The Society of College and University Planning was founded in 1965 at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor during an informal gathering of campus planners frustrated with the lack of professional exchange in their emerging field. Rapid postwar enrollment growth and massive campus expansion projects had created urgent needs for long-range physical planning, yet few institutions had dedicated planners or shared knowledge.
A small group, led by University of Michigan planners George J. Bruha and Frederick W Mayer met in Ann Arbor to discuss common challenges facing other State of Michigan settlements; joined by Stanford, Ohio State and the University of Illinois. They decided to create a formal organization to foster collaboration, research, and professional development. In 1966, with Michigan’s support, SCUP was officially established as a nonprofit with its first office on the Ann Arbor campus. Its founding principle—integrated planning linking academics, finances, and facilities—remains central today.
Early operations benefited from administrative support (aegis) provided by the University of Michigan, including office space and resources in Ann Arbor. This arrangement persisted until a financial crisis in the late 1970s (1976–1980), during which SCUP relocated to New York.
The decoupling—marking full operational and administrative independence from the University of Michigan—occurred in 1980, when SCUP returned to Ann Arbor as a self-sustaining nonprofit headquartered at a separate location –1330 Eisenhower Place — less than a mile walk from Standards Michigan‘s front door at 455 East Eisenhower.
* Of the 220 ANSI Accredited Standards Developers, the State of Michigan ranks 3rd in the ranking of U.S. states with the most ANSI-accredited standards developers (ASDs) headquartered there; behind the Regulatory Hegemons of California and ChicagoLand and excluding the expected cluster foxtrot of non-profits domiciled in the Washington-New York Deep State Megalopolis. Much of Michigan’s presence in the private consensus standards space originates from its industrial ascendency through most of the 1900’s.
At the moment all titles in this catalog seem to be stabilized although a great deal of economic activity in the commercial real estate market involves adjustment to the circumstances of the pandemic. Largely because a sizeable portion of square footage in every school district, college, university and university-affiliated healthcare research and clinical delivery system derives at least part of its funding from governments at all levels there are workgroups devoted to measuring square footage and documenting its use. For example:
Getting square-footage right is essential for securing an organization’s sustainability and “green” claims for example. The links in previous posts provide for information about future public consultations.
We maintain the BOMA catalog on the agenda of our Space Planning, Hammurabi and Architectural colloquia, hosted 6 to 8 times annually. See our CALENDAR for the next online meeting, open to everyone.
We drill into the specifics commonly found in education communities: sub-lease of space to private industry in publicly-owned facilities. The Building Owners and Managers Association International is an ANSI-accredited consensus standard developer and revised its standard — BOMA Z65.5 Retail Properties: Standard Method of Measurement. Measuring the area of a retail building can quickly become complex when variables must be considered such as ancillary space, mezzanines and storefront lease lines. Many large research universities have long since leased space within many of their building envelopes for private industry to service their communities — student unions, hospitals, dormitories and athletic venues, for example. From the project prospectus:
Z65.5 is intended exclusively for retail properties and their associated structures and may be applied to single-tenant, multi-tenant or multi-building configurations. It features a single method of measurement, with two levels of measurement data, known as Partial Measurement and Overall Measurement for retail properties. It does not measure sidewalks, surface parking, drainage structures, or other ancillary site improvements. This standard is chiefly designed to generate Gross Leasable Area figures, a key metric in retail leasing; however, it also produces area figures which may be of interest to those examining space utilization, valuation, benchmarking, and the allocation of building expenses to various cost centers. The scope of this standard is not intended to be submitted for consideration as an ISO, IEC, or ISO/IEC JTC-1 standard.
Public consultation is open until February 8th.
You may obtain an electronic copy from: floorstandards@boma.org. Send comments (with optional copy to psa@ansi.org) to: floorstandards@boma.org. We encourage user-interest subject matter experts in education facility management to participate directly in the BOMA standards development process by communicating directly with Tanner Johnson at BOMA (tjohnston@boma.org) or 202-326-6357 for more information.
We keep the BOMA catalog on the standing agenda of our colloquia devoted to building construction best practice. See our CALENDAR for the next online meeting; open to everyone.
– To promote an unambiguous framework for determining the areas of Industrial Buildings with a strong focus on Rentable Area calculations;
– To facilitate transparency and clear communication of building measurement concepts among all participants in the commercial real estate
industry;
– To allow a comparison of values on the basis of a clearly understood and generally agreed upon method of measurement; and
– To align concepts and measurement methodologies with the International Property Measurement Standards: Industrial Buildings (January 2018)
document.
Send comments (with optional copy to psa@ansi.org) to: tjohnston@boma.org
Standards Michigan follows, but d0es not advocate in most of the BOMA standards suite for the following reasons:
Educational facility occupancies are fairly well accounted for in existing federal and state regulations
Advocacy in energy-related best practice titles are a better use of resources at the moment.
We encourage user-interest subject matter experts in education facility management to participate directly in the BOMA standards development process by communicating directly with Tanner Johnson at BOMA (tjohnston@boma.org) or 202-326-6357 for more information.
We maintain the entire BOMA suite on our periodic Model Building Code colloquia. See our CALENDAR for the next online meeting; open to everyone.
Issue: [15-200]
Category: Architectural, Space Plaaning, Facility Asset Management
Giovanni Paolo Panini, An architectural capriccio with figures among Roman ruins
The post-pandemic #WiseCampus transformation requires significant capital to meet the sustainability goals of its leadership. Campuses are cities-within-cities and are, to a fair degree, financed in a similar fashion. Tax-free bonds are an effective instrument for school districts, colleges and universities — and the host community in which they are nested — for raising capital for infrastructure projects while also providing investors with, say $10,000 to $100,000, to allocate toward a tax-free dividend income stream that produces a return in the range of 2 to 8 percent annually.
An aging population may be receptive to investment opportunities that protect their retirement savings from taxation.
Once a month, we walk through the prospectuses of one or two bond offerings of school districts, colleges and universities and examine offering specifics regarding infrastructure construction, operations and maintenance. We pay particular attention to details regarding “continuing operations”. Somehow the education industry has to pay for its green agenda. See our CALENDAR for the next Finance colloquium; open to everyone.
The interactive map provided by Electronic Municipal Market Access identifies state-by-state listings of tax-free bonds that contribute to the construction and operation of education facilities; some of which involved university-affiliated medical research and healthcare delivery enterprises.
CLICK ON IMAGE FOR INTERACTIVE MAP
If you need help cutting through this list please feel free to click in any day at 11 AM Eastern time. Use the login credentials at the upper right of our hope page. We collaborate with subject matter experts at Municipal Analytics and UBS.
*We see the pandemic as a driver for a step-reduction in cost in all dimensions of education communities. We coined the term with a hashtag about two years ago.
*College and university infrastructure projects are classified with public school districts under the rubric “municipal bonds” at the moment. CLICK HERE for more information.
Important 2024 IEBC Changes Affecting College & University Facilities
Code Change
Campus Impact
1. Occupiable Roofs
New provisions coordinate rooftop occupancy requirements with the 2024 IBC. Universities converting roofs into terraces, student gathering areas, dining spaces, green roofs, or observation decks must evaluate structural capacity, means of egress, accessibility, guardrails, and fire protection.
2. Risk Category Clarification for Additions
Provides clearer guidance when additions have a different occupancy than the existing building. This is particularly important for laboratory expansions, medical research buildings, student health facilities, and emergency operations centers.
3. Storm Shelter Coordination
Storm shelter provisions now coordinate directly with IBC Section 423 and ICC 500. Campus projects in tornado-prone regions should verify shelter requirements early during planning.
4. Smoke Compartment Requirements
Certain renovations involving healthcare occupancies, student medical clinics, and assisted-living facilities may require additional smoke compartmentation during major alterations.
5. Adult Changing Stations
Projects adding toilet facilities may now require adult changing stations in certain accessible family or assisted-use restrooms. This primarily affects stadiums, arenas, student unions, libraries, and performing arts centers.
6. Exterior Wall Renovations on High-Rise Buildings
Installation of combustible exterior wall coverings or envelope systems on existing high-rise buildings may trigger automatic sprinkler requirements. This should be evaluated during residence hall and research tower renovations.
7. Existing Automatic Sprinkler Systems
New provisions establish conditions under which certain non-required sprinkler systems may be removed following occupancy changes. Campus owners should review this carefully before renovation projects.
8. Temporary Emergency Building Uses
New Appendix E provides guidance for temporary emergency use of existing buildings. Universities can incorporate these concepts into emergency operations planning during natural disasters or public health emergencies.
9. Construction Site Safety Planning
New owner responsibilities emphasize development of site safety plans and designation of responsible personnel during construction. This is especially valuable on occupied campuses where construction occurs adjacent to classrooms, residence halls, hospitals, and pedestrian routes.
10. Better Coordination with the 2024 IBC
Many provisions have been reorganized or updated to improve consistency between the IEBC and the current International Building Code. Campus design teams can expect fewer conflicts between existing-building and new-construction requirements during modernization projects.
Facilities Most Likely to be Affected
Research laboratories
Residence halls
Athletic stadiums and arenas
Libraries
Student unions
Classroom buildings
Central utility plants
Medical schools and student health clinics
Performing arts centers
High-rise academic buildings
“`
November 30, 2021
Every month we direct our colleagues in the education industry to the US Census Department’s monthly construction report to make a point: at an average annual clip of about $75 billion, the education industry is the largest non-residential building construction market in the United States. A large part of that construction involves infrastructure upgrades of existing buildings that contribute to sustainability goals but may not make flashy architectural statements for philanthropists.
The International Existing Building Code (IEBC) is a model code in the International Code Council family of codes intended to provide requirements for repair and alternative approaches for alterations and additions to existing buildings (LEARN MORE). A large number of existing buildings and structures do not comply with the current building code requirements for new construction. Although many of these buildings are potentially salvageable, rehabilitation is often cost-prohibitive because compliance with all the new requirements for new construction could require extensive changes that go well beyond the value of building or the original scope of the alteration.
Education facility planners, architects and managers: Sound familiar?
ICC administered workgroups have been convening with considerable frequency over the past several months to pull together a number of relevant concepts for the next (2019 Group B) revision. For the purpose of providing some perspective on the complexity and subtlety of the issues in play, a partial overview of working group activity is available in the links below. Keep in mind that there are many other proposals being developed by our ICC working group and others.
It is a large document — 2919 pages — so keep that in mind when accessing it. There are many issues affecting #TotalCostofOwnership of the education facility industry so we will get cracking on it again next week. See our CALENDAR for the next online teleconference. Use the login credentials at the upper right of our home page.
Finally, we persist in encouraging education industry facility managers (especially those with operations and maintenance data) to participate in the ICC code development process. You may do so by CLICKING HERE. Real asset managers for school districts, colleges, universities and technical schools in the Albuquerque region should take advantage of the opportunity to observe the ICC code-development process. The Group B Hearings are usually webcast — and we will signal the link to the 10-day webcast when it becomes available — but the experience of seeing how building codes are determined is enlightening when you can watch it live and on site.
Issue: [16-169]
Category: Architectural, Facility Asset Management, Space Planning
Colleagues: Mike Anthony, Jack Janveja, Richard Robben
This content is accessible to paid subscribers. To view it please enter your password below or send mike@standardsmichigan.com a request for subscription details.
This content is accessible to paid subscribers. To view it please enter your password below or send mike@standardsmichigan.com a request for subscription details.
Research from the World Economic Forum has shown that improvements in the design and construction process can be achieved by using international standards like ICMS to gain comparable and consistent data. ICMS provides a high-level structure and format for classifying, defining, measuring, recording, analysing and presenting construction and other life-cycle costs.
The development of this standard is coordinated with the ICC Group A Codes. We have tracked concepts in it previous revisions; available in the link below.
As always, we encourage our colleagues with workpoint experience to participate directly in the ICC Code Development process. CLICK HERE to get started.
Issue: [15-283]
Category: Athletics & Recreation, Architectural, Public Safety
Contact: Mike Anthony, Jack Janveja, Richard Robben
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
_Mauritshuis_171.jpg)
