What About Public Private Partnerships? #ilmaBlog #HigherEducation #P3 #PPP #University #Architect

Example of Stakeholder Team (Source: Servitas)

Background on Public Private Partnerships (P3’s):

Many institutions of higher education are facing mounting pressure on their mission to deliver high-quality, affordable education to students and perform world-class research. Reductions in public funding support and concerns about overall affordability present substantial near-term and longer-term budget challenges for many institutions.

Public institutions are predominantly affected, having been constrained by suspensions or reductions in state funding. State appropriations across the US grew by just 0.5% annually between 2005 and 2015. State funding has still not recovered to 2008 levels, the last year in which state funding decisions would not have been affected by the Great Recession.

(Source: Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS) — state appropriations revenue divided by total fall enrollment, 2005–15)

Public-private partnership models are continuing to proliferate as cash-strapped colleges and universities seek to replace or update aging and outdated infrastructure amid tight finances.

(Source: Proliferating Partnerships)

What is the P3 Delivery Model?

A public-private partnership, or P3, is long-term agreement between a public entity and a private industry team that is tasked with designing, building, financing, operating and maintaining a public facility. The past decade has seen a steady increase in the use of P3 structures, both inside and outside higher education. In 2016, something of a watershed year for P3, multiple high-profile projects came online in response to a variety of public needs, including a $1-billion-plus water infrastructure project servicing San Antonio, and a $300-million-plus renovation of the Denver International Airport’s Great Hall.

(Source: A Few Lessons About Public-Private Partnerships)

“Public” is a non-profit institutional or governmental entity that engages a “private” for-profit entity to pay for a particular project.

The “private” partner provides funding (and often expertise) to deliver (and often operate) the project used by the “public” entity to meet its purposes.

In return for its capital, the “private” entity gets a revenue flow from the asset it has paid for.

(Source: Should your University enter into a Public/Private Partnership – the Pro’s and Con’s)

The emergence of the P3 option is happening where it matters most: projects that would be otherwise unattainable under the traditional public-improvement delivery models. For instance, 10 years ago, only a handful of higher education P3 projects were up and running; today, we are approaching three dozen such projects.

The biggest challenge is, of course, the financing component, but P3 teams bring much more to the table than money — they give public entities access to expertise and innovation that can add significant value to projects at each phase of development.

(Source: A Few Lessons About Public-Private Partnerships)

Motivations for P3 transactions vary widely, but include:

  • Supplementing traditional debt instruments. These include private capital, using off balance sheet or alternative mechanisms.
  • Transfer of risk. Historically, universities have born all or most of the risk of facilities-related projects themselves. A P3 is a way to either transfer or at least share the risk.
  • Speed and efficiency. A P3 allows for a faster development process, and time to completion is generally shorter and on schedule. The sole focus of the private entity is to complete the project on budget and on time. University infrastructure tends to have competing priorities across all-campus facility needs.
  • Outsourcing provision of non-core assets. Outsourcing allows institutions to focus investment of internal resources and capabilities on those functions that are closer to the academic needs of its students.
  • Experience. Private partners often have much more experience and skills in a particular development area (e.g., facility architecture and infrastructure, student housing needs) and are able to better accommodate the needs of students, faculty, administrators, etc.
  • Planning and budgeting. Private partners offer experience and know-how in long-term maintenance planning and whole life cycle budgeting.

(Source: Public-private partnerships in higher education What is right for your institution?)

The four types of P3s:

  • Operating contract/management agreement. Short- to medium-term contract with private firm for operating services
  • Ground lease/facility lease. Long-term lease with private developer who commits to construct, operate and maintain the project
  • Availability payment concession. Long-term concession with private developer to construct, operate, maintain and finance the project in exchange for annual payments subject to abatement for nonperformance
  • Demand-risk concession. Long-term concession with private developer to construct, operate, maintain and finance the project in exchange for rights to collect revenues related to the project

Pro’s and Con’s of P3’s:

Since their emergence in student housing several years ago, P3s have become important strategies for higher education institutions because of the many benefits they offer, including:

  • Lower developer costs
  • Developer expertise
  • Operational expertise
  • Access to capital
  • Preservation of debt capacity
  • More favorable balance sheets and credit statements
  • Risk mitigation
  • Faster procurement and project delivery (It can typically take a university about 5 years to get a project built. With a P3, that process can be reduced to just 2 years. Additionally, P3s can save approximately 25% in costs compared to typical projects.)

Beyond the above, the indirect advantages of P3s in student housing are numerous, such as they:

  • Provide better housing for students
  • Expand campus capacity
  • Create high-quality facilities
  • Expand the tax base for both a city and county
  • Provide an economic boost to surrounding areas, which likely lead to private growth and other improvements

It is important to note that, while there are many benefits of P3s for higher education institutions, these agreements also have disadvantages that need to be considered, including:

  • High cost of capital
  • Reduced control for the university
  • Complexity of deals
  • Multi-party roles and responsibilities
  • Limitation on future university development

(Source: Student Housing A Hot Sector For Public-Private Partnerships)

A LOOK AHEAD

Where Are We Heading?

  • More political involvement and pressure to consider P3
  • Pre-development Risks – Many projects failing to close
  • Issues with Construction Pricing & Labor Shortages
  • An increasing number of developers are getting in the on-campus business; however, developers are being more strategic on which projects/procurements to respond to
  • Exploration of other sources of funds like tax credits, USDA, and opportunity zones
  • Shared governance continues to grow
  • Larger, more complex P3 projects including long term concessions, availability payment models, Key Performance Indicators (KPIs)
  • Bundling of Procurements (food, housing (including faculty), academic buildings, hotel, energy, facility maintenance, etc.)

Further Reading:

We would love to hear from you about what you think about this post. We sincerely appreciate all your comments – and – if you like this post please share it with friends. And feel free to contact us if you would like to discuss ideas for your next project!

Sincerely,

FRANK CUNHA III
I Love My Architect – Facebook


Higher Education

Blog Posts Related to Higher Education

  1. Library of the Future – For Colleges & Universities
  2. Mansueto Library by JAHN
  3. Creative Arts Center at Brown University by Diller Scofidio + Renfro
  4. What is a High Performance School?
  5. Architect’s Sketchbook – Montclair State University (Sketches by @FrankCunhaIII, 2017)
  6. 13 Examples of Green Architecture
  7. WELL Communities: Health & Wellness Lifestyle
  8. You Know LEED, But Do You Know WELL?
  9. The 2030 Challenge for Planning @Arch2030
  10. What is The 2030 Challenge? @Arch2030
  11. Smart Cities
  12. Top 20: Technology & Innovation Ideas For Architects

My Higher Education Projects

  1. New Computer Science Facility for College of Science & Mathematics
  2. School of Nursing & Graduate School
  3. New Research Facility, Montclair State University
  4. Conrad J. Schmitt Hall Renovation, Montclair State University
  5. Frank Sinatra Hall, Montclair State University
  6. Music School, Montclair State University
  7. Student Recreation Center, Montclair State University
  8. College Hall (In Progress)
  9. Conceptual Design – Adaptive Re-Use of Existing Cogeneration Plant
  10. Conceptual Design – Study Atrium
  11. Small Project – Successful Conversion (Tech Classrooms) Before & After
  12. New Center for Environmental Life Sciences
  13. Babbio Center, Stevens Institute of Technology

We would love to hear from you on what you think about this post. We sincerely appreciate all your comments – and – if you like this post please share it with friends. And feel free to contact us if you would like to discuss ideas for your next project!

Sincerely,

FRANK CUNHA III
I Love My Architect – Facebook

 


Library of the Future – For Colleges & Universities

If the classroom is the heart of higher education, the library is its soul.

Brief History of College Libraries

Typically, undergraduate libraries were not often discussed during the first part of the 20th century — It was thought that the basic library collections were able to meet the needs of all users, undergraduates, graduate students and faculty.

As a result of the rapid increase in the student population after World War II, undergraduate service became an issue for library and university administrators. With the growth of a complex research-oriented library and university system, undergraduate students were often bewildered. Huge card catalogs, closed book stacks and extensive reference materials overwhelmed new students and many did not seek assistance.

Harvard’s Lamont Library was the first large university’s effort to open an undergraduate library. Many other universities followed suit, such as Michigan, Texas and South Carolina. Some established full-scale libraries while others provided separate reading rooms aimed at undergraduates. One characteristic of these projects was that the books were housed in open stacks. Through design and layout undergraduate libraries and reading rooms tried to convey an informal and accessible air.

(Source: https://www.library.wisc.edu/college/about-college/history-of-college-library/)

Robert W Woodruff Library, Atlanta University Center

Robert W. Woodruff Library- Atlanta University Center

“Libraries need to break out…. We need to rethink our whole attitude about the relationship between students and space, furniture, and information, and redefine what a library should be.”

–Lee Van Orsdel Dean of University Libraries, Grand Valley State University

Library of the Future - Gensler-TrendsIn a digital world, libraries are “ripe for reinvention,” says Derek Jones, Principal in Perkins+Will’s Raleigh, N.C., office. Colleges are trimming the space their libraries allocate for books and storage and are forming consortiums to share resources. Digitization is facilitating just‑in‑time delivery of information and materials, although, as Jones points out, “when you have a million items and no budget, digitizing can be a formidable task.”

Library of the Future - EvolutionSteelcase WorkSpace Futures researchers and designers have developed key design principles for planning 21st century libraries. Like the classroom design principles, they’re based on primary user-centered research. The library design principles reflect the changed nature of a library in higher education today:

  • Design library spaces that support social learning
  • Support the librarian’s evolving role
  • Optimize the performance of informal spaces
  • Plan for adjacencies
  • Provide for individual comfort, concentration, and security
  • Provide spaces that improve awareness of, and access to, library resources

Library of the Future_Page_2

Library of the Future_Page_3

These top 10 highlights capture the big picture themes of organizational change that need to take place to develop a Library of the Future for institutions of higher education:

Libraries remain the gatekeepers to rich tapestries of information and knowledge. As the volume of web resources increases, libraries are charged with finding new ways to organize and disseminate research to make it easier to discover, digest, and track.

Incorporating new media and technologies in strategic planning is essential. Libraries must keep pace with evolving formats for storing and publishing data, scholarly records, and publications in order to match larger societal consumption trends favoring video, visualizations, virtual reality, and more.

In the face of financial constraints, open access is a potential solution. Open resources and publishing models can combat the rising costs of paid journal subscriptions and expand research accessibility. Although this idea is not new, current approaches and implementations have not yet achieved peak efficacy.

Libraries must balance their roles as places for both independent study and collaboration. Flexibility of physical spaces is becoming paramount for libraries to serve as campus hubs that nurture cross-disciplinary work and maker activities — without eschewing their reputations as refuges for quiet reflection.

Catering to patrons effectively requires user centric design and a focus on accessibility. Adopting universal design principles and establishing programs that continuously collect data on patron needs will make libraries the ultimate destination for learning support and productivity.

Spreading digital fluency is a core responsibility. Libraries are well-positioned to lead efforts that develop patrons’ digital citizenship, ensuring mastery of responsible and creative technology use, including online identity, communication etiquette, and rights and responsibilities.

Libraries must actively defend their fundamental values. In times of economic and political unrest, libraries will be challenged to uphold information privacy and intellectual freedom while advocating against policies that undermine public interests and net neutrality.

Advancing innovative services and operations requires a reimagining of organizational structures. Rigid hierarchies are no longer effective. To meet patrons’ needs, libraries must draw from different functional areas and expertise, adopting agile, matrix like paradigms.

Enabled by digital scholarship technologies, the research landscape is evolving. GIS data, data visualization, and big data are expanding how information is collected and shared. These tools are helping libraries preserve and mine their collections while illuminating collaborative opportunities.

Artificial intelligence and the Internet of Things are poised to amplify the utility and reach of library services. These emerging technologies can personalize the library experience for patrons, connecting them more efficiently to resources that best align with their goals.

(Sources: http://uwmltc.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/360_Issue60-1-small.pdf and https://www.steelcase.com/research)

Library of the Future_Page_1We would love to hear from you on what you think about this post. We sincerely appreciate all your comments – and – if you like this post please share it with friends. And feel free to contact us if you would like to discuss ideas for your next project!

Sincerely,
FRANK CUNHA III
I Love My Architect – Facebook


Conceptual Design – Study Atrium

This slideshow requires JavaScript.


Project Information: Design Charrette for Student Study Space

My Role: University Facilities, University Architect

Architect of Record: KSS Architects

Client: Montclair State University, University Facilities

About the Project:

Working with KSS Architects we analyzed how best to utilize the space between two existing buildings to maximize study areas for students. The proposed space would encourage chance encounters between students of different majors since the two adjacent buildings serve two different colleges at the university.

Project Status:

There are currently no plans to further develop this conceptual design.

We would love to hear from you on what you think about this post. We sincerely appreciate all your comments – and – if you like this post please share it with friends. And feel free to contact us if you would like to discuss ideas for your next project!

Sincerely,
FRANK CUNHA III
I Love My Architect – Facebook


Architect’s Sketchbook – Montclair State University (Sketches by @FrankCunhaIII, 2017)

College Hall is where the history and the future of Montclair State meet. It’s where every student’s college journey begins with Undergraduate Admissions and ends with the submission of their final audit to the Office of the Registrar for graduation.

College Hall is where it all started. Back in 1903, the New Jersey State Normal School in Trenton could no longer support New Jersey’s growing need for qualified teachers by itself, so the state approved plans for a new normal school to serve northern New Jersey. (A normal school was a post-secondary school devoted to training teachers.) And in 1908, the New Jersey State Normal School at Montclair admitted its first students.

College Hall’s Spanish mission-style architecture, which was adopted for other buildings on campus, was the inspiration of benefactor Edward Russ, a member of the New Jersey State Board of Education who liked buildings he saw on a trip to California. So he integrated the style into plans for College Hall, complete with red-tile roofs—a look that lives on in campus construction today.

In the beginning, College Hall housed almost everything—administrative offices, classrooms, a library and a gym. Today, it is Montclair State’s administrative hub, housing the offices of the President and the Provost, University Advancement, Admissions, the Registrar, the Graduate School and more.

IMG_2252

IMG_1190

IMG_1109

Dedicated to the first president of Montclair State, Charles S. Chapin, in 1928, it is one of the original buildings of the Montclair State Normal School. This former residence hall was renovated in 1974, and again in 2009, and is now the home of the John J. Cali School of Music. The Leshowitz Recital Hall is also located in Chapin Hall.

IMG_1115

Russ Hall was built in 1915 and served as the first residential facility of the State Normal School at Montclair, now of course known as Montclair State University. Converted at one point to an administrative building and then later renovated back to a residence hall, Russ Hall provides suite-style accommodations for approximately 100 students.

IMG_1119

IMG_2253Dedicated to Allan C. Morehead, an alumnus and former professor, executive vice president and provost at Montclair State. Morehead Hall was used as a demonstration high school from 1929 to 1973. It now houses several student support services offices.

IMG_1186IMG_2065IMG_1206


Better Than a Selfie

cels-004-selfiecels-003-have-funEveryone likes to take a selfie (these days).  Only thing better is when someone else takes a selfie some place you helped design and build.

What: Center for Environmental Life Sciences

Where: Montclair State University

Who: Architect ; Photographer ; Builder ; Project Manager

Happy New Year!

Sincerely,
Frank Cunha III
I Love My Architect – Facebook
FC3 ARCHITECTURE+DESIGN, LLC
e-mail: fcunha@fc3arch.com
mobile: 201.681.3551
direct: 973.970.3551
web: Business / Personal
Licensed in CT, DC, DE, FL, MD, NJ, NY, PA, VA


Ophiuchus: The Serpent Bearer (Playing With Numbers)

Whether it is because I have OCD or because I was raised Catholic and am fascinated with numbers, take for example the number 13 which is the number of letters I have in my name: FRANK CUNHA III (without the spaces); Some say that the concept of Friday 13 being an unlucky day is linked with events that occurred in the Christian Bible, and they interpret that these events occurred on a Friday. Examples include the great flood during the time of Noah, the confusion of languages at the Tower of Babel, the day Eve tempted Adam with the apple, and the day Jesus Christ died.   But I digress, the point of this post is to memorialize my ability to finally record (albeit partially) the shadow of Ophiuchus cast onto the concrete pad at a popular sculpture located at Montclair State University.  I first heard about the sculpture from a studio professor at NJIT (Don Wall, friend to John Hedjuk).  I believe Don Wall was trying to stress the importance of context, spatial relations, and the memorialization of event in the design of Architecture.  I was finally able to capture the shadow after more than 10-years (I simply kept missing it as life passed by).  But here it is…..finally! 
(Click Image to See Larger Version)


Ophiuchus: The Serpent Bearer” sculpture by former professor Mac Adams is located adjacent to Finley Hall and Sprague Library. It is a fusion of art and science. “Technically, the shadow sculpture is made of steel wedges, bars and disks that seemingly mean nothing sensible,” Rodriguez explained. “However, the breathtaking image emerges when the summer sun casts the shadow of the work from noon to approximately 1:15 p.m. between May and July of each year.  (See other sculptures located at MSU.)

Because of the partial overlap of the constellation Ophiuchus and the Sun’s path upon which zodiacal longitude is based, Ophiuchus is sometimes mistakenly referred to as the ’13th sign of the Zodiac’. This is an inappropriate reference since the zodiac is a division of the ecliptic into twelve equal parts, initially originated for calendrical purposes. This makes the notion of a ’13th sign’ a mathematical impossibility. It is only correct to refer to Ophiuchus as one of the constellations which cross the zodiac; which does not constitute a zodiacal sign, of which all historical records acknowledge only twelve.