architecture and landscape architecture are the latest additions to the long list of professions that have this fingerprinting requirement. Most of the professions are listed in Business and Professions Code Section 144. The State Bar of California requires ALL attorneys to provide fingerprints, not just those who are seeking their initial license.

Another good question is why does this only apply to applicants for an initial license? Why doesn’t it apply to those renewing their licenses? Certainly there is a cost factor involved, and the logistics of processing hundreds of thousands of fingerprints a year. Additionally, California law generally requires relevant criminal convictions of license holders to be reported to the holder’s licensing board. For architects, that is found in Business and Professions Code Section 5590.

More information about this requirement can be found in a CAB FAQ on the fingerprinting requirement.

AIA CA Holds an Advocacy Townhall

October 7, 2020| Advocacy, Advocacy Updates, AIACA| AIA California

AIA CA held an Advocacy Townhall for our Members on Thursday, September 17. During this townhall VP of Government Relations Rona Rothenberg, FAIA, Director of Government Relations Mark Christian, Hon. AIA CA, and AIA CA Contract Lobbyist Mike Belote talked about the importance of the advocacy program to the Membership, some of the key issues the Legislature considered this year, as well as issues that will come up next year.

Rona, Mark, and Mike agreed that the shortage of housing will be a focus of the Legislature next year due to, in part, the Legislature’s inability to move significant housing legislation during the final days of the legislative session. Tax increases should also be on the table next year; we anticipate a large budget deficit that, we believe, the Legislature will not want to solve with budget cuts alone. This means a sales tax on services could become a real threat next year. AIA CA’s membership in a coalition of professional service providers and business groups opposed to a sales tax on services was discussed, along with the ongoing efforts of the coalition to discourage this idea from considered next year.

The efforts of AIA CA related to Climate Action were also discussed. This included a proposal for zero carbon continuing education for architects, support for electrification codes at the local level and within the state code, and support for the adoption of the Zero Code California as a part of the California Green Building Code.

We are looking at holding additional Advocacy Townhalls in 2021 to keep Members informed of what is happening in Sacramento, to provide an opportunity to ask questions, and to share your opinions.

2021 Advocacy Survey

September 16, 2020| Advocacy, Relevance| AIA California

One of the primary functions of AIA California is to represent AIA Members before the California State Legislature, which writes and votes on laws that impact the architectural profession, firms, employees, our communities, and the built and natural environments in California.

AIA CA often proactively proposes changes to state law to benefit the profession and business of architecture and public health, safety, and welfare.

In order to successfully propose positive changes to state law, AIA CA annually surveys its Membership for suggested changes to state law.

This is the survey to help us create our governmental advocacy agenda for next year. Answers will be reviewed by your colleagues who comprise the AIA CA Advocacy Advisory Committee. That Committee will make recommendations to your colleagues who are the AIACC Board of Directors.

Please complete the survey by Wednesday, September 30, 2020.

New Law Makes it Easier to Enter into Independent Contractor Relationships

September 9, 2020| Advocacy, Advocacy Issues, Advocacy Updates, Relevance| AIA California

Governor Gavin Newsom signed AB 2257 into law on September 4, 2020, which immediately changed the law governing whether a business can form an independent contractor relationship with another business. The new language was added into AB 2257 in late August, which has caused this change in law to be a pleasant surprise to many.

Prior to the governor signing AB 2257 into law, California law for the most part presumes any person providing labor is an employee unless the strict Dynamex test could be met. The law contained several exemptions, including one for architects that allowed an architectural firm to form an independent contractor relationship with a licensed architect.

AB 2257 creates a business-to-business exemption to the Dynamex test, meaning the easier-to-meet Borello test applies.

AIA California is in the process or preparing a detailed Practice Advisory on this new law. Until that is available, please consult with an attorney before making any decision on an independent contractor relationship.

Also, for your information, here is the new law:

California Labor Code Section 2776.

Section 2775 and the holding in Dynamex do not apply to a bona fide business-to-business contracting relationship, as defined below, under the following conditions:

(a) If an individual acting as a sole proprietor, or a business entity formed as a partnership, limited liability company, limited liability partnership, or corporation (“business service provider”) contracts to provide services to another such business or to a public agency or quasi-public corporation (“contracting business”), the determination of employee or independent contractor status of the business services provider shall be governed by Borello, if the contracting business demonstrates that all of the following criteria are satisfied:

(1) The business service provider is free from the control and direction of the contracting business entity in connection with the performance of the work, both under the contract for the performance of the work and in fact.

(2) The business service provider is providing services directly to the contracting business rather than to customers of the contracting business. This subparagraph does not apply if the business service provider’s employees are solely performing the services under the contract under the name of the business service provider and the business service provider regularly contracts with other businesses.

(3) The contract with the business service provider is in writing and specifies the payment amount, including any applicable rate of pay, for services to be performed, as well as the due date of payment for such services.

(4) If the work is performed in a jurisdiction that requires the business service provider to have a business license or business tax registration, the business service provider has the required business license or business tax registration.

(5) The business service provider maintains a business location, which may include the business service provider’s residence, that is separate from the business or work location of the contracting business.

(6) The business service provider is customarily engaged in an independently established business of the same nature as that involved in the work performed.

(7) The business service provider can contract with other businesses to provide the same or similar services and maintain a clientele without restrictions from the hiring entity.

(8) The business service provider advertises and holds itself out to the public as available to provide the same or similar services.

(9) Consistent with the nature of the work, the business service provider provides its own tools, vehicles, and equipment to perform the services, not including any proprietary materials that may be necessary to perform the services under the contract.

(10) The business service provider can negotiate its own rates.

(11) Consistent with the nature of the work, the business service provider can set its own hours and location of work.

(12) The business service provider is not performing the type of work for which a license from the Contractors’ State License Board is required, pursuant to Chapter 9 (commencing with Section 7000) of Division 3 of the Business and Professions Code.

(b) When two bona fide businesses are contracting with one another under the conditions set forth in subdivision (a), the determination of whether an individual worker who is not acting as a sole proprietor or formed as a business entity, is an employee or independent contractor of the business service provider or contracting business is governed by Section 2775. (c) This section does not alter or supersede any existing rights under Section 2810.3

What is Happening in Sacramento? Join the AIA California Advocacy Townhall to Find Out.

September 9, 2020| Advocacy, Advocacy Issues, Advocacy Updates| AIA California

AIA California is holding an Advocacy Townhall on September 17, from 12:00pm to 1:30pm to help Members understand the importance of advocacy, issues we are facing in Sacramento, and how the political climate may impact 2021. AIA CA Vice President of Government Relations Rona Rothenberg, FAIA, Director of Government Relations Mark Christian, Hon. AIA CA, and AIA CA contract lobbyist Mike Belote will lead this discussion, answer your questions, and look forward to any “there ought to be a law” suggestions you have.

Click here to register.

Get Involved! Become a Citizen Architect

June 8, 2020| Advocacy, AIACA, Relevance| AIA California

Architect and Vice Mayor for the City of Campbell, Liz Gibbons, AIA, has offered some suggestions, and calls to action for all AIA California Members. We encourage you to take her up on these challenges, and let us know the outcome.

The presidential election on November 3, 2020 has garnered much attention, but now is not the time to lose sight of the important elections that will take place closer to home: State legislators; County officials; and City government positions. These are the elected officials who determine policies, delineate strategic priorities, establish climate action plans, define land use and zoning regulations, approve ordinances, entitle projects, appoint police chiefs, negotiate staff contracts, enact legislation, set fees and so much more. These day-to-day actions govern our communities and directly impact the architectural profession and the values we embrace.

My request today is Get Involved. Get involved by learning about the candidates; get involved volunteering for a particular campaign; get involved with specific issues (e.g. Homeless, Housing, Proposition 13 reform, Education, etc.). Getting involved means to follow through on a commitment to investigate and engage. As you do this, you can find and support candidates who best represent your values and those of our profession. You may also establish valuable contacts for future conversations, future appointments to boards and commissions, and even potential election opportunities you yourself, or someone you know, may become interested.

Involvement may include active participation on a focus committee or simply holding virtual coffees with candidates for your friends and colleagues. We as architects have honed skills such as eliciting information by asking questions, listening, and researching. Along with presentation, graphic, and media knowledge, these attributes can support candidates, ballot measures and propositions that you value.

Political engagement is not an easy task, but there are other avenues for engagement. Given that voter registration is the foundation of voter turnout, engage with your friends and neighbors and have them complete the 2020 Census and register to vote. As part of your weekly company virtual meeting, offer a friendly challenge to your colleagues to complete the 2020 Census and register to vote.

With social distancing, campaigning has already substantively changed. With the Covid-19 economy, donations to local election races are down and it is possible that November’s elections may be determined by individual actions as much as by special interest groups. People are even less likely to read mailers, and local campaigns may not have or be comfortable with creating a large media presence. As such, the architectural profession may have a significantly strong opportunity to influence local election results.

Again, individual actions are likely to be the core of any successful campaign this fall. Getting out the vote is critical, but equally, it is getting out well-informed voters. Now is the time to Get Involved, and then vote!

With best thoughts for your health and safety,

Elizabeth “Liz” Gibbons, AIA, LEED AP

Vice Mayor, City of Campbell

Former AIA Strategic Counselor At-Large

Solar fight ends on a bright note

February 24, 2020| Advocacy, AIACA, Relevance| AIA California

By: Michael Malinowski, FAIA

When the new energy code went into effect on January 1st, one of the provisions that gained a lot of press was the new mandate for solar on every new California home. In the footnotes were a couple of exceptions. One was infeasibility with a strict documentation script to insure it would be rarely used. The other was “approved community solar” – which in theory could provide the flexibility and cost efficiency of managed solar ownership, while still providing homeowners with benefits of solar savings and contribution toward climate action.

The problem with community solar: although one such plan was submitted last year, it was not approved. While the Sacramento Municipal Utility District (SMUD) “Solar Shares” proposal drew wide support from both CEC staff as well as many organizations and stakeholders (including AIA California [AIA CA]), there was also wide opposition from the solar industry, as well as others.

Fast forward to the Energy Commission hearing on February 20 when a revised SMUD Solar Shares was back on the agenda. There was so much interest in this item that a special fixed start time was set on the agenda. The normally relatively staid CEC hearing room filled to overflowing, and detailed and very passionate arguments went back and forth – most limited to one minute – extending for over three hours in total. It’s all on youtube if you’re inclined to watch the, at times, dramatic testimony where government and industry captains; business and nonprofit leaders; legislators and staffers; scientists and professionals; workers, students, and homemakers; offered so many nuanced perspectives, analyses, and viewpoints.

When the hearing was finally over, the Commission discussed at length, and finally voted unanimously for approval. AIA CA was there, at the table, with a message of concern for the urgent need for powerful climate action; and the need for flexibility to make sure everyone can contribute. We cited our own investment: AIA CA has already signed up for Solar Shares for our new headquarters, since our leased building does not give us the option of rooftop solar and we wanted voluntarily to contribute renewable energy.

Now that the dust has settled, looking back what was most striking was not the 100% of the commission behind approval.

What was most striking was that in spite of the fierce debate around nuances of the Solar Shares program, 100% of the opinions on both sides of the argument supported urgent solar action.

That’s a consensus that bodes well for climate action!