Named after its major donor — co-founder of Analog Devices — this Frank Gehry designed holds the top spot for highest absolute cost per square foot of any US university research — just shy of $500 million in today’s dollars.
The project replaced a “temporary” structure from World War II known for fostering innovation, particularly through the MIT Radiation Laboratory. The new center was intended to continue this legacy by housing the Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory (CSAIL), the Laboratory for Information and Decision Systems (LIDS), and the Department of Linguistics and Philosophy, while promoting interdisciplinary collaboration through its innovative design.
— Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) (@MIT) May 23, 2017
The donations were driven by MIT’s goal to consolidate its computer science, electrical engineering, and artificial intelligence departments into a state-of-the-art facility to encourage the exchange of ideas and technology. The project, completed in 2004, faced challenges, including cost overruns and a subsequent lawsuit against Gehry and contractor Skanska USA for alleged design and construction flaws, such as leaks and drainage issues. This lawsuit was amicably resolved in 2010. Despite these issues, the Stata Center remains a landmark of MIT’s campus, celebrated for its bold architecture and role in fostering innovation.
Bill Gates, who donated $20 million through the William H. Gates Foundation, resulting in one of the center’s towers being named the Gates Tower.
Alexander W. Dreyfoos Jr. (MIT class of 1954), who gave $15 million, leading to the naming of the Dreyfoos Tower.
Morris Chang of TSMC and Charles Thomas “E.B.” Pritchard Hintze (an MIT graduate associated with JD Edwards, now Oracle), who also provided significant funds.
Steven Kirsch, founder of Infoseek, who contributed $2.5 million specifically for the construction of the center’s auditorium.
Here we shift our perspective 120 degrees to understand the point of view of the Producer interest in the American national standards system (See ANSI Essential Requirements). The title of this post draws from the location of US and European headquarters. We list proposals by a successful electrical manufacturer for discussion during today’s colloquium:
2026 National Electrical Code
CMP-1: short circuit current ratings, connections with copper cladded aluminum conductors, maintenance to be provided by OEM, field markings
CMP-2: reconditioned equipment, receptacles in accessory buildings, GFCI & AFCI protection, outlet placement generally, outlets for outdoor HVAC equipment(1)
(1) Here we would argue that if a pad mount HVAC unit needs service with tools that need AC power once every 5-10 years then the dedicated branch circuit is not needed. Many campuses have on-site, full-time staff that can service outdoor pad mounted HVAC equipment without needing a nearby outlet. One crew — two electricians — will run about $2500 per day to do anything on campus.
CMP-3: No proposals
CMP-4: solar voltaic systems (1)
(1) Seems reasonable – spillover outdoor night time lighting effect upon solar panel charging should be identified.
CMP-5: Administrative changes only
CMP-6: No proposals
CMP-7: Distinction between “repair” and “servicing”
CMP-10: Short circuit ratings, service disconnect, disconnect for meters, transformer secondary conductor, secondary conductor taps, surge protective devices, disconnecting means generally, spliced and tap conductors, more metering safety, 1200 ampere threshold for arc reduction technology, reconditioned surge equipment shall not be permitted, switchboard short circuit ratings
Today we examine the catalog of several ANSI-accredited, consortia and ad hoc standard developers with titles relevant to the planning, construction and management of the built environment of education communities nested within human settlements characterized by a high population density, extensive infrastructure, and various economic, social, and cultural activities. In other words, from the point of view of a campus as a “city within a city” with attention to infrastructure.
Several organizations and bodies in the United States that develop model codes and standards related to zoning and land use. These model codes and standards are often adopted or referenced by municipalities in their zoning ordinances. Here are some prominent organizations and their model codes:
Each of the foregoing titles have some bearing upon decisions about land use. However, keep in mind, that zoning regulations are primarily established at the local level by municipalities, cities, and counties, rather than through national standard bodes. These organizations and their codes provide guidance and best practices for zoning, but specific regulations can vary significantly between different jurisdictions. They are frequently incorporated by reference into regulations by governments at all levels.
Join us today with the login credentials at the upper right of our home page.
Here are some community colleges in the United States that are embedded within cities, offering students the advantages of an urban setting:
City College of San Francisco – San Francisco, California
Los Angeles City College – Los Angeles, California
Borough of Manhattan Community College – New York, New York
Miami Dade College – Wolfson Campus – Miami, Florida
City College of Chicago – Chicago, Illinois
Seattle Central College – Seattle, Washington
Austin Community College – Rio Grande Campus – Austin, Texas
Houston Community College – Central Campus – Houston, Texas
San Antonio College – San Antonio, Texas
Portland Community College – Cascade Campus – Portland, Oregon
Washtenaw Community College – Ann Arbor-Ypsilanti, Michigan
These community colleges not only provide access to higher education but also offer the benefits of being located within major urban centers, including proximity to job markets, cultural institutions, and public transportation.
The Swedish Standards Institute for Standards is the Global Secretariat for ISO TC/211 which leads standardization in the field of digital geographic information. Standardization titles developed by this committee aims to establish a structured set of standards for information concerning objects or phenomena that are directly or indirectly associated with a location relative to the Earth. These standards may specify, for geographic information, methods, tools and services for data management (including definition and description), acquiring, processing, analyzing, accessing, presenting and transferring such data in digital / electronic form between different users, systems and locations.
We maintain all ISO projects on the standing agenda of our Global and ICT colloquia which are open to everyone. You may communicate with Jennifer Garner (jgarner@itic.org) if you wish to participate in standards-setting activity from the United States point of view. Keep in mind that our network of education communities outside the United States is significant and long-standing.
Issue: [16-141]
Category: Global, Information & Communications Technology
Colleagues: Mike Anthony, Jim Harvey, Jack Janveja, Richard Robben
Abstract.This article makes three related arguments. First, that although many definitions of the smart city have been proposed, corporate promoters say a smart city uses information technology to pursue efficient systems through real-time monitoring and control. Second, this definition is not new and equivalent to the idea of urban cybernetics debated in the 1970s. Third, drawing on a discussion of Rio de Janeiro’s Operations Center, I argue that viewing urban problems as wicked problems allows for more fundamental solutions than urban cybernetics, but requires local innovation and stakeholder participation. Therefore the last section describes institutions for municipal innovation and IT-enabled collaborative planning.
So proud to announce the @ellisoninst is beginning construction on our new campus at the @UniofOxford and broadening our mission: Science & Engineering for Humanity. EIT develops & deploys technology in pursuit of solving four of humanity’s most challenging & enduring problems.… pic.twitter.com/vSkHWSS8EK
The purpose of the code is to establish minimum requirements to provide a reasonable level of health, safety, property protection and welfare by controlling the design, location, use or occupancy of all buildings and structures through the regulated and orderly development of land and land uses within this jurisdiction.
CLICK IMAGE
Municipalities usually have specific land use or zoning considerations to accommodate the unique needs and characteristics of college towns:
Mixed-Use Zoning: Cities with colleges and universities often employ mixed-use zoning strategies to encourage a vibrant and diverse urban environment. This zoning approach allows for a combination of residential, commercial, and institutional uses within the same area, fostering a sense of community and facilitating interactions between students, faculty, and residents.
Height and Density Restrictions: Due to the presence of educational institutions, cities may have specific regulations on building height and density to ensure compatibility with the surrounding neighborhoods and maintain the character of the area. These restrictions help balance the need for development with the preservation of the existing urban fabric.
Student Housing: Cities with colleges and universities may have regulations or guidelines for student housing to ensure an adequate supply of affordable and safe accommodations for students. This can include requirements for minimum bedroom sizes, occupancy limits, and proximity to campus.
Parking and Transportation: Given the concentration of students, faculty, and staff, parking and transportation considerations are crucial. Cities may require educational institutions to provide parking facilities or implement transportation demand management strategies, such as promoting public transit use, cycling infrastructure, and pedestrian-friendly designs.
Community Engagement: Some cities encourage colleges and universities to engage with the local community through formalized agreements or community benefit plans. These may include commitments to support local businesses, contribute to neighborhood improvement projects, or provide educational and cultural resources to residents.
This is a relatively new title in the International Code Council catalog; revised every three years in the Group B tranche of titles. Search on character strings such as “zoning” in the link below reveals the ideas that ran through the current revision:
Reed v. Town of Gilbert (2015): This Supreme Court case involved a challenge to the town of Gilbert, Arizona’s sign code, which regulated the size, location, and duration of signs based on their content. The court held that the sign code was a content-based restriction on speech and therefore subject to strict scrutiny.
City of Ladue v. Gilleo (1994): In this Supreme Court case, the court struck down a municipal ordinance that banned the display of signs on residential property, except for signs that fell within specific exemptions. The court held that the ban was an unconstitutional restriction on the freedom of speech.
Metromedia, Inc. v. San Diego (1981): This Supreme Court case involved a challenge to a San Diego ordinance that banned off-premises advertising signs while allowing on-premises signs. The court held that the ordinance was an unconstitutional restriction on free speech, as it discriminated against certain types of speech.
City of Ladue v. Center for the Study of Responsive Law, Inc. (1980): In this Supreme Court case, the court upheld a municipal ordinance that prohibited the display of signs on public property, but only if the signs were posted for longer than 10 days. The court held that the ordinance was a valid time, place, and manner restriction on speech.
City of Boerne v. Flores (1997): This Supreme Court case involved a challenge to a municipal sign code that regulated the size, location, and content of signs in the city. The court held that the sign code violated the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, as it burdened the exercise of religion without a compelling government interest.
Site and survey standards play a crucial role in the planning, development, and management of large college campuses. They are wildly interdependent with the politics of the host community. Some considerations:
Optimal Land Use: Large college campuses often have extensive land holdings. Site and survey standards help ensure that the land is utilized efficiently, with consideration given to factors such as building placement, parking areas, green spaces, and pedestrian pathways. This optimization enhances the functionality of the campus while also preserving natural resources and promoting sustainability.
Safety and Accessibility: Standards for site surveys include considerations for safety and accessibility. This involves ensuring that buildings are constructed in compliance with relevant codes and regulations to minimize hazards and risks. Additionally, accessibility standards ensure that campus facilities are designed to accommodate individuals with disabilities, promoting inclusivity and equal access to education.
Infrastructure Planning: Site and survey standards are essential for planning the infrastructure of a large campus. This includes utilities such as water, electricity, sewage, and telecommunications. Proper planning ensures that these essential services are efficiently distributed throughout the campus to support academic, residential, and administrative functions.
Environmental Considerations: Large college campuses often have a significant environmental impact. Site and survey standards can incorporate measures to minimize this impact, such as sustainable landscaping practices, stormwater management systems, and energy-efficient building designs. By adhering to these standards, campuses can reduce their carbon footprint and contribute to environmental conservation efforts.
Regulatory Compliance: Compliance with local, state, and federal regulations is essential for any large-scale development project, including college campuses. Site and survey standards ensure that campus construction and expansion projects adhere to zoning laws, environmental regulations, building codes, and other legal requirements. Compliance with these standards mitigates the risk of fines, legal disputes, and delays in project implementation.
Aesthetic and Cultural Considerations: Large college campuses often serve as cultural landmarks and focal points within their communities. Site and survey standards may include guidelines for architectural design, landscaping, and historical preservation to enhance the aesthetic appeal of the campus and celebrate its cultural heritage. By maintaining a visually appealing and culturally rich environment, campuses can attract students, faculty, and visitors while fostering a sense of pride and belonging among the campus community.
In summary, site and survey standards are essential for the effective planning, development, and management of large college campuses in the US. By ensuring optimal land use, promoting safety and accessibility, planning infrastructure, addressing environmental concerns, ensuring regulatory compliance, and enhancing aesthetics, these standards contribute to the overall success and sustainability of the campus environment.
Core standards for college campus land use typically encompass a range of factors including zoning, building placement, infrastructure, environmental considerations, accessibility, and aesthetics. While specific standards may vary depending on the institution and its location, here are some common core standards:
Zoning and Land Use Regulations: Compliance with local zoning ordinances and land use regulations governing the allowable uses of the campus land, such as residential, academic, administrative, recreational, and green spaces.
Building Placement and Density: Guidelines for the placement, size, and density of buildings on the campus to optimize land use, preserve green spaces, and maintain a cohesive campus layout.
Pedestrian and Bicycle Infrastructure: Design standards for sidewalks, crosswalks, bike lanes, and pathways to ensure safe and convenient pedestrian and bicycle circulation throughout the campus.
Vehicle Circulation and Parking: Standards for vehicular circulation, parking lot design, and parking space allocation to accommodate the transportation needs of students, faculty, staff, and visitors while minimizing congestion and maximizing safety.
Utilities Infrastructure: Requirements for the provision of essential utilities such as water supply, electricity, sewage, telecommunications, and internet connectivity to support the functional needs of campus facilities.
Environmental Conservation: Standards for sustainable landscaping, stormwater management, energy efficiency, waste management, and environmental stewardship to minimize the campus’s environmental footprint and promote ecological sustainability.
Accessibility: Compliance with accessibility standards outlined in the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) to ensure that campus facilities, pathways, and amenities are accessible to individuals with disabilities, including wheelchair users, visually impaired individuals, and those with mobility impairments.
Historical and Cultural Preservation: Guidelines for the preservation and adaptive reuse of historical buildings and cultural landmarks on the campus, as well as provisions for incorporating cultural elements and artwork into new development projects.
Aesthetic Design Guidelines: Standards for architectural design, landscaping, signage, lighting, and public art to enhance the visual appeal and cohesive character of the campus environment while reflecting the institution’s identity and values.
Safety and Security Measures: Implementation of safety and security measures, such as lighting, surveillance cameras, emergency call boxes, and landscaping strategies, to ensure a safe and secure campus environment for students, faculty, staff, and visitors.
These core standards provide a framework for the effective planning, development, and management of college campus land use, supporting the institution’s educational mission, fostering a vibrant campus community, and enhancing the overall quality of campus life.
Join us today at 16:00 UTC when we update our understanding of titles in the various applicable standards catalogs that affect the safety and sustainability of these “cities-within-cities”
“Starry Night Over the Rhône” 1888 Vincent van Gogh
Today we refresh our understanding of the moment in illumination technologies for outdoor lighting systems— related but different from our exploration of building interior illumination systems in Illumination 200. Later in 2024 we will roll out Illumination 400 (Holiday illumination) and Illumination 500 which explores litigation related to public illumination technology. As cities-within-cities the shared perimeter of a campus with the host municipality has proven rich in legal controversy and action.
Illumination technology was the original inspiration for the electric utility industry; providing night-time security and transforming every sector of every economy on earth. Lighting load remains the largest component of any building’s electric load — about 35 percent– making it a large target for energy regulations.
Our inquiry begins with selections from the following documents…
2023 National Electrical Code: Article 410 (While the bulk of the NEC concerns indoor wiring fire hazards, there are passages that inform outdoor lighting wiring safety)
…and about 20 other accredited, consortia or ad hoc standards developers and publishers aligned principally with vertical incumbents. Illumination was the original inspiration (i.e. the first “killer app”) for the electrical power industry in every nation. Its best practice literature reflects a fast-moving, shape-changing domain.
Click in today with the login credentials at the upper right of our home page.
Upper Wharfedale Primary Federation School District Yorkshire Dales
Outdoor lighting systems can be owned and maintained by different entities depending on the context and location. Here are some examples of ownership regimes for outdoor lighting systems:
Public ownership: In this case, outdoor lighting systems are owned and maintained by the local government or municipal authority. The lighting may be installed in public spaces such as parks, streets, and other outdoor areas for the safety and convenience of the public.
Private ownership: Outdoor lighting systems may be owned by private individuals or organizations. For example, a business owner may install outdoor lighting for security or aesthetic reasons, or a homeowner may install outdoor lighting in their garden or yard.
Co-owned: Outdoor lighting systems may be owned jointly by multiple entities. For example, a residential community may jointly own and maintain outdoor lighting in their shared spaces such as parking areas, community parks, or recreational facilities.
Utility ownership: Outdoor lighting systems may be owned and maintained by utility companies such as electric or energy companies. These companies may install and maintain street lights or other lighting systems for the public good.
Third-party ownership: In some cases, a third-party entity may own and maintain outdoor lighting systems on behalf of a public or private entity. For example, a lighting contractor may install and maintain lighting in a public park on behalf of a local government.
The ownership regime of an outdoor lighting system can have implications for issues such as installation, maintenance, and cost-sharing. It is important to consider ownership when designing and implementing outdoor lighting systems to ensure their long-term effectiveness and sustainability.
New update alert! The 2022 update to the Trademark Assignment Dataset is now available online. Find 1.29 million trademark assignments, involving 2.28 million unique trademark properties issued by the USPTO between March 1952 and January 2023: https://t.co/njrDAbSpwBpic.twitter.com/GkAXrHoQ9T
_-_Nationalmuseum_-_edited.jpg)
