Leveraging the Embedded Value of Campus

The first step is to assess and quantify space utilization and programming needs, particularly as they relate to mission alignment. Have silos created redundancies? Which assets are underutilized, and why? Which assets are exceptional? How are various spaces perceived by students? What is their impact on the student experience and overall recruitment and retention? 

The second step involves space redistribution. The assessment phase will spark ideas about adaptive reuse and strategically reallocating space across campus into highly utilized buildings that become mixed-use in their programs. Which departments are like-minded or co-dependent? Could new synergies be sparked by sharing space? Big goals can drive a cultural shift and send a focused message to support new ways of operating.

The third step, implementation, requires bold change. Perhaps excess space could be divested to tighten up the campus footprint. Partnerships could be forged with other academic institutions, industry, developers, government agencies, alumni, or the community to assist with strategy, funding, or investment. By exploring partnership options, institutions can reduce their operational footprints and lighten their deferred maintenance burdens, thereby improving their long-term financial stability.

Throughout the process, leaders should be guided by their core values, their campuses’ context-specific goals, and their unique assets. Leaders need to be aspirational, seeking to elevate the experience for everyone on campus, while also being practical by carefully considering local market forces, the costs of ongoing maintenance, and other factors.

Repositioning assets to align with mission

The Ohio State University undertook a planning effort that centered on the student experience, took a visionary approach to asset management, and created a tactical plan for sustainable funding.

The undergraduate experience is central to Ohio State’s mission because housing, dining, recreation, and engagement spaces have a direct impact on student success and well-being. Given the critical role that these facilities play in student life and the unique ways in which they impact cost of attendance and affordability, the university sought to ensure that they could continue to be responsibly maintained and operated.

Many leaders struggle with “tunnel vision” when they are dealing with individual assets that are problematic. To achieve a wholistic view, we assessed all student life assets across campus and considered not only each facility’s condition and associated expenses, but also its qualitative value. Scatter-mapping assets helped decision-makers understand the relationship of building conditions, existing debt obligations, revenues, and costs associated with each site, as well as replacement costs over time.

The rationale for growth reflects the need to realign existing assets with demand and potentially divest from assets that are not centrally located at the core of campus. The analysis helped reveal that several assets were located at the campus periphery, while some centrally located assets were suffering from under-investment. This strategy helped campus leaders conceive reinvesting into the core of campus rather than in distributed assets that didn’t reach standards.  

Each asset type is based on a metric that determines its future state, and collectively the program illustrates how trends impact size. Each asset type was benchmarked by national standards as well as Perkins&Will project standards to find the sweet spot for Ohio State.

Planning and landscape design teams applied this research and analysis to create implementation plans for new “districts” that infuse the large campus with a neighborhood feel. The plan includes strategies like adding mixed-use residence halls with greater density, consolidating assets, creating gateways to improve connectivity to the rest of campus and the larger community, and realigning portfolios of bed types. The resulting plan enhances the student experience while also managing assets responsibly.

Maximizing assets to increase revenue

The University of California College of the Law San Francisco is partnering with other academic institutions to optimize housing assets and increase revenue. The university is in the Tenderloin district adjacent to the Civic Center, and stakeholders at the nearby University of California San Francisco had identified a need for medical student housing in that part of the city due to its proximity to a major hospital.  

Conversations between the two universities spurred UC Law to redevelop a key site and realize the full potential of its zoning envelope. By filling out the footprint and expanding upward, UC Law gained additional classroom space and 650 new apartments. This was 300 more apartments than the law school needed, but that capacity could be used by the medical school and other nearby institutions to provide student housing, thereby generating additional revenue. While the project was being designed and built, UC Law was connecting with external academic partners to discuss sharing the surplus apartments, common spaces, and amenities.  

Monetizing land to fund projects

Wentworth Institute of Technology recognized the embedded value of their assets and capitalized on that value. The campus is in a prime location in Boston, and the land’s value had increased significantly over Wentworth’s 100 years in the neighborhood, particularly due to recent demand from Boston’s life sciences sector. The only problem? Parking and athletic fields took up a significant amount of space. 

Wentworth identified an opportunity to unlock this underused land and capitalize on it. By moving athletic programs from a highly desirable parcel to a new field on less desirable real estate, the university was able to offer the prime lot to a developer under a long-term ground lease. The developer is planning a lab and office facility to meet private sector needs, and the revenue from the ground lease is enabling the university to fund new projects, including residential projects, that generate additional revenue.

Be relevant, be aspirational, be practical

These institutions found that right-sizing, although challenging and complex, didn’t have to be painful. In fact, right-sizing can be a liberating experience as stakeholders participating in visioning and other exercises are given free rein to think creatively about campus assets and liabilities. This opportunity should be initiated by balancing three lenses: Is our existing framework relevant? Are we being aspirational? And is the plan practical enough to be implemented?  

By adopting proven methodology and approaching challenges with open minds, campus leaders can responsibly transform their campuses for the future.