As we look ahead this year, the future of the built environment is becoming clear. Data centers remain strong, commercial development is regaining momentum, and student housing — especially within California’s public university system—has shifted from speculation to certainty. Recent legislation, including Assembly Bills AB 648 (effective January 2026), AB 357, and AB 893, has transformed the landscape by streamlining approvals, reducing entitlement barriers, and accelerating delivery for publicly funded projects.
Student housing must now be fast-tracked, infrastructure-ready, and digitally enabled from day one — supporting affordability, sustainability mandates, and long-term operational efficiency. In this context, smart building ecosystems are no longer optional; they are essential. The question is no longer whether to implement smart technologies, but which use cases to prioritize and how to integrate them so that housing delivered quickly today remains resilient, adaptable, and future-ready for decades to come.
University housing sits at the intersection of affordability, climate commitments, operational complexity and asset stewardship. While smart building technologies have become more common in residence halls and mixed-use housing, results vary widely. Success depends less on the technology itself and more on how early, intentionally and holistically these systems are integrated throughout the building lifecycle.
Smart building systems must be treated not as amenities or add-ons, but as core infrastructure — on par with structural systems, power distribution, and life safety. When planned as connected infrastructure, smart systems improve energy performance, reduce operational burden, support climate goals and enhance occupant experiences. The selection of smart building systems and use cases should be carefully designed and selected to meet the owner’s objectives and desired outcomes. This helps ensure that technologies are not treated as features that are quickly value-engineered out.
When treated as features, they often introduce risk, cost and complexity. The challenge for owners, architects, and engineers is clear: how to align smart building strategies with accelerated delivery models — ensuring speed does not compromise performance, resilience, or long-term value.
University housing faces unique challenges compared to private multifamily developments:
Students expect reliable connectivity, comfort and safety as baseline conditions, while parents and stakeholders demand fiscal responsibility, data protection and operational resilience. These pressures make smart systems essential, but only when aligned with the operational realities of public universities.
Incremental adoption of smart technologies — such as adding smart thermostats late in design or deploying sensors without clear use cases — often leads to fragmented systems, cybersecurity risks, higher operating costs, and poor staff adoption.
A core infrastructure approach treats the following as foundational:
Every smart system — HVAC controls, access control, cameras, metering and sensors — depends on a resilient network. In student housing, this network supports both academic and residential connectivity as well as building operations and safety. If the network fails, the building ceases to be “smart” — it becomes compromised.
Smart systems play a direct role in achieving sustainability goals by providing real-time visibility into energy use, demand response and anticipating maintenance needs. Continuous performance monitoring and timely corrective actions help keep buildings operating efficiently and sustainably.
Facility managers ultimately own and operate smart buildings, yet they are often brought in late or not at all during design and construction. As a result, they inherit systems they had little input on, leading to avoidable operational challenges, added costs, and long-term inefficiencies.
To address this, facility teams develop campus standards that define their smart building strategy and set clear expectations for design and construction. But standards alone are not enough. Effective teams stay actively involved throughout the design and construction process to enforce, validate and align implementations with their operational goals.
To support this governance, many organizations establish a Master Systems Integrator (MSI) of Record role. This role, staffed internally or through partners such as Alfa Tech, ensures consistency, compliance and long-term success across smart building projects.
Smart housing expands the digital attack surface. Access control, cameras, sensors, and BAS devices must be secured through:
University housing assets outlast most technology vendors. Open protocols, documented APIs, and avoiding single-vendor ecosystems protect long-term investments and reduce replacement risk.
Smart buildings often fail at handover, not design. Effective commissioning includes:
Smart building investments should be evaluated using clear return on investment metrics, including energy savings, reduced maintenance costs, and improved operational efficiency. Together, these outcomes improve long term affordability and resilience.
“Advances in cloud first computing and integration technologies have significantly reduced implementation costs. What once exceeded $2 per square foot can now start around $0.20 per square foot for a full smart building platform. This cost reduction has shortened payback periods to under two years in most cases and in some cases less than one year,” Gutkin says.
As a result, smart building technologies are seeing broader adoption and becoming standardized across multiple building sectors.
Smart buildings are no longer experimental. For universities, the question is not whether to adopt smart systems, but how. Treating smart technologies as core infrastructure aligns them with operational realities, supports sustainability goals, reduces long-term cost and risk and enhances resilience and student experience.
Gislene Weig is a principal at AlfaTech Consulting Engineering, where her core practice focuses on the planning, design, and integration of smart building and low-voltage technology systems. She works closely with universities, architects, and commercial clients across California to deliver scalable, secure, and future-ready infrastructure for student housing, academic, and mixed-use environments, bridging technology strategy with practical, code-compliant design.
Sergey Gutkin is a senior principal of Smart Building and AI Technology at AlfaTech Consulting Engineering, where he helps owners and facilities teams turn complex building data into clear, actionable outcomes. He specializes in bridging the gap between advanced technology and real business needs — translating automation, IoT, and AI capabilities into measurable improvements in performance, efficiency, and operational resilience. Known for his practical, results-driven approach, Sergey focuses on delivering scalable solutions that reduce operational burden, unlock long-term value, and future-proof building portfolios.
