FSB was once again voted the Best Architecture Firm by The Journal Record’s Reader Rankings. This is the second year in a row the Oklahoma-City-based architecture and engineering firm has been recognized for this honor.
On June 14, The Journal Record honored this year’s winners at the second annual Reader’s Ranking Awards reception held at the Oklahoma History Center. The list of honorees comprised of Oklahoma businesses and organizations chosen by Journal Record readers, including construction and design, entertainment, finance, general business, healthcare and many more.
Since its founding in 1945, FSB has worked hard to become known as a provider of high-quality architectural and engineering services. As its reputation and client list has grown locally, nationally and internationally, FSB has continued to remain focused on delivering beyond its clients’ expectations in seven distinct markets: Aviation, Civic, Corporate, Education, Federal, Infrastructure and Technology and Native American.
In addition to this honor from The Journal Record, FSB has received more than 150 awards and is the only practice to be named “Firm of the Year” four times by the AIA’s Central Oklahoma Chapter, an honor given specifically to recognize vision, leadership and quality of work.
Careers in science, technology, engineering and math (STEM) are often at the forefront in developing solutions to some of today’s biggest challenges, but what does it really mean to have one of these jobs?
With a maiden name that literally translates to “master builder” and then growing up in a home designed by her architect uncle, Cathleen Guthery seemed destined to become an architect. Her childhood home initially spurred her interest in becoming an architect and now she is one — plus a senior associate and project manager — at FSB with 17 years of experience under her belt.
Cathleen specializes in the Native American market sector, and is involved in every aspect of the project. A big part of working in her field, Cathleen says, is being able to adapt quickly to whatever challenges each day brings. Just like her job title suggests, she does a bit of everything from going to client meetings and conducting progress meetings with the team to working on design drawings and making job site observations. Cathleen is never bored, saying “I literally never know what I’ll face when I walk in the office.”
Cathleen starts her day early so she can tackle the most important tasks before the office gets busy and then she coordinates with her project teams. On any given day, her time is primarily focused on communicating. Whether it’s verbal or written, Cathleen has to ensure the effective exchange of a wide variety of information between the in-house teams, clients and contractors while also making sure everyone remains on the same page and understands what’s being communicated. In addition to this monumental task and generally keeping her project teams on task and moving forward, Cathleen also drafts contracts, creates and reviews project schedules and budgets, preps presentations, writes design narratives and meeting minutes, reviews drawings and specs, reviews contractor pricing, creates punch lists and visits job sites.
Even though it can be stressful, Cathleen thrives on it — the variety of the job, the opportunity to build lasting relationships with clients and colleagues alike, and the design challenge of creating buildings that will have a long-term, positive impact. Cathleen also thrives on sharing her passion for STEM. Whether it’s local high school students, college interns or fellow FSBers, Cathleen encourages them to stick with it. Why? Because there are tremendous opportunities for careers in STEM fields — some don’t even exist yet. However, with students in particular, she tries to dispel the myth that you have to be a math whiz to work in a STEM-related field, telling them not to let misplaced fear keep them from pursing their career goals.
The most rewarding part of working in STEM for Cathleen is knowing the genuine impact she has on clients and those who will use the buildings she’s helped develop. At the end of the day, she says, it’s fulfilling to know that you’ve delivered a project that helps clients achieve their goals and serve their purpose.
Considering a STEM-related career?
Now that you know what a typical day is like, Cathleen recommends you shadow different professionals in the field of your interest, at both large and small companies, to “spend some time with it and learn what that career is actually about on a day-to-day basis in the real world.”
“That can make a huge difference,” Cathleen says. “At FSB, we’ve had interns who come here planning to be an engineer and leave wanting to be architects, and vice versa. It’s good to see different environments and what it’s really like.” Bottom line? Don’t limit yourself. Make sure you explore all the options.
First Liberty Bank on Friday broke ground in Norman on its first satellite branch.
While the building is being constructed, the bank will continue to help customers out of temporary accommodations at the Shops at Tecumseh Crossing, 3400 24th Ave. NW, a heavy trailer designed specifically for financial services. The trailer has a teller and drive-thru lane, and it seems to be popular with consumers from the University of Oklahoma, President Joey Root said.
The new building will be finished in early 2019.
Root said it was simply a matter of time for the 12-year-old Oklahoma City commercial bank to expand, and Norman made sense because three of the founders live in the college town: Barry Switzer, Hunter Miller and Toby Keith.
The bank is self-funding the construction. First Liberty had $380 million in assets as of Monday, Root said.
“I would have expected us to be a little bigger by now, but then you’ve got to consider that we made it through a couple of pretty tough economic downturns,” Root said. “We’re getting there.”
Root said bank officials are planning more branches but added that it’s too early to say whether they will be de novo – built from scratch – or acquired from other banks.
“We don’t have a lot of need for branches because most people bank with us over the internet or through other methods of deposit,” he said. “We’ll ultimately have a handful of branches, probably three or four over the next five years in and around Greater Oklahoma City.
“There are a lot of banks that are closing branches down, so that does present an opportunity from time to time,” Root said. “If one came along in a location we really liked, we would consider that.”
First Liberty’s branching application was approved by the state Banking Department last year. Since then, two more de novo branches have been approved, a department official said Monday.
Cullin Faison, formerly of UMB Bank and First Bank & Trust, will be First Liberty’s Norman market president. Faison has 10 years of banking experience with an emphasis on commercial lending. He grew up in Norman and graduated from Baylor University’s business school.
On March 23, 2018 the United States began charging a tariff of 25% on some imported steel and 10% on some imported aluminum. Structural Steel, Concrete Reinforcing Steel, Tanks, Ducts, Pipes, Metal Deck, Metal Roof Panels and Metal Wall Panels, to name a few of the major construction materials which will be potentially impacted by this tariff. The impact of this tariff on the cost of steel and aluminum for projects will vary based upon a project’s schedule and the contract bidding/delivery method utilized. While the near term prices will likely fluctuate with speculation and changes to the terms of the tariff, FSB looks to our country’s past experiences and the current industry to make our best estimation of the potential impacts.
It is important to quickly note here that even concrete buildings have a significant amount of steel; approximately 75% to 85% of a structural steel building, on average — so this tariff potentially impacts all construction projects.
Some of the challenges we face in predicting cost, is that this is a very dynamic market and there are many variables; not the least of which is our industry’s memory of the volatile steel prices approximately 10 years ago. Projects bidding in the immediate term will coincide with the initial period of the tariff, where uncertainty, anxiety and fear are at their highest. Projects which use a significant amount of steel may well be won and lost depending upon a contractor’s tolerance for risk; more so than any other single factor. And the amount of risk taken may adversely impact the overall success of projects if the risks do not pan out for the contractor. Even more so than in commercial construction, the federal government’s longer contracting period represents an increased risk to contractors bidding a federal project as they will be required to hold a large percentage of their bid (metals) on a fixed-price for an extended period of time, in a market which may be seeing significant increased costs.
The Associated General Contractors of America (AGC) issued a memo on March 8, 2018 which encourages Federal Construction Contracts to include specific FAR references which help ease this risk. The AGC notes, “Since the federal government procures most construction contracts on a fixed-price basis without a contract price escalation clause, spikes in material prices for items such as steel and aluminum can represent a significant challenge for contractors. Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) subpart 16.203 specifically allows for economic price adjustments in fixed-price contracts. In order for it to assist a federal construction contractor, it reportedly must be implemented as part of our project’s contract through FAR parts 52.216-2, 3 or 4.” The implication is that this contract clause will eliminate bid contingencies and make for a fairer, more balanced bid or proposal process. The AGC has additional recommendations for non-federal contracts.
The American Institute of Steel Construction (AISC) noted in a webinar on March 23, 2018 that in 2016 (the last year of available data) their membership reported ample production capacity, fabrication capacity and a 3 month on-hand supply of structural steel in warehouses. The total U.S. steel-making capacity is 149 million tons annually and 101 million tons of steel were from U.S. sources with 38 million tons imported — if this total demand was maintained and served only from the U.S., there would still be a reserve capacity of 11 million tons of steel production in the US. The total U.S. structural steel fabrication capacity is 10 million tons annually and 6.3 million tons were from U.S. sources with 1.7 million tons imported — if this total demand was maintained and served only from the U.S., there would still be a reserve domestic fabrication capacity of 2 million tons of structural steel. It is interesting to note here that two-thirds of the international sources for fabricated structural steel were from Canada and Mexico, which are both currently exempt from the tariff. The AISC’s information indicates there is not an anticipated shortage of structural steel (production or fabrication) in the U.S.
While there are many reported reasons for the tariff, it is believed the intent of the tariff is to level the steel and aluminum marketplace in the U.S. and to shift steel and aluminum production and fabrication back to U.S. companies and workers. While the tariff does not apply directly to U.S. steel, the pressure of cheaper, foreign steel and aluminum may lesson and result in an increase in the cost of domestically produced and fabricated steel and aluminum. In looking at the prior President Bush era steel tariffs in March 2002 through December of 2003, which varied as high as 30%, we saw approximately a 33% increase in U.S. raw steel material costs which peaked six months following the start of the tariff and then dropped off in cost and averaged approximately 20% higher than the pre-tariff cost for the remainder of the tariff’s duration. Interestingly, the raw steel costs again increased for a long period of time after the tariff ended. This same data set (by SteelBenchmarker™) indicates the pre-2018 tariff cost of raw steel in the U.S. is nearly $900 per ton as of March 1st — up from $800 per ton as of January 1st.
FSB recently contacted one of the largest U.S. fabricators and confirmed the January 1st cost of $800 per ton and was told the raw material cost has already increased to $1,100 per ton at the onset of the tariff (an increase of 37.5% on raw material), with additional cost increases expected.
Per AISC, the raw steel costs represent one-third of the total constructed steel cost. AISC did not report an expected corresponding increase in the fabrication, shipping or erection costs of structural steel. As such it could be estimated that the total increased in steel cost in a completed facility so far this year is approximately 12.5%. Previously, in 2002 we saw prices peak at 6 months before nearly halving for the duration of the tariff; which may indicate total erected steel costs would be less than a 10% premium by late 2018. As in 2002, we do not know how long the 2018 tariff will last, but in 2003 when the tariff ended, we note the price of steel again began to sharply rise in those economic conditions and its price decoupled from the cost of Chinese steel which remained at the lower cost.
In additional to our structural steel sources, FSB has reached out to other suppliers of steel materials for construction and we are seeing that steel pipe, steel tanks and reinforcing steel are also reporting raw material cost increases in the 20% to 30% range this year to date, similar to the cost increase associated with structural steel. To date, several countries have received exemptions and/or quotas in lieu of tariffs — this list includes Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, Mexico, the European Union and South Korea; the status of each to be reviewed by May 1, 2018 to determine whether to continue to exempt these countries
The key to successfully navigating projects during this tariff is having in-depth knowledge of the design of steel materials in construction, and continually monitoring the pulse of the industry and the status of the tariff in order to help building owners make the best possible project decisions. Please contact FSB at (405) 840-2931 to learn more about how our team of architects and engineers can help lead your project down the path to success.
One of the gates being planned at Will Rogers World Airport will be bigger than others have been so far in Oklahoma City, Director Mark Kranenburg said Thursday.
The reason – being able to receive international flights – likely won’t be realized for several years, he told members of the Oklahoma City Convention and Visitors Commission, but it’s better to have a long-range vision than to miss opportunities for reacting too late.
In 2015, the Oklahoma City Airport Trust announced plans to expand the terminal at Will Rogers World Airport to include an updated, streamlined security checkpoint, public observation gallery, and increased shopping and dining amenities. The $86 million project is being driven by the need for more capacity – the airport recorded a record number of travelers in 2017, and projections suggest the numbers will keep growing with Oklahoma City’s population.
The expansion initially included four new gates with room set aside for six more as needed. Oklahoma-based architectural and engineering firm Frankfurt-Short-Bruza Associates won the contract and partnered with the Hellmuth Obata & Kassabaum firm, which has worked on more than 350 major aviation terminal projects around the world.
Even if Will Rogers World Airport doesn’t start receiving international flights of its own soon, Kranenburg said, it still must be able to handle diversions for medical, mechanical and weather emergencies. And those flights tend to be wide-bodied aircraft. And due to new federal laws about how long passengers can be held waiting on planes, they need somewhere comfortable to disembark, possibly for hours at a time. If those passengers are from out of the country, they must be kept segregated from domestic traffic.
“But we also want to position ourselves to one day be able to handle international arrivals of our own … even if it is many years down the road,” he said, adding that space will be needed for Customs and additional security.
Kranenburg said airport officials are still working on estimated costs with the engineer – he cited a figure of $89 million. Bids will go out before the end of the year, timed to avoid construction staffing conflicts with other major projects in the city, he said.
In the meantime, the airport’s cargo building has already been demolished to make room for expansion on the east. The center of the terminal, marked by its primary elevator bank, will shift in that direction, giving the airport a slightly unbalanced look until that work is completed, he said.
Much is demanded of today’s schools, not just from the teachers and students within, but from the educational facilities themselves. Unique, flexible learning spaces are essential to provide modern students with the optimal learning environment. At the same time these buildings must be as cost-efficient as possible, to help cash-strapped school districts across the country cope with ongoing budget challenges and free up funds that can be apportioned elsewhere.
Creating learning environments that meet both these critical needs isn’t difficult, but for best results it does require an integrated, “whole building” approach throughout the design process, said Fred Schmidt, Senior Principal. That’s because many standard features that boost learning also allow for significant cost savings over the life cycle of the building, and this holds true both for new facilities and for renovations to existing schools.
When designing a school building – whether it’s a brand new facility or a renovation – FSB’s design team meets extensively with all stakeholders in the process, to obtain input from all perspectives and identify specific needs and concerns. “Energy efficiency is an offshoot advantage of the energy modeling we normally do when designing a healthy school, and we look at the overall design of the facility to find energy wasters,” Schmidt said. Once this data is obtained, “There are software systems packages we utilize that allow us to do energy modeling with shared information, so we can more effectively look at the energy usage,” Schmidt added. “Previously all we might have to go on were copies of the school’s utility bills or bills from comparable buildings in the area. Now that information is more accessible, so we can analyze the historic energy usage and the current usage and incorporate this information into our energy modeling. This allows us to achieve much greater accuracy in our energy cost estimations.”
The same factors which reduce a school’s energy operating costs overlap significantly with the factors that allow for peak student performance, namely thermal comfort and lighting, Schmidt said. The biggest challenges in these areas, they said, typically are classroom air circulation, dissipating heat that’s generated in the kitchen, and installing appropriate lighting throughout, especially in gymnasiums, restrooms, classrooms and parking lots. The envelope of a school building also must be taken into consideration, since windows are the greatest source of heat loss and heat gain in any structure, Schmidt noted. Installing thermal, low-E windows will provide one of the strongest weapons possible in the fight to lower a school’s operating costs.
“Research has shown that if students feel safe and physically comfortable, then they learn better,” Schmidt said. “That means everything from being safe from weather and outside intruders to maximizing personal comfort. If the building has the proper air changes, for example, with plenty of fresh air, no drafts, and a comfortable temperature, then they perform better. If your mechanical/electrical/plumbing systems aren’t at peak performance, then you can lose out on both energy savings and optimum student performance.”
One of the most effective trends in both school and commercial building design is that of “daylight harvesting” – the use of natural lighting alone or in combination with artificial lighting. The dual benefits of lower cost/improved performance are particularly visible in this key area, Schmidt noted. Multiple studies over the past several decades have linked natural lighting to improved school performance and fewer student behavioral problems.
On the energy savings front, classrooms and other spaces can be designed to maximize exposure to natural light. When renovating schools where fluorescent or incandescent lights are established, control systems can be upgraded and programmed to back off using these artificial lights when natural light is available. In either case, the result again is a significant lowering of utility costs. In existing spaces, the single greatest impact to cost savings and quality lighting is to replace older light fixtures with newer LED lighting, Schmidt said.
The use of automated building control systems to monitor HVAC functions is another design factor that has a major impact on both cost and comfort. A fresh wave of wireless technology and computer-networked, design-integrated controls make it possible to add multiple lighting control options that save money and are more flexible. These devices can independently perform such actions as controlling window openings for heat and fresh air control, and operating window shades for maximum heat control, so that they automatically adjust as the sun moves across a building. Boosting and lowering the ambient light provides a major savings in heat and cooling costs — funds that can potentially be used for other upgrades or desired building features.
For school officials who want to do more research, there’s also assistance available from the federal government, through programs such as the EPA’s ENERGY STAR for K-12 School Districts program, which provides technical support, guidance on financing options and recognition for schools that want to use energy more efficiently. (Program details are available at: https://www.energystar.gov/buildings.)
To learn more about how our cost-effective education facility design services can benefit your school district, contact Laure Majors at [email protected]or (405) 840‑2931.
University campuses are often noted for their classic architecture, with buildings that can date back 100 years or more. Yet tradition and history – while important – run a distant second when students are shopping for the best higher education fit. That’s why leaders who want to keep their programs competitive must look at more than just the excellence of their faculty. They also need to consider the broader factors that today’s students are looking for – namely flexible classrooms, comfortable living spaces, access to cutting-edge technology and plenty of open areas that make it easy to socialize in large or small groups, said FSB Senior Principal Fred Schmidt.
“For a long time, education buildings were very institutional in appearance. There was no focus on holistic designs that take into account the entire student experience,” Schmidt said. “That has changed significantly over the years, to where it’s now a combination of the programs and the physical environment. Today’s students aren’t just seeking state-of-the-art facilities for their particular field of study. They’re also looking for dormitories, cafeterias, fitness centers and other gathering spaces that offer a more fun and homelike feel.”
The impact of a building on student recruitment efforts can be particularly enhanced when an educational program requires a highly technical or otherwise specialized facility. For instance, FSB transformed a run-down traditional classroom building into a cutting-edge dance instruction facility for Oklahoma City University’s top-tier Ann Lacy School of American Dance. In 2017, the school was named the best dance program in the country by OnStage, a national media outlet that covers the performing arts. The facility designed by FSB is cited among the reasons for its success.
Over the years, FSB has designed a number of highly successful modern learning environments and other facilities for its education clients, and these have had a significant impact on student recruitment, Schmidt noted. Some examples:
The Forensic Science Institute, created for the University of Central Oklahoma’s top-tier forensics program. With its state-of-the-art technology and flexible design, the facility isn’t just used by students — forensic professionals from across the country routinely visit for continuing education training.
The Oklahoma City University School of Law is now housed in the city’s original high school building, which was constructed in 1910 and is listed on the National Register of Historic Places. FSB’s design maintained the building’s historic integrity while incorporating state-of-the-art technology, a functioning courtroom and other modern learning features. Since its completion, admissions to the prestigious program have steadily risen.
The CEAT Lab, designed for long-time client Oklahoma State University, is the newest undergraduate facility for its College of Engineering, Architecture and Technology. Competition for these students is intense, and the new lab — equipped with such unique features as drone testing capabilities — is already a major selling point for campus recruiters.
Creating a Holistic Atmosphere
Along with the educational facilities, students are increasingly choosing campus environments with café-style cafeterias, comfortable and technology-friendly dorms, fitness/wellness centers and student unions that create opportunities to interact. Over the years FSB has designed dozens of these types of facilities, most recently new dormitories and a newly renovated kitchen for Northern Oklahoma College, which are also being used for recruitment purposes.
“What it boils down to is that these physical environments play a very important role in student recruitment,” Schmidt said. “Students today want spaces that feel comfortable, no matter what they are. There has been a generational shift, with the result that the opportunities for social interaction have increased tremendously, and that needs to be reflected in everything from the classroom to the cafeteria and beyond.”
For more information about education building design as a recruitment tool, contact Laure Majors at [email protected], (405) 840-2931.
Many people assume that the less expensive a building is, the less attractive it will be. This is a common misconception, as an appealing design can definitely be achieved for any type of facility, even when there are tight budget constraints.
“Building designs typically consider function first, and this includes issues like durability, maintainability and the quality of the materials used,” said John Osborne, FSB Senior Design Project Manager. “Once the functional objectives have been established for a project, they will be the key factors driving the design. However, you can achieve those design objectives in a variety of ways. Attention to simple design principles such as balance, rhythm, scale, proportion, texture, color and light allows you to achieve an aesthetically pleasing design without necessarily impacting a project’s costs.”
As one example of our firm’s ability to create attractive facilities within a limited budget, FSB is currently designing a Family Justice Center in Shawnee, Oklahoma which will offer single-location social services primarily for victims of domestic abuse. For this group, which struggles with the financial constraints typical of non-profit agencies, the resulting building design is very budget conscious, but also aesthetically appealing and functionally efficient. The design incorporates a welcoming, non-institutional aesthetic in which immediately upon entering the facility victims (clients) can see at a glance the multiple agencies located there to serve their needs. This is a simple planning strategy which has no significant effect on construction budget, but one that contributes meaningfully to the overall atmosphere proposed.
Another way FSB projects maximize each dollar invested is through designing attractive spaces that can be used for multiple functions. For higher education clients, for instance, lobbies and courtyards can be used as informal gathering spaces, study areas and as a location for banquets, concerts and other special events.
Budget is the primary concern for virtually every client, and FSB addresses this in a manner that distinguishes our firm from many of its competitors. In addition to designing with budget in mind, periodic cost estimates are provided to clients throughout the design process, to ensure probable construction costs do not begin to creep up beyond the established budget.
“Oftentimes, a balance between simplicity and more elaborate aesthetics must be achieved,” Osborne said. “Designs that are too austere can be equally inappropriate to those appearing too opulent. Some projects, such as university buildings or presidential facilities, may require a more stately appearance, while others warrant a more austere aesthetic. There is a need to create an appropriate aesthetic for every project.
“Image goals are unique to each client and project,” he added. “What may be important for one client may not be as highly valued by another. Therefore, we must first discover what each client’s desired image goals are for any given project. Our objective is to then create an appropriate design aesthetic which achieves those goals. Even with extremely limited budgets, projects of all sizes can be made attractive through good design principles and the creative use of simple materials.”
For more information about balancing building aesthetics and budget, contact Laure Majors, Business Development Principal, at [email protected] or (405) 840-2931.
As a member of the Muscogee (Creek) Nation, Oklahoma City architect Jason Holuby is more than familiar with the importance of ceremonial fires among Native Americans. His and other tribes’ annual Green Corn Ceremony, for one, symbolizes the renewal of the harvest — and of the spirit and tribal traditions.
Choosing the name “New Fire Native Design Group” for his months-old architectural and engineering affiliate of Frankfurt-Short-Bruza FSB Associates was a natural for Holuby, who is president of the new five-member force.
“Just like when a tribal town was formed, we are lighting a new fire — a fire that reflects our passion and drive for what we do,” he said. “We’re founded on the idea of new beginnings, the emergence of a new direction and focus on supporting Native American clients.”
Native American projects represent 30 percent of FSB revenues, Holuby said. “It’s become a big piece of what we do, especially over the past three years,” he said.
Jason Holuby, FSB architect and member of the Muscogee (Creek) Nation who will be leading New Fire Native Design Group poses for a photo at his office in Oklahoma City, Okla. on Monday, Dec. 11, 2017. Photo by Chris Landsberger, The Oklahoman
New Fire Native has the backing of FSB, a nearly 75-year-old firm that employs 165, including engineers, architects and interior designers.
From his fifth-floor offices at 5801 Broadway Extension, Holuby, 41, sat down with The Oklahoman on Monday to talk about his life and career. This is an edited transcript:
Q: Tell us about your roots.
A: I grew up in Eufaula, the heart of the Muscogee Creek Nation. My dad’s dad was full-blooded Creek, and left the family when my dad was young. His mom moved around, to Oklahoma City and elsewhere, to try to make ends meet. My dad eventually moved in with a friend in Eufaula and started working in a pharmacy owned by who would become my maternal grandfather. That’s how my parents met, and what influenced my father, after serving in the Air Force, to pursue a pharmacy degree at Southwestern Oklahoma State University. I’m the youngest of their three children. My older brother works as a pharmacist in California, and my older sister is a former teacher and now stay-at-home mom in Lafayette. My parents are retired and still live in Eufaula. When I was growing up, my mom was a homemaker, until I turned 12 or 13, when she started running the five-and-dime store adjacent to my father’s pharmacy of 15 years. When I was at OU, she went back to complete the education degree she all but finished. We graduated the same year, and she taught in Henryetta. After selling his business, my father worked 15 years as a pharmacist for the Creek Nation. It was important for him to give back to his culture. I see myself as doing the same thing today — giving back to my culture.
Q: What was your thing growing up?
A: Of course, living near Lake Eufaula, we did a lot of fishing, boating and skiing. I started playing piano when I was 8, and picked up the guitar when I was 12. In high school, I played in the orchestra pit for musicals. I was exposed to my Native American culture, including area stomp dances and Creek language classes. I was always into art, including pencil, watercolor, and oil. One of the regional competitions I won included a partial scholarship to Bacone College in Muskogee, which I didn’t end up taking.
Q: Where did you go to college?
A: I was awarded several scholarships to OU, where I started as a chemical engineering/pre-med major. But I wasn’t passionate about my studies until I serendipitously switched to architecture. After a year at OU, I was talking with an architecture major on my dorm floor who was complaining that he’d never been artistic, but had to draw for hours in a program he considered too technical. Intrigued, I bought my friend’s architectural supplies for half of what he’d paid for them. From the second I entered the architecture school, I knew it was what I was meant to do. FSB Principal Glenn Short was a college friend of my parents, and allowed me to intern at FSB after my freshman and sophomore years, so I could be surer about the path I’d chosen.
Q: Tell us about your early career and how you came to join FSB.
A: Following graduation, I worked three and a half years for McFarland Architects in Tulsa, specializing in architecture for rural hospitals. I reached back out to FSB 14 years ago, when I was ready to work for a bigger firm and to handle more diverse projects that involved fewer codes and regulations, and included interesting interior and exterior, as well as functional, designs. For the first eight years with FSB, I focused on projects at Cameron University in Lawton, including its master plan, new business school, student union and journalism school. For Oklahoma City University, I helped design the nursing school and its downtown law school.
Q: Tell us about a few of FSB’s Native American projects?
A: We’ve handled more than 30 projects for the Chickasaws. We started out with the Chickasaw Cultural Center in Sulphur, as the owner’s representative, overseeing the process. Then, we took on a stronger role during construction, and subsequently designed the Chickasaw Visitors Center across from the Artisan Hotel in Sulphur. We also handled the $220 million, 500,000-square-foot Choctaw headquarters in Durant. Of the 39 tribes in Oklahoma, we so far have worked for eight, including handling the Shawnee Tribe Heritage Center and Muscogee (Creek) Nation master plan.
Q: Certain patterns and designs are important to Native American tribes. How did you incorporate those emphases?
A: The diamond pattern — the personification of the rattlesnake — is important to the Chickasaws. Like rattlesnakes, they stick to themselves and don’t go looking for conflict, but if you step on, or irritate, them, they’re ready to strike back. In the Chickasaw projects, we incorporated the diamond pattern on the outside of the buildings, in the woodworks, wall fabric and glazing and lighting. Meanwhile, a circle with a cross in it is important to the Choctaws. It represents the four stages of life, four cardinal directions and more. There’s even more emphasis on the four seasons for the Creek Nation.
Throughout our firm’s history, FSB has always been known for its exceptionally talented staff. There’s another factor that’s critical to our success, however, namely that most of our firm’s 200+ architects, engineers, planners, interior designers and other key personnel are located under one roof. This deliberate co-location strategy creates unequaled opportunities for staff to streamline communication about a project’s feasibility, constructability and cost. This improved collaboration, in turn, is an essential ingredient to the successful completion of each project, no matter what its size or method of delivery.
“At FSB, our in-house teams enable great communication,” said Gene Brown, President. “Rather than working in silos, our engineers work directly with our architects to provide a cohesive design. Each project is assigned a team, and that team works closely together throughout the life of the project. When one of our experts can literally get up and go ask someone a question, instead of waiting for phone calls and emails to be returned, it has an obvious reduction in lag time.”
In contrast, many AE firms have architects and engineers in different locations who communicate in a sporadic fashion during the design process, so their facility designs aren’t as cohesive. The end result can be buildings that are less energy efficient and more difficult and costly to maintain.
Sometimes clients fear that selecting a large in-house firm means they’ll get “pot luck,” with randomly assigned architects and engineers who may or may not have experience with their particular type of facility. At FSB, this is far from the case, as the firm’s interdisciplinary teams are assigned to specific market sectors. FSB’s market sectors include Aviation, Civic, Commercial, Mission Critical, Native American, Federal and Education. Each market sector team has extensive, ongoing and often award-winning design experience in that particular sector. By working in specialized teams on multiple projects, these professionals have developed excellent communication and overall understanding of each member’s role in specific types of projects. This leads to increased performance.
These benefits continue to hold true no matter what project delivery method is selected. During the design process in-house teams also have access to a common CAD database, which is seen by all disciplines in real time and allows errors to be caught and changes made early in the process. This makes a huge difference in FSB’s ability to identify any design issues as quickly as possible and to provide coordinated, thorough and up-to-date construction drawings. The result is major time and money savings for the client and a smoother construction process.
“This simultaneous collaboration also benefits the client long after the facility is completed,” Brown said. “For example, if the support systems of a building are designed in from the beginning, rather than added as an afterthought, it results in building systems that function more economically and are much easier to maintain throughout the life of the facility.”
Finally, having a large pool of professional staff under one roof makes an enormous difference when it comes to quality control. At FSB, each design undergoes an extensive peer review process conducted by an interdisciplinary team of architects and engineers who are not assigned to that project. This process is hugely simplified when a reviewer can literally walk across an office aisle to get questions answered or consult with other personnel.
Buildings are much more complex than they used to be. By working together in house, FSB can ensure the architects and engineers collaborate from the very beginning and avoid a lot of unnecessary expense, delays and frustration for clients.
To learn more about the benefits of FSB’s in-house services, contact Laure Majors at [email protected] or 405-840-2931.
FSB was once again voted the Best Architecture Firm by The Journal Record’s Reader Rankings. This is the second year in a row the Oklahoma-City-based architecture and engineering firm has been recognized for this honor.
FSB recently contacted one of the largest U.S. fabricators and confirmed the January 1st cost of $800 per ton and was told the raw material cost has already increased to $1,100 per ton at the onset of the tariff (an increase of 37.5% on raw material), with additional cost increases expected.
