Any multi-story building requires inspection and maintenance of structural steel framework. The steel supports the building’s weight and resists environmental forces like wind and seismic activity. Over time, corrosion, fatigue cracks, or connection failures can weaken the structure, risking collapse. Inspections detect these issues early, while maintenance, like repainting or replacing damaged parts, preserves steel integrity. For student housing, occupant safety is critical, and compliance with building codes reduces liability risks. Neglecting these practices can lead to structural failure, endangering residents and causing costly repairs or legal issues. Regular upkeep ensures safe, long-lasting buildings.
During today’s session we examine the relevant standards with proposed revisions open for public comment. Use the login credentials at the upper right of our home page.
No single universal code or standard guarantees that buildings will never crack or fail structurally, as structural integrity depends on various factors like design, materials, construction quality, environmental conditions, and maintenance. However, several widely adopted codes and standards aim to minimize the risk of structural failure and ensure safety, durability, and serviceability. These provide guidelines for design, construction, and maintenance to prevent issues like cracking or catastrophic failure.
φ
Key Codes and Standards:
International Building Code (IBC): Widely used in the United States and other regions, the IBC sets minimum requirements for structural design, materials, and maintenance to ensure safety and performance. It references standards like ASCE 7 (Minimum Design Loads and Associated Criteria for Buildings and Other Structures) for load calculations (e.g., wind, seismic, snow).Maintenance provisions require regular inspections and repairs to address issues like cracking or deterioration.
ACI 318 (Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete): Published by the American Concrete Institute this standard governs the design and construction of concrete structures.Includes requirements to control cracking (e.g., reinforcement detailing, concrete mix design) and ensure durability under environmental exposure.Maintenance guidelines recommend periodic inspections for cracks, spalling, or reinforcement corrosion.
AISC 360 (Specification for Structural Steel Buildings): Published by the American Institute of Steel Construction, this standard covers the design, fabrication, and erection of steel structures. Addresses fatigue, connection design, and corrosion protection to prevent structural failure. Maintenance involves inspecting for issues like weld imperfections or coating degradation.
Commercial kitchens offer several benefits, such as efficient food preparation and large-scale production, allowing businesses to meet high demand. They provide professional-grade equipment and ample space, enabling chefs to explore culinary creativity. Commercial kitchens also promote hygiene and food safety standards, with dedicated cleaning protocols and inspections. However, hazards can arise from the high-temperature cooking equipment, sharp tools, and potentially hazardous substances. There is also a risk of burns, slips, and falls, emphasizing the importance of proper training and safety measures. Adequate ventilation and fire safety systems are vital to prevent accidents and maintain a healthy working environment.
Public hearings on the proposed changes happen in Orlando, April 7-16.
This is a summary of the actions taken on the 2024 Comments on Proposed Changes to the ICC International Codes at the October 23-28, 2024 Committee Action Hearings #2 held at the Long Beach Convention Center, Long Beach, California. Balloting of local building code officials is now underway.
Welcome to the future: robot chef whips up tasty meals at FIU | FIU News – Florida International University https://t.co/IE4qDASlJv
Technical committees of the International Code Council synchronize best practice discovery processes with the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services using this matrix, linked here without comment. For more information contact Kimberly Paarlberg (kpaarlberg@iccsafe.org).
When is it ever NOT storm season somewhere in the United States; with several hundred schools, colleges and universities in the path of them? Hurricanes also spawn tornadoes. This title sets the standard of care for safety, resilience and recovery when education community structures are used for shelter and recovery. The most recently published edition of the joint work results of the International Code Council and the ASCE Structural Engineering Institute SEI-7 is linked below:
Given the historic tornados in the American Midwest this weekend, its relevance is plain. From the project prospectus:
The objective of this Standard is to provide technical design and performance criteria that will facilitate and promote the design, construction, and installation of safe, reliable, and economical storm shelters to protect the public. It is intended that this Standard be used by design professionals; storm shelter designers, manufacturers, and constructors; building officials; and emergency management personnel and government officials to ensure that storm shelters provide a consistently high level of protection to the sheltered public.
This project runs roughly in tandem with the ASCE Structural Engineering Institute SEI-17 which has recently updated its content management system and presented challenges to anyone who attempts to find the content where it used to be before the website overhaul. In the intervening time, we direct stakeholders to the link to actual text (above) and remind education facility managers and their architectural/engineering consultants that the ICC Code Development process is open to everyone.
The ICC receives public response to proposed changes to titles in its catalog at the link below:
You are encouraged to communicate with Kimberly Paarlberg (kpaarlberg@iccsafe.org) for detailed, up to the moment information. When the content is curated by ICC staff it is made available at the link below:
We maintain this title on the agenda of our periodic Disaster colloquia which approach this title from the point of view of education community facility managers who collaborate with structual engineers, architects and emergency management functionaries.. See our CALENDAR for the next online meeting, open to everyone.
The hearings officially run from April 19–24 (or up to April 28 in some references), with daily sessions typically from morning into the evening. This is part of the 2024–2026 code development cycle for the 2027 editions of the International Codes (I-Codes). Stakeholders discuss and testify on public comments submitted for proposed changes to building, residential, mechanical, plumbing, fire, energy, and related codes. It is the first combined Public Comment Hearing under ICC’s updated process.
The Group B suite now under consideration is listed below: .
International Energy Conservation Code
International Building Code – Structural Only
International Existing Building Code
International Green Construction Code
International Residential Code
We have covered noteworthy concepts in all of the foregoing codes and standards in previous posts and during our daily and monthly coverage of commenting opportunities the ICC makes available to its stakeholders. Today we are simply providing a link to the webcast of the hearings that will take place for the better part of 10 days for about 10 hours per day. The webcasts proceed on two tracks and may be accessing by clicking on the image below:
USE TRACK 2
The agenda of the hearings generally proceeds according to the core document for this phase of the Group B consensus product development; linked below:
We encourage education industry facility managers (especially those with operations and maintenance data) to participate in the ICC code development process. The business models of education industry trade associations as “opinion aggregators” is limited by many factors so we encourage direct participation by workpoint experts involved with individual school districts, colleges, universities, university-affiliated healthcare systems and trade schools.
“Efeito de Sol” | Lucílio de Albuquerque (1877-1939)
Safety and sustainability for any facility, not just university-affiliated healthcare facilities, usually begin with an understanding of who, and how, shall occupy the built environment. University settings, with mixed-use occupancy arising spontaneously and temporarily, often present challenges and they are generally well managed.
First principles regarding occupancy classifications for healthcare facilities appear in Section 308 of the International Building Code, Institutional Group I; linked below:
There are thousands of healthcare code compliance functionaries and instructors; most of them supported by trade associations and most of them authoritative. Hewing to our market discipline to track only the concepts that will affect university-affiliated healthcare enterprises only. There are a few noteworthy differences between corporate healthcare businesses and university affiliated healthcare enterprises (usually combined with teaching and research activity) that we identify on this collaboration platform.
We collaborate closely with the IEEE Education & Healthcare Facilities Committee which takes a far more global view of the healthcare industry. That committee meets online 4 times monthly in European and American time zones.
Finally, we encourage our colleagues to participate directly in the ICC Code Development process. Contact Kimberly Paarlberg (kpaarlberg@iccsafe.org) for more information about its healthcare committees and how to participate in the ICC code development process generally. Tranches of ICC titles are developed according to the schedule below:
Some colleges and universities in the USA (e.g. Stanford, Duke, University of Chicago, University of Michigan) own one- and two-family dwellings (detached single-family homes or duplexes), though this is not common for most institutions and typically occurs on a limited scale rather than as large portfolios.
These and others sometimes acquire residential parcels for income, tax advantages, or long-term asset management. Acquiring adjacent residential properties controls development, reduces conflicts (e.g., student overcrowding in single-family areas), or creates future land banks for Town-Gown solutions.
Risk aggregations distinguishing single-family (IRC) from multi-family (IBC) requirements include:
Occupant load and life safety: Multi-family buildings have more residents per structure, raising the potential for higher casualties in fires or emergencies → stricter egress rules (e.g., often requiring multiple exits/stairways beyond three stories, wider corridors, and more robust exit access).
Fire spread and compartmentation: Shared walls/floors in apartments increase vertical/horizontal fire propagation risk → enhanced fire-resistance ratings for separations (e.g., between units, corridors), fire-rated assemblies, and often mandatory sprinklers using NFPA 13R (higher capacity for simultaneous head activation) versus IRC’s NFPA 13D (lower capacity, no fire department connection required for single-family).
Egress and evacuation complexity: In multi-family settings, unknown layouts, longer travel distances, and more people amplify evacuation challenges → performance-based requirements for means of egress, smoke control, and sometimes additional features like fire alarms or standpipes.
Structural and hazard exposure: Greater building size/height in multi-family increases exposure to wind, seismic, or progressive collapse risks → more engineered design (performance-based) versus IRC’s prescriptive tables for simpler single-family loads.
Sprinkler and suppression differences: IRC allows simpler, lower-flow domestic-style systems for one-/two-family; IBC mandates systems scaled for higher fire loads in R-2 occupancies.
These distinctions reflect the principle that risk scales with density and shared elements—single-family homes pose primarily individual/household-level threats, while multi-family structures aggregate risks across many unrelated occupants, justifying the IBC’s more comprehensive, often stricter provisions for safety.
Detached site condominiums (also called detached condos or site condos) offer a practical solution to the U.S. housing affordability crisis for young families by providing standalone, single-family-style homes at significantly lower costs than traditional detached single-family residences.
These properties look and feel like conventional homes—fully detached with no shared walls, private yards, and often garages—but are legally structured as condominiums. Owners typically own the interior structure (and sometimes the land beneath it, depending on the setup), while sharing common areas, landscaping, and amenities through an HOA.
This model reduces purchase prices substantially: median condo prices (including detached variants) hover around $340,000–$357,000 nationally, compared to $410,000–$420,000+ for detached single-family homes. Builders achieve this by clustering units more densely, lowering per-unit land and development costs, and enabling entry-level homeownership in desirable areas where land is expensive.
For young families, this means easier access to homeownership with lower down payments, more predictable maintenance (HOA handles exteriors and common elements), and family-friendly features like space for kids and pets—without the full financial burden of a traditional house. It bridges the gap between unaffordable single-family homes and denser options like apartments or townhomes, helping families build equity and stability sooner amid rising prices and shortages.
Following the ICC Group A revision cycle public consultation on the 2024 International Fire Code will begin. The ICC will announce the development schedule sometime in 2022.
We limit our resources simply tracking the proposals that run through Group E (Educational) and Group I (Institutional) occupancies in the Group A suite with closer attention to the state they are adopted whole cloth or with local exceptions. In many cases, IFC adoption by state and local authorities is delayed by one or more previous code revisions. This delay in adoption may be necessary in order for jurisdictions to evaluate the impact of changes upon the region under their authority.
Public safety budgets historically support the local and state fire marshal and his or her staff. The revenue stream of many trade associations originates from membership, conference attendance, training and certification enterprises that service the public sector stakeholder. Manufacturer sponsorship of trade association conferences is noteworthy.
Unless there is an idea, or proposed regulation that has run off the rails (either in terms of rigor or cost increase) — we place fire safety in the middle of our ranking of priorities. With gathering pace, we find many fires safety goals being met with electrotechnologies where we place our highest priority.
Click on image for more information. The map is updated by expert agencies frequently so we recommend a web search for an update.
Significant code changes rarely happen within a 3-year cycle so it is wise to follow ideas as they travel through the agendas of technical committees through several cycles as administered by the Fire Code Action Committee.
The ICC posts the transcripts of public proposals, technical committee responses to public proposals, public response to the technical committee response and the final balloting in a fair and reasonable fashion as can be seen in the transcripts linked below:
A search on the terms “classroom” or “school” in any of the documents above offers granular insight into the trend of current thinking. We find fire extinguishers placement a perennial concern across several standards suites. You will note the careful consideration of proposals for use of the mass notification systems, now integrated into fire alarm systems and their deployment in active shooter situations.
The transcripts reveal detailed understanding and subtlety.
“The Country School” | Winslow Homer
There are many issues affecting the safety and sustainability of the education facility industry. We add value to the industry because of our cross-cutting perspective on the hundreds of “silos”created by the competition (and sometimes cooperation) among accredited, consortia and open-source standards developers. We have the door open every day at 11 AM Eastern time to enlighten understanding of them all. We also host a breakout teleconference every month to drill into the specifics of standards action on fire safety for the real assets of school districts, colleges and universities. See our CALENDAR for the next online meeting.
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.
The ICC Group B Code Meetings will be hosted soon and open to the public:
The Group B tranche is largely focused on energy, structural, residential and existing building concepts but all of the titles cross-reference the IFC in some way so it is wise to follow how the concepts re-arrange and cross-reference themselves with each cycle.
Issue: [16-169]
Category: Architectural, Facility Asset Management, Space Planning
“The Tower of Babel” 1563 | Pieter Bruegel the Elder
Widely accepted definitions (sometimes “terms of art”) are critical in building codes because they ensure clarity, consistency, and precision in communication among architects, engineers, contractors, and regulators. Ambiguity or misinterpretation of terms like “load-bearing capacity,” “fire resistance,” “egress” or “grounding and bonding” could lead to design flaws, construction errors, or inadequate safety measures, risking lives and property.
“Standardized” definitions — by nature unstable — create a shared language that transcends local practices or jargon, enabling uniform application and enforcement across jurisdictions. Today at the usual hour we explore the nature and the status of the operational language that supports our raison d’êtreof making educational settlements safer, simpler, lower-cost and longer-lasting.
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)
