University Committees: Campus Development Committee Committee

Meeting - December 16, 2024

Agenda

Date: December 16, 2024
Members: Warwick Arden, Charles Maimone, Alyson Wilson
Subcommittee Representatives: Alicia Knight, Allen Boyette, Barbara Moses, Bill Davis, Cameron Smith, Dana Harris, Doug Morton, Lisa Johnson, Patrick Deaton, Sumayya Jones-Humienny
Guests: Greg Sparks

Approval of the Minutes: W. Arden (1 min.)

Consent Agenda Approval: N/A

Campus Planning Subcommittee Items

  1. Delegated Authority Determinations: N/A
  2. Action Items:
    1. OIT New AI Data Center Study (Campus Development Needs Request) : G. Sparks (20 mins)
  3. Information Items:
    1. Holladay Hall Neighborhood Space Requests Update (Info. Item 21.08): L. Johnson/S. Jones-Humienny (15 mins)
    2. Advanced Nuclear Research Reactor Facility Feasibility Study Update (#2023140002): D. Morton (20 mins)
    3. 2024 Capital Development Plan Report: L. Johnson (15 mins)

Project Execution Subcommittee Items: C. Smith (15 mins)

  1. Updates:
    1. N/A

Other Business

Next Meeting:
Monday, January 27, 2025, 1:30 PM – 3:o0 PM

Minutes

Monday, December 16, 2024
Holladay Hall, Conference Room 18
1:30 PM-3:00 PM

Attendance and Distribution

Members present: Warwick Arden, Charles Maimone, Alyson Wilson
Subcommittee Representatives present: Alicia Knight, Allen Boyette, Barbara Moses, Bill Davis, Cameron Smith, Dana Harris, Doug Morton, Lisa Johnson, Patrick Deaton, Sumayya Jones-Humienny
Guests: Greg Sparks

Approval of the Minutes

The minutes of the November 25, 2024, meeting were approved and have been posted.

Approval of the Consent Agenda Approval:

  1. N/A

Campus Planning Subcommittee Info Items

  1. Delegated Authority Determinations: N/A
  2. Action Items:
    1. OIT New AI Data Center Study, Space Request #24-24: G. Sparks presented the attached “2024-12-16 CDC OIT Data Centers 2024v2” [pdf slide] presentation. (See the associated “2024-12-16-CamDevCmte-Minutes-and-Presentation.pdf”.) Discussion included the following:
      1. Demand continues to grow, primarily for research by PIs investigating more complex questions, from script submissions through NC State’s high-performing computing (HPC) portal.
      2. The GPU demand is in addition to the CPU demand. Typically, AI needs for campus operations would be housed on campus, but the university is running out of power.
      3. Three independent efforts include:
        1. A study that is underway to reinstate Data Center II in Administrative Building III as a short-term solution, with 6-12 racks that need to be operational in 24-30 months. OIT is funding this study.
        2. OIT’s request for approval is to begin in January 2025 a $150,000 study for meeting the University’s needs over the next decade, by providing 60 racks on site that could be operational in 24-36 months. This requires looking at potential locations for a facility to be built in phases.
        3. An aspirational long-term plan for a top-tier HPC facility (most likely in RTP) that would be operational in 8-10 years and would supplement individual campus capabilities.
        4. The study will be funded jointly by University and OIT resources.
      4. The Committee discussed two concepts, one that provides direct HPC access to all, and the other that provides a centrally-run portal through which to submit requests. The AVC for Research Computing would administrate the latter.
      5. The Committee gave the following directions:
        1. Provide life-cycle cost analyses for cloud solutions compared to the realistic total cost of ownership for on-site facilities (including all infrastructure first-cost and ongoing maintenance and utility costs), plus a combination of both as a potential long-term solution. The concern is the large, continuous investment required for on-site facilities that may become obsolete quickly versus cloud facilities that continuously upgrade to stay competitive in the market.
        2. OIT should continue working to clearly define and document campus demand for AI infrastructure. This demand should be done with enough granularity to distinguish “need” versus “want” and to distinguish the varying requirements for AI methodological developers and AI applications users. This effort must be within NC State’s context for locations and costs.
        3. Benchmarking should refine the peer list to more similar institutions, such as Virginia Tech.
        4. The governance structure should be determined for requests, like the one by the College of Sciences, to have their own stand-alone HPC facilities.
        5. The two biggest AI users noted are the College of Engineering and College of Agriculture and Life Sciences, but their needs should not box out others’ needs.
        6. Include Alyson Wilson on the study committee.
      6. The Committee deferred deciding on whether to proceed with the study until they discussed it further. [At their January 27, 2025, meeting, the Committee gave the study approval to proceed with the understanding OIT would fund it.]
  3. Information Items:
    1. Holladay Hall Neighborhood Space Requests Update (Info. Item 21.08): L. Johnson presented the attached “2024-12-16 CDC Holladay Hall Neighborhood Space” [pdf slide] presentation. (See the associated “2024-12-16-CamDevCmte-Minutes-and-Presentation.pdf”.) Discussion included the following:
      1. The Administrative Space Analysis recommendations for space savings, due this month for review by C. Maimone, will require change management to implement. Scenarios for consolidating administrative units into less space will present opportunities to solve other space pressures elsewhere on campus.
      2. Furthermore, if the Holladay Hall Space Principles are formally extended to Winslow and Peele Halls, opportunities to move units/personnel to the Administrative Neighborhood could solve some outstanding space pressures in the Holladay Hall neighborhood for Advancement, Institutional Strategy and Analysis, Internal Audit, Admissions, and the Office of the Provost.
      3. To address the space consolidation recommendations, modifications will require financial investment.
      4. Backfill of Winslow’s first floor public-facing space should be allocated to a unit that is physically present in the space during business hours. Preference will be given to those who need a front door presence.
      5. A formal response to Advancement is needed for their request to backfill the space they vacated in Winslow.
      6. The Committee stated the Holladay Hall Principles should extend to Peele and Winslow Halls. After review, they did not approve Advancement’s request based on these Holladay Neighborhood Principles and will formalize their response to Advancement with a memo. The Committee directed the Campus Planning Subcommittee to review Advancement’s essential needs for growth for all their currently allocated space per the forthcoming Administrative Space Analysis and hybrid work arrangement guidelines to determine alternative solutions. They asked to revisit the backfill options at a future Committee meeting for reassignment considerations.
    2. Advanced Nuclear Research Reactor Facility Feasibility Study Update (#2023140002): D. Morton presented the attached “2024-12-16 CDC Advanced Nuclear Research Test Reactor Dec 9, 2024” [pdf slide] presentation. (See the associated “2024-12-16-CamDevCmte-Minutes-and-Presentation.pdf”.)
      1. Discussion included the following:
        1. The Advanced Reactor Steering Committee provided an update to the Chancellor and state legislators on December 11, 2024.
        2. The findings and recommendations include the recommended technology, preferred site, potential reactor designers, and anticipated cost.
        3. The final design will likely be a derivative of the Sodium Fast Reactor (SFR) technology to strengthen the Research and Test Reactor (RTR) sustainability with the goal of demonstrating affordable scalability. SFR technology has proven to produce 20 MW of clean energy and the focus will be on determining the benefits to the State of NC in its application for inherently safe and easier deployment that is compatible with a potential molten salt loop.
        4. The Steering Committee requested $13M over the next two years for siting the SFR facility at Main Campus Drive and Trailwood Drive to be co-located with the MSL and RTR in the proposed research hub area.
        5. If NC State does not pursue this initiative, then we will lose the ability to keep pace with nuclear engineering’s evolution.
    3. 2024 Capital Development Plan Report (Info. Item 24.03): L. Johnson presented the attached “2024-12-16 Capital_Development_Plan_2024_Dec12_VER” [pdf slide] presentation. (See the associated “2024-12-16-CamDevCmte-Minutes-and-Presentation.pdf”.) Discussion included the following:
      1. Revisions to the final draft include:
        1. All existing capital submissions remain on the list until the next call for needs, at which point they will need to be resubmitted by colleges and departments if they remain a priority.

Project Execution Subcommittee Info Items

  1. N/A

Other Business

  1. N/A

Next Meeting: Monday, January 27, 2025, from 1:30 pm to 3:00 pm

Meeting Adjourned: 3:00 PM

Capital Development Plan Report 2024