The majority oppressed? On asymmetrical multiculturalism and majority rights
Standards Institution of Israel | Tel Aviv University Statement of Financial Position 2022: ₪ 8.332B
…’Nestled at the entrance of Tel Aviv University’s Brender-Moss Library for Social Sciences, Management, and Education, a coffee cart—welcomes students and faculty with its setup on the entrance floor and adjacent plaza.
Under wide umbrellas, patrons sip aromatic hot coffees, iced lattes, or refreshing cold drinks while munching on fresh baked goods, sandwiches and snacks. Seating spills into designated library nooks, blending caffeine-fueled focus with outdoor breezes…’
7 Tel Aviv University students. 1 epic @TEDx stage.
Last week, seven remarkable Tel Aviv University students challenged traditional perspectives and shared groundbreaking ideas during the inaugural TEDxTelAvivUniversity event themed: “The New “Old”: Ideas, Reimagined.”
The… pic.twitter.com/fbbCww5eho
— Tel Aviv University (@TelAvivUni) January 12, 2025
| Peter Boghossian: Muslim Migration Failure in Western Europe w/ Raymond Ibrahim |
Public Input on the 2029 Edition will be received until January 6, 2027
Books cannot be killed by fire. People die, but books never die
No man and no force can put thought in a concentration camp forever
— Franklin Roosevelt
Many education communities build and maintain cultural resource properties whose safety and sustainability objectives are informed by local adaptations of consensus products developed by the International Code Council (ICC) and the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA). We need to understand the ICC and NFPA product suites as a pair. For most real assets in the education industry they move “roughly” in tandem even though they are produced by different organizations for a different set of customers. Sometimes the out-of-step condition between NFPA and ICC permits subject matter experts on technical committees to make the best possible decisions regarding the safety and sustainability agenda of the interest group they represent; but not always.
Occupancy classification is always a first consideration and both the NFPA and the ICC have a claim to some part of this occupancy concept*. In the ICC suite we find code requirements for many “cultural places of worship” tracking in the following sections of the International Building Code (IBC):
Section 303 Assembly Group A-3
Section 305 Educational Group E
Section 308 Institutional Group I
Note that Sections 305 and 308 recognize the accessory and multi-functional nature of occupancy types in the education industry – i.e child care and adult care function can marge and be an accessory to a place of worship. The general rule in the IBC is that accessory religious educational rooms and religious auditoriums with occupant loads of less than 100 per room or space are not considered separate occupancies. Other standards developers are guided by this rule.







Close coupled to the IBC for this occupancy class is NFPA 909 Code for the Protection of Cultural Resource Properties – Museums, Libraries, and Places of Worship. From the document prospectus:
• This code describes principles and practices of protection for cultural resource properties (including, but not limited to, museums, libraries, and places of worship), their contents, and collections, against conditions or physical situations with the potential to cause damage or loss.
• This code covers ongoing operations and rehabilitation and acknowledges the need to preserve culturally significant and character-defining building features and sensitive, often irreplaceable, collections and to provide continuity of operations.
• Principles and practices for life safety in cultural resource properties are outside the scope of this code. Where this code includes provisions for maintaining means of egress and controlling occupant load, it is to facilitate the evacuation of items of cultural significance, allow access for damage limitation teams in an emergency, and prevent damage to collections through overcrowding or as an unintended consequence of an emergency evacuation.
• Library and museum collections that are privately owned and not open to the public shall not be required to meet the requirements of this code.







Since we are hard upon release of the 2021 Edition of NFPA 909 let us take a backward look at the current (2017) version of NFPA 909 Code for the Protection of Cultural Resource Properties – Museums, Libraries, and Places of Worship. Chapter 14 covers “Museums, Libraries and their Collections”. Chapter 15 covers “Places of Worship”
The 2025 Edition is now open for public input. Let us pick through proposals for the 2021 Edition to inform our approach to its improvement by referencing the technical committee transcripts linked below:
Public Input Report: January 12, 2023
N.B. We find committee response (accepted in principle) to Standards Michigan proposal to articulate conditions in which places of worship and libraries are used as community disaster relief support facilities. We consider this a modest “code win”.
Circling back to the ICC suite we find elevated interest in hardening community owned facilities to tornadoes, hurricane and floods and other storm related risk in the structural engineering chapters of the International Building Code.















Leadership and facility managers for enterprises of this type are encouraged to contribute obtain their own (free) NFPA public participation account in order to directly participate in the 2025 revision of NFPA 909 by logging in here: https://www.nfpa.org/login.
Public consultation on the First Draft of the 2025 Edition closes January 4, 2024.
This document is also a standing item on our periodic Prometheus, Lively and Fine Arts teleconference. See our CALENDAR for the next online meeting; open to everyone.![]()
Issue: [15-258]
Category: Fire Safety, Public Safety
Colleagues: Mike Anthony, Josh Elvove, Joe DeRosier
*See NFPA 101 Life Safety Code
LEARN MORE:
Guidelines for the Security of Rare Books, Manuscripts, and Other Special Collections, Association of College & Research Libraries, American Library Association, 50 East Huron Street, Chicago, IL 60611-2795.
“A Legal Primer on Managing Museum Collections,” Malaro, Marie, second edition 1998
“Risk and Insurance Management Manual for Libraries,” Mary Breighner and William Payton, edited by Jeanne Drewes, ALA 2005 ISBN 0-8389-8325-1.
Wisconsin Historic Building Code, Madison, WI:Wisconsin Administrative Code.
ANSI Z535.2-2023: Environmental and Facility Safety Signs
Consistency with Institutional Branding
Compliance with Local Zoning and Building Codes
ADA Accessibility Requirements
Wayfinding and Identification Functionality
Material and Durability Standards
Size and Placement Restrictions
Approval and Review Processes
Safety and Visibility Standards
Temporary Signage Regulations
Somewhat Related:
Before CAD, Architect wrote like this. A handwriting everyone could understand. pic.twitter.com/dYyIJMNsOx
— LMD (Arc.) (@Layemie001) June 14, 2026
University of Michigan Naming Policy Guideline
Michigan State University: Building and Facilities Naming
University of Buffalo Naming Guidelines
University of Vienna: Analyzing wayfinding processes in the outdoor environment
“Appalachian Spring” Aaron Copland
University of Maryland School of Musichttps://t.co/IJK62tCUaW@TerpsMusic@UofMaryland pic.twitter.com/sPsuSOiG6r— Standards Michigan (@StandardsMich) April 3, 2021
“Appalachian Spring” | 1944 Aaron Copland @SydneyCamerata
print(“Lunch Hour 1600 UTC”)\n weekday(2)
print(“American Standard”)https://t.co/9822ixJIr7 pic.twitter.com/KE7vsYZ5p6— Standards Michigan (@StandardsMich) March 22, 2023
The American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials is a standards setting body which publishes specifications, test protocols, and guidelines that are used in highway design and construction throughout the United States. Despite its name, the association represents not only highways but air, rail, water, and public transportation as well. Its technical committees are responsible for route numbering recommendations.
Although AASHTO sets transportation standards and policy for the United States as a whole, AASHTO is not an agency of the federal government; rather it is an organization of the states themselves. Policies of AASHTO are not federal laws or policies, but rather are ways to coordinate state laws and policies in the field of transportation.
One of its consensus products — the so-called “Green Book” — is heavily referenced in campus design guidelines and construction contracts because most education communities exist within municipal infrastructure. Power, water supply, sewers to schools and campuses large and small all tend to follow transportation pathways. The Green Book is revised periodically, the 2018 Edition the most recent.
SUMMARY OF KEY REVISIONS AND UPDATES
We do not advocate in this product at the moment but follow the movement in concepts relevant to education communities; notably the recent reorganization that emphasizes transportation of people, rather than focusing primarily on moving vehicles. A new chapter discusses multimodal level of service and puts greater emphasis on lower-speed, walkable, urban zones in which new mobility technologies are emerging (such as micro-scooters on campuses)
We maintain the AASHTO catalog on our Pathways, Zoning and Mobility colloquia. See our CALENDAR for the next online meeting, open to everyone.
CAMPUS PLANNING & LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE | December 2024 Revision
American universities are plagued by excessive, cluttered signage — “oversigning” — that creates visual chaos and an unwelcoming aesthetic. This is a direct result of strong social control tendencies in modern campus culture and bureaucracy.
Key causes:
The outcome is visual overload: too many fonts, colors, rules, and directives. While signage standards try to impose order, the underlying incentives of safetyism, compliance, and norm enforcement continually push toward more signs, not fewer.
Paul Hardin Kapp
School of Architecture, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Illinois, United States
ABSTRACT: The university campus in the United States is a unique architectural and landscape architecture typology. Nothing like it existed until Harvard University was established in 1638. Invented during in the 17th century by the American colonists and later developed during the American Industrial Revolution, the American campus is a community devoted to teaching and generating knowledge. It can be urban, suburban, and/or rural in form and its planning directly correlates with a university’s research mission and the pedagogy of the American university system. Its buildings and landscapes are embedded with iconography, which the founding builders used to convey their values to future generations.
This paper presents the history of how this designed work first emerged in American society and then evolved in ways that responded to changes that occurred in America. At the end of the 20th century, universities conserved parts of them as cultural heritage monuments. Originally, the university campus was built to disseminate a classical education, but later, the campus was built for technical and agricultural education. By the beginning of the 20th century, professional education and sport changed its architecture and landscape. The paper briely discusses that while it has inspired how universities are built to teach and generate knowledge throughout the world. It concludes by reairming its value to cultural heritage and that it should be conserved.
Today at the usual hour we sort through the NFPA stack for fire safety system aspects during renovation, alteration, or rehabilitation of buildings. Two sections come to mind:
Chapter 43 (NFPA 101): Building Rehabilitation
Educational and Day-Care Occupancies (July 23, 2025 Second Draft Transcript)
The Life Safety Code addresses those construction, protection, and occupancy features necessary to minimize danger to life from the effects of fire, including smoke, heat, and toxic gases created during a fire. It is widely incorporated by reference into public safety statutes; typically coupled with the consensus products of the International Code Council. It is a mighty document — one of the NFPA’s leading titles — so we deal with it in pieces; consulting it for decisions to be made for the following:
(1) Determination of the occupancy classification in Chapters 12 through 42.
(2) Determination of whether a building or structure is new or existing.
(3) Determination of the occupant load.
(4) Determination of the hazard of contents.
There are emergent issues — such as active shooter response, integration of life and fire safety systems on the internet of small things — and recurrent issues such as excessive rehabilitation and conformity criteria and the ever-expanding requirements for sprinklers and portable fire extinguishers with which to reckon. It is never easy telling a safety professional paid to make a market for his product or service that it is impossible to be alive and safe. It is even harder telling the dean of a department how much it will cost to bring the square-footage under his stewardship up to the current code.
The 2021 edition is the current edition and is accessible below:
NFPA 101 Life Safety Code Free Public Access
Public input on the 2027 Revision will be received until June 4, 2024. Public comment on the Second Draft 2027 Revision will be received until March 31, 2026.
Since the Life Safety Code is one of the most “living” of living documents — the International Building Code and the National Electric Code also move continuously — we can start anywhere and anytime and still make meaningful contributions to it. We have been advocating in this document since the 2003 edition in which we submitted proposals for changes such as:
• A student residence facility life safety crosswalk between NFPA 101 and the International Building Code
• Refinements to Chapters 14 and 15 covering education facilities (with particular attention to door technologies)
• Identification of an ingress path for rescue and recovery personnel toward electric service equipment installations.
• Risk-informed requirement for installation of grab bars in bathing areas
• Modification of the 90-minute emergency lighting requirements rule for small buildings and for fixed interval testing
• Modification of emergency illumination fixed interval testing
• Table 7.3.1 Occupant Load revisions
• Harmonization of egress path width with European building codes
There are others. It is typically difficult to make changes to stabilized standard though some of the concepts were integrated by the committee into other parts of the NFPA 101 in unexpected, though productive, ways. Example transcripts of proposed 2023 revisions to the education facility chapter is linked below:
Chapter 14 Public Input Report: New Educational Occupancies
Educational and Day Care Occupancies: Second Draft Public Comments with Responses Report
Since NFPA 101 is so vast in its implications we list a few of the sections we track, and can drill into further, according to client interest:
Chapter 3: Definitions
Chapter 7: Means of Egress
Chapter 12: New Assembly Occupancies
Chapter 13: Existing Assembly Occupancies
Chapter 16 Public Input Report: New Day-Care Facilities
Chapter 17 Public Input Report: Existing Day Care Facilities
Chapter 18 Public Input Report: New Health Care Facilities
Chapter 19 Public Input Report: Existing Health Care Facilities
Chapter 28: Public Input Report: New Hotels and Dormitories
Chapter 29: Public Input Report: Existing Hotels and Dormitories
Chapter 43: Building Rehabilitation
Annex A: Explanatory Material
As always we encourage front-line staff, facility managers, subject matter experts and trade associations to participate directly in the NFPA code development process (CLICK HERE to get started)
![]()
NFPA 101 is a cross-cutting title so we maintain it on the agenda of our several colloquia —Housing, Prometheus, Security and Pathways colloquia. See our CALENDAR for the next online meeting; open to everyone.
Issue: [18-90]
Category: Fire Safety, Public Safety
Colleagues: Mike Anthony, Josh Elvove, Joe DeRosier, Marcelo Hirschler
More
When lives are at stake, alternative approaches are welcome. #LifeSafety #AlternativeApproaches #Code #NFPA101 @NFPA
https://t.co/JvWyyZtuLP— ANSI (@ansidotorg) December 20, 2018
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/njrDAbSpwB pic.twitter.com/GkAXrHoQ9T
— USPTO (@uspto) July 13, 2023
Standards Michigan Group, LLC
2723 South State Street | Suite 150
Ann Arbor, MI 48104 USA
888-746-3670