Learning Resources

The Impact of COVID-19 on Construction on Campus

By: Catherine Walsh, Associate Vice President, Facilities Division, Northeastern University | David L. Damon, Principal and Higher Education Practice Leader, Perkins and Will | Maureen Kirkpatrick, Vice President/Operations Manager, Turner Construction Company | Hosted by: Niusha Arndt, Project Designer, Perkins and Will, BSA/SCUP College + University Roundtable | Donna Denio Client Service Representative, Campbell-McCabe, Co-Chair, BSA/SCUP College + University Roundtable

This webinar will focus on how higher education campus construction is impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic and its positive and negative implications on construction sites on the MIT and Northeastern University campuses. Panelists will share case studies of how on-campus construction has changed, the new supply chains, and staff management consideration.

This is part of the series “Less Talk, More Action: Tactical Topics to Return to Campus.”

Abstract: This webinar will focus on how higher education campus construction is impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic and its positive and negative implications on construction sites on the MIT and Northeastern University campuses. Panelists will share case studies of how on-campus construction has changed, the new supply chains, and staff management consideration. They will review construction opportunities due to the pandemic, and how to plan for modifying existing facilities to respond to evolving campus needs.

Institutions Mentioned: Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Northeastern University
Planning Types: Campus Planning
Tags: COVID-19, Facilities Management, Facilities Planning

Member Price:
Free

Non-Member Price:
Free

Back to School Through the Lens of ASHRAE

By: Hosts: Niusha Arndt, Designer, Perkins + Will, BSA/SCUP College + University Roundtable; Patrick Murphy, Associate Principal and Director of Sustainable Design, Vanderweil Engineers, BSA/SCUP College + University Roundtable | Moderator: Nancy May, Formerly Vice President, Facility & Operations Management, Northeastern University | Panelists: Susanna M. Baker, Director of Facilities & Space Planning, MIT Sloan School of Management; Bill Bahnfleth, Leader of ASHRAE’s Epidemic Task Force, Former President of ASHRAE (worldwide), Professor of Architectural Engineering at Penn State University

Panelists Susanna M. Baker, MIT Sloan School of Management, and Bill Bahnfleth, ASHRAE (American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers) and Penn State University, discussed requirements for a typical campus upgrade and reviewed ASHRAE recommendations on improving campus safety in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. They also addressed some of the unique challenges for an urban campus response to maintaining campus safety.

Abstract: This is the third in a series of webinars, “Less Talk, More Action: Tactical Topics to Return to Campus,” jointly sponsored by SCUP’s North Atlantic Region, BSA, and their BSA/SCUP College + University Roundtable focused on the impact of COVID-19 on campuses.

Institutions Mentioned: Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Pennsylvania State University
Planning Types: Campus Planning
Tags: COVID-19, Facilities Planning, Infrastructure, Response Planning, Urban Campus

Member Price:
Free

Non-Member Price:
Free

Phased Transformations of Academic Buildings

Can’t vacate the facility? Renovation in stages can be planned efficiently.

By: Roger N. Goldstein, Amanda L. Sanders, Bernard J. Dooley

When you’re renovating a campus building, you’re contending with dust, noise, vibration, the risk of budget overruns, relocating occupants, extended timelines, and more. Following best practices of experienced planners can help you to mitigate the most common challenges.

From Volume 48 Number 1 | October–December 2019

Abstract: As mid-20th-century buildings reach the end of their service life, academic institutions are confronted by the challenge of renovating them while they remain partially occupied. When appropriate swing space is unavailable, or when there is no potential for vacating a building completely to allow renovation to occur more efficiently, a phased approach becomes necessary. The consequences of committing to phased renovation, however, are not only logistical, but also financial, programmatic, and technical. Through analysis of phased renovation projects across multiple building types, one can extract best practices for planning, design, and construction to mitigate many of the most common challenges.

Institutions Mentioned: Massachusetts Institute of Technology, University of Connecticut-Main Campus
Planning Types: Campus Planning
Tags: Academic Facility, Facilities Planning, Laboratory Facility, Renovation

Member Price:
Free

Non-Member Price:
Free

Conference Presentations

Published
July 14, 2019

2019 Annual Conference | July 2019

Putting the Green in Infrastructure

An Urban Campus's High-Performance Landscape

By: Jennifer Johnson,Eric Kramer,Laura Tenny

Abstract: Green infrastructure uses the landscape to manage stormwater. This session will explore the Massachusetts Institute of Technology's (MIT) successful pilot green infrastructure project. We'll review the characteristics and benefits of green infrastructure in general, along with the accelerated design and construction process for this project in particular. We'll also share measurable results from the green infrastructure, and how the project has impacted the campus.

Institutions Mentioned: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Planning Types: Campus Planning
Tags: Energy Infrastructure, Facilities Planning, Infrastructure, SCUP 2019 Annual Conference, Sustainability (Environmental), Urban Campus

Member Price:
Free

Non-Member Price:
Free

Conference Presentations

Published
July 14, 2019

2019 Annual Conference | July 2019

A Survival Guide to Planning and Executing Phased Renovations

By: Laura A. Cruickshank, Roger N. Goldstein, Sarah Stanton

Abstract: Renovating campus buildings that are partially occupied is a frequent challenge. Planning and executing an efficient phased renovation optimizes resource use and minimizes disruption. This presentation will focus on lessons learned in three case studies of phased renovations, comprising mid-20th century science and humanities buildings as well as student housing. You will learn about best practices from projects across multiple building types as well as examine planning methodologies, design processes, and technical challenges for broader applicability.

Institutions Mentioned: Massachusetts Institute of Technology, University of Virginia-Main Campus, University of Connecticut-Main Campus
Tags: Academic Facility, Facilities Planning, Planning Processes, Project Management / Delivery, Renovation, SCUP 2019 Annual Conference, Student Housing

Member Price:
Free

Non-Member Price:
Free

User-Driven Planning for Digital-Image Delivery

By: Henry Pisciotta,Michael Halm,Michael J. Dooris

Writing for “informed generalists” rather than IT experts or systems development experts, the authors report on user-needs assessment issues for academic digital-image management and retrieval systems: “Content is king” and content needs are dynamic, not static.

From Volume 34 Number 3 | April–June 2006

Abstract: This article draws on two projects funded by the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation concerning the ways colleges and universities can support the legitimate sharing of digital learning resources for scholarly use. The 2001-03 Visual Image User Study (VIUS) assessed the scholarly needs of digital image users-faculty, staff, and students. That study led to the 2003-06 development of LionShare, an authenticated peer-to-peer network for a variety of e-learning resources, including digital images. This article highlights the assessment aspects of those projects. The article is intended for anyone interested in the planning of systems for the management of e-learning resources in higher education.

Institutions Mentioned: Pennsylvania State University, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Simon Fraser University-Burnaby, James Madison University

Member Price:
Free | Login

Member-only Resource

Join now to have access

Designing the University of the Future

By: Rifca Hashimshony,Jacov Haina

These authors identify transforming trends in society that are affecting the mission of universities, analyze the impact of those trends on the institutional and spatial structure of universities, and then summarize the factors that planners should be paying attention to in the future design of their institutions.

From Volume 34 Number 2 | January–March 2006

Abstract: This article focuses on the future physical layout of the university in view of the profound social and cultural changes of our time that are affecting the structure of higher education in general and universities in particular. We suggest that the basic architectural prototypes of university design should be re-examined in view of these changes. The main issues related to the characteristics of contemporary (current) society are identified, and their implications on the institutional and spatial structure of the university are analyzed. The article concludes with a methodological generation of alternative scenarios for the physical structure of the university of the future.

Institutions Mentioned: Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Technion-Israel Institute of Technology, Humboldt University of Berlin, University of Virginia-Main Campus, Free University of Brussels, Open University

Member Price:
Free | Login

Member-only Resource

Join now to have access

Planning for Cost-Efficiencies in Online Learning

Planning and planners must take the lead in ensuring that the design of on-line learning programs is both cost-efficient and productive. This must happen with some urgency because the gap between online learning models and implementation has been closing more rapidly than planners’ knowledge about online learning has been growing.

From Volume 33 Number 3 | March–May 2005

Abstract: This article proposes a framework that can help institutions break down and analyze the costs of online learning so they can make decisions about how to improve the cost-efficiencies of online education. The framework involves looking at costs across elements (which include the two stages of development and delivery plus administration of the enterprise) and seven factors: students, faculty, other staff, course design, content, infrastructure, and policy. The elements and factors may combine and interact, thereby improving (or not improving) cost-efficiencies. Where possible, current research results are included and areas where research is needed are identified.

Institutions Mentioned: Open University, University of Central Florida, Massachusetts Institute of Technology

Member Price:
Free | Login

Member-only Resource

Join now to have access

MIT Campus Planning 1960-2000: An Annotated Chronology

By: Jon E. Moss

From Volume 33 Number 1 | September–November 2004

Institutions Mentioned: Massachusetts Institute of Technology

Member Price:
Free | Login

Member-only Resource

Join now to have access

Research Space: Who Needs It, Who Gets It, Who Pays for It?

By: Ira Fink

An overview of research space management in the United States, based on interviews with senior administrators, Internet documents, and the authors’ vast experience, identifies important trends that need attention.

From Volume 33 Number 1 | September–November 2004

Abstract: Today, the amount of space devoted to research at research universities exceeds that of classrooms and class laboratories. This research space portfolio presents important policy and management challenges. As stewards of this portfolio, universities must address issues of funding the construction of research facilities, equipping and maintaining them, allocating and accounting for space used for research, and managing, in broadest terms, the physical and administrative infrastructure in which research is conducted. As this article illustrates, managing the balance between the growing demand for and the supply of research space is complicated. To address the issues of research space, universities have developed a variety of space management methods to fit their unique research missions, priorities, and operational culture. This article provides important insights into this little studied aspect of higher education space planning. The article is an overview of research space management across the U. S. on general campuses and in health science centers. It is based on interviews with senior administrators in selected research universities conducted specifically for this study, information about research space management available on university documents on the Internet, and on the work of Ira Fink and Associates, Inc. in programming research facilities on a multitude of campuses nationwide.

Institutions Mentioned: University of Arizona, University of California-Los Angeles, University of Pittsburgh-Pittsburgh Campus, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Duke University, Carnegie Mellon University, University of California-Berkeley, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, University of Washington-Seattle Campus, University of California-San Diego, University of Iowa, Massachusetts Institute of Technology

Member Price:
Free | Login

Member-only Resource

Join now to have access

Planning Types

Challenges