Extinguishing A fire at the Equitable Building skyscraper in New York City, January 1912.
The parent title in the NFPA catalog — NFPA 1 — sets standards for fire lanes by addressing them within various chapters and sections; depending on the specific aspects of fire protection, access, and safety they pertain to. Here are some of the key sections and chapters in NFPA 1 that may include relevant information regarding fire lanes:
Chapter 18: New High-Rise Buildings: This chapter may include requirements related to access for firefighting operations, which could encompass provisions for fire lanes.
Chapter 20: New Educational and Day-Care Occupancies: Requirements related to access for emergency responders in educational facilities, including provisions for fire lanes, may be addressed in this chapter.
Chapter 22: Existing Educational and Day-Care Occupancies: Similar to Chapter 20, this chapter may contain provisions for existing educational facilities regarding fire protection and access.
Chapter 24: New Residential Board and Care Occupancies: Requirements for access and fire protection in residential board and care occupancies, including provisions for fire lanes, may be found in this chapter.
Chapter 30: New Mercantile Occupancies: This chapter may include provisions related to access and fire protection in mercantile occupancies, which could involve requirements for fire lanes.
Chapter 32: Existing Mercantile Occupancies: Similar to Chapter 30, this chapter may address requirements for existing mercantile occupancies, including provisions for fire lanes.
Since NFPA 1 covers a wide range of fire safety topics, including building design, fire protection systems, and emergency procedures, specific requirements related to fire lanes may be distributed throughout the document rather than consolidated in a single section. It’s important to carefully review the relevant chapters and sections of NFPA 1 to ensure compliance with applicable requirements for fire lane design, construction, and maintenance.
Best practice for determining snow zones, as the criteria for designating these zones can vary depending on factors such as geography, climate, population density, infrastructure, and available resources. However, municipalities typically develop their own criteria and guidelines based on these factors to create effective snow removal plans.
Common principles and factors that many municipalities consider when determining snow zones, as mentioned in the previous response. These include weather patterns, topography, traffic volume and patterns, residential density, critical infrastructure, public safety considerations, and feedback from residents and stakeholders.
Some municipalities may also adopt best practices and recommendations from organizations such as the American Public Works Association (APWA) or the National Association of City Transportation Officials (NACTO) to inform their snow removal planning processes. These organizations may offer guidance on snow zone designations, prioritization of routes, and effective snow removal techniques based on industry standards and research.
Ultimately snow zones respond to the specific needs and characteristics of each municipality, with the goal of efficiently managing winter weather events to ensure public safety and mobility.
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.
Campus exterior lighting systems generally run in the 100 to 10,000 fixture range and are, arguably, the most visible characteristic of public safety infrastructure. Some major research universities have exterior lighting systems that are larger and more complex than cooperative and municipal power company lighting systems which are regulated by public service commissions.
While there has been considerable expertise in developing illumination concepts by the National Electrical Manufacturers Association, Illumination Engineering Society, the American Society of Heating and Refrigeration Engineers, the International Electrotechnical Commission and the International Commission on Illumination, none of them contribute to leading practice discovery for the actual power chain for these large scale systems on a college campus. The standard of care has been borrowed, somewhat anecdotally, from public utility community lighting system practice. These concepts need to be revisited as the emergent #SmartCampus takes shape.
Electrical power professionals who service the education and university-affiliated healthcare facility industry should communicate directly with Mike Anthony ([email protected]) or Jim Harvey ([email protected]). This project is also on the standing agenda of the IEEE E&H committee which meets online 4 times monthly — every other Tuesday — in European and American time zones. Login credentials are available on its draft agenda page.
Issue: [15-199]
Category: Electrical, Public Safety, Architectural, #SmartCampus, Space Planning, Risk Management
Contact: Mike Anthony, Kane Howard, Jim Harvey, Dev Paul, Steven Townsend, Kane Howard
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”
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: [email protected]. Send comments (with optional copy to [email protected]) to: [email protected]. 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 ([email protected]) 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.
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 ([email protected]) 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
“The Renaissance of Burnley” Nicole Burnley | University College of London
In Rome you long for the country;
in the country – oh inconstant! – you praise the distant city to the stars.
— Horace
As cities-within-cities, education communities stakeholders in broad policy formulation of town-gown infrastructure of the emergent #WiseCampus. Since 2014 we have been participants in this project, supporting the original US TAG — the National Fire Protection Association. Last year the NFPA relinquished the US TAG role in this project but we are on “standby” and ready to resume activity when a replacement US TAG is found.
Consensus documents emerging from ISO/TC 268 tend to be large, fast-moving and highly interdependent. Drafts for US stakeholder comment and balloting arrive frequently as new workgroups are spawned from the core ISO TC/268 committees.
CLICK ON IMAGE FOR MORE INFORMATION
We are happy to review these documents with education communities in other participating countries involved in this project online during our Hello World! and Zoning colloquia; the next shown on our CALENDAR. Use the login credentials at the upper right of our home page.
ANSI seeks a US Technical Advisory Group Administrator
31 July 2021:
No new consultations released to ANSI.
15 July 2021:
No new consultations released to ANSI.
20 May 2021:
No new consultations. NFPA has relinquished its role as US TAG and it is likely that ANSI is busy either finding a new TAG or assuming leadership of the TAG role itself.
9 March 2021:
No consultations issued by NFPA, the US TAG
9 December 2020:
ISO/CD 37108 Sustainable Cities and Communities – Business Districts – Guidance for Practical Local Implementation of ISO 37101. Ballots due 8 January
2 November 2020:
ISO/DIS 37106:2018/DAM 1 Sustainable Cities and Communities — Guidance on Establishing Smart City Operating Models for Sustainable Communities – Amendment 1. Comments due November 23rd
13 October 2020:
Smart community infrastructures — Data exchange and sharing for community infrastructures based on geo‐information. Comments due November 3.
2 October 2020:
ISO/CD 37109 Sustainable Development and Communities – Practical Guidance for Project Developers – Meeting ISO 37101 Framework. Comments due October 21
10 September 2020:
ISO / CD 37110 Sustainable Cities and Communities — Management Guidelines of Open Data for Smart Cities and Communities — Part 1: Overview and General Principles. Comments due September 29
Holidays in France
No drafts open for comment
5 August 2020:
ISO/PWI 37111 Sustainable Cities and Communities – Small and Medium Sized Cities – Guidance for Practical Implementation of ISO 37101. Comments due August 19th
15 July 2020:
ISO/DIS 37164 Smart Community Infrastructures – Smart Transportation Using Fuel Cell LRT. Comments due July 27th.
ISO / FDIS 37165 Smart Community Infrastructure – Guidance on Smart Transportation with the Use of Digitally Processed Payment (d-payment. Comments due August 5th
8 July 2020:
No drafts open for comment
15 June 2020:
ISO/FDIS 37163 Smart Community Infrastructures – Guidance on Smart Transportation for Parking Lot Allocation in Cities. Comments due June 22nd
7 May 2020:
ISO / DIS 37167 Smart Community Infrastructures – Smart Transportation for Energy Saving Operation by Slowly Driving Intentionally. Comments due June 5th.
1 May 2020:
ISO/CD 37166 Smart Community Infrastructures – Urban Data Integration Framework for Smart City Planning. Comments due May 21st.
21 April 2020:
No drafts open for comment
19 March 2020:
ISO/NP Reserved 37180 Smart community infrastructures — Guidance on smart transportation with QR code identification/authentification in transportation and its related/additional services Comments due April 9th
11 March 2020:
ISO/ DIS 37106 Sustainable Cities and Communities – Guidance on Establishing Smart City Operating Models for Sustainable Communities – Amendment 1. Comments due by March 18th
3 February 2020:
ISO/FDIS 37160 Smart Community Infrastructure – Electric Power Infrastructure – Measurement Methods for the Quality of Thermal Power Infrastructure and Requirements for Plant Operations and Management. Comments due by February 17th
13 January 2020 Update:
No exposure drafts open for comment at this time.
26 December 2019 Update:
ISO/FDIS 37162 Smart Community Infrastructures – Smart Transportation for Newly Developing Areas. Comments due 9 January 2020
4 December 2019 Update:
ISO/DIS 37165 Smart Community Infrastructures – Guidance on Smart Transportation by Non-cash Payment for Fare/Fees in Transportation and its Related or Additional Services. Comments due 18 December 2019
WG4 TR— Data exchange and sharing for community infrastructure based on Geoinformation. Comments due 18 December 2019
WG4 TR Smart Community Infrastructures Report of Pilot Project on the Application of SC1 Deliverables. Comments due 18 December 2019
4 November 2019 Update:
ISO/NP 37169 Smart Community Infrastructures –Smart Transportation by Run-Through Train/Bus Operation in/between Cities. Comments due November 20th
ISO/NP 37168 Smart Community Infrastructures – Guidance on Smart Transportation for Autonomous Shuttle Services Using Connected Autonomous Electric Vehicles (eCAVs). Comments due November 20th
ISO/FDIS 37155 Framework for Integration and Operation of Smart Community Infrastructures – Recommendations for Considering Opportunities and Challenges from Interactions in Smart Community Infrastructures from Relevant Aspects through the Life Cycle. Comments due November 20th
7 October 2019 Update:
ISO/FDIS 37123 Sustainable Cities and Communities – Indicators for Resilient Cities. Comments due October 29th
25 September 2019 Update:
ISO/NP 24609 Smart Community Infrastructures – Data and Framework of Digital Technology Apply in Smart City Infrastructure Governance. Comments due October 3rd
10 September 2019 Update:
ISO/FDIS 37105 Sustainable Cities and Communities – Descriptive Framework for Cities and Communities. Comments due September 19th
2 August 2019 Update:
ISO/CD 37164 Smart community infrastructures — Smart transportation using fuel cell light rail transportation. Comments due August 16th
ISO/DIS 37163 Smart Community Infrastructures – Guidance on Smart Transportation for Parking Lot Allocation in Cities. Comments due August 19th
1 August 2019 Update:
ISO/NP 37167 Smart Community Infrastructures — Smart Transportation for Energy Saving by Intentionally Slowly Driving. Comments due August 12th
July 28, 2019 Update:
ISO/CD 37155-2 Framework for Integration and Operation of Smart Community Infrastructures- Part 2: Holistic Approach and the Strategy for Development, Operation and Maintenance of Smart Community Infrastructures. Comments due August 1st.
June 25, 2019 Update:
ISO / DIS 37160 Smart Community Infrastructure – Measurement Methods for Quality of Thermal Power Station Infrastructure and Requirements for Plant Operations and Management. Comments due July 12th
June 5, 2019 Update:
No commentable documents at this time.
May 22, 2019 Update:
ISO/DIS 37161 Smart Community Infrastructures – Guidance on Smart Transportation for Energy Saving in Transportation Services in Cities.Comments due June 5th
May 16, 2019 Update:
No commentable documents at this time. We walk through all transportation-related standards action on May 16th.
April 29, 2019 Update:
ISO NP 37166 New Work Item Proposed: Smart Community Infrastructures. Specification of Multi-Source Urban Data Integration for Smart City Planning. Comments due May 14th
March 14, 2019 Update:
ISO/FDIS 37122 Sustainable Cities and Communities – Indicators for Smart Cities | Comments due April 2nd.
February 19, 2019 Update:
ISO/FDIS 37104 Sustainable Cities and Communities – Transforming Our Cities – Guidance for Practical Local Implementation of ISO 37101 | Comments due February 15th
ISO NP 23944 (N330) New Work Item Proposed: Smart Community Infrastructures – Guidance on smart Transportation by Non-Cash payment for Fare/Fees in Transportation and its Related or Additional Services | Comments due February 15th
Ballot for ISO NP 23943 (N328) New Work Item Proposed: Smart Community Infrastructures – Smart Transportation using Fuel Cell LRT | Comments due February 15th
January 24, 2019 Update:
ISO/DIS 37123 Sustainable cities and communities — Indicators for resilient cities. Ballots due February 8th
Some amount of the commentable material cannot be distributed and must be viewed online (a chronic problem). Click in to any of our daily 11 AM EST teleconferences if you would like to read and mark up with comments.
December 18, 2018 Update:
No commentable documents at this time
November 1, 2018 Update:
ISO / DIS 37155 Framework for Integration and Operation of Smart Community Infrastructures – Part 1: Opportunities and Challenges from Interactions in Smart Community Infrastructures from all Aspects through the Life Cycle.
* Owing to copyright restrictions you must send an email to [email protected] to access to the documents
14-101 ISO 268 Item ISO IEC 17021 Public Review Draft
September 18, 2018 Update:
Comments are due September 24th on the documents linked below:
14-101 ISO WD TS 37107 SEPT 2018 Sustainable Cities
14-101 ISO CD 37160 SEPT 2018 Sustainable Cities
September 16, 2018 Update:
The US TAG convened at NFPA Headquarters last this week. Since some of the material is copyright protected, we welcome education facility professionals to click in any day at 11 AM to review the commenting opportunities open to US stakeholders generally, and education industry professionals specifically.
Draft document now open for public review: Smart community infrastructures — Guidance on smart transportation for allocation of parking lots in cities. (ISO Stage 20.20) Comments are due at NFPA on September 13th
US TAG meets at NFPA Headquarters in Quincy, Massachusetts September 12 and 13. Mike Anthony will be in attendance.
August 2018 Update:
Draft document now open for public review: Sustainable development in communities — Indicators for Smart Cities. Comments are due at NFPA on August 27th.
Draft document now open for public review: Guidelines on Data Exchange and Sharing for Smart Community Infrastructures. Comments are due at NFPA on August 24th
One draft document is now open for public review: Smart community infrastructures — Smart transportation for rapid transit in/between large city zones and the surrounding areas (ISO/DIS 37159).Comments are due at NFPA on August 7th.
July 2018 Update:
No new business items received from ISO Genève. US TAG will meet in at NFPA headquarters, September 12-13, 2018
June 2018 Update:
No new business items received from ISO Genève. The US TAG is planning a September on-site meeting at NFPA Headquarters in Boston.
May 2018 Update:
Balloting was completed by the US TAG on proposed ISO/FDIS 37120 Sustainable Development in Communities – Indicators for City Services and Quality of Life
April 2018 Update:
At the 2017 Paris meeting of TC/268, the UK suggested that it would be helpful to develop an overall maturity model for cities, drawing on the framework set out by SC1 in ISO/DIS 37153. The TC agreed, and WG4 was asked to work up proposals.
At its Berlin meeting in May, WG4 made good progress and recommended a way forward. But in plenary discussion with other working groups, there was concern that WG4 was moving too quickly and on too narrowly‐focused a basis
The purpose of a recent release by ISO TC/268 — an outline of city “maturity models” — is to respond to those concerns, proposing a broader framework for future work in this area across TC/268
An explanation of the broad contours of parent standard — with the Association Française de Normalisation (AFNOR Group) as the Secretariat — is described in the videoclip below:
* Permission is granted by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) to electronically reproduce this draft International Standard for purpose of review and comment related to the preparation of the U.S. position, provided this notice is included. All other rights are reserved.
“The Appian Way: The Road that Built the Roman Empire”, Richard Talbert, Cambridge University, 2012. This is a comprehensive study of the Appian Way and its significance to the Roman Empire. The author draws on a wide range of archaeological and historical evidence to explore the road’s construction, use, and legacy. Mr. Talbert is now working from the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill
This content is accessible to paid subscribers. To view it please enter your password below or send [email protected] a request for subscription details.
This content is accessible to paid subscribers. To view it please enter your password below or send [email protected] a request for subscription details.
This content is accessible to paid subscribers. To view it please enter your password below or send [email protected] a request for subscription details.
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
Open for Comment / Building Codes & Construction Spend