The Journal of College and University Student Housing - Volume 36, No. 2 - 87

ACUHO-I Construction and Renovation Data

Table 2
New Construction Cost Data – January 2008 Survey
Type of project Total Average project costs Per GSF Per bed Total Average construction costs Per GSF Per bed

Adjoining suites Super suites Apartments

$33.4M $18.5M $23.3M

$205 $216 $150

$85,807 $62,864 $63,203

$27.8M $16.8M $18.1M

$170 $191 $128

$71,474 $56,166 $54,158

Information from the January 2008 ACUHO-I Construction and Renovation Survey Note: Project costs include all expenses associated with constructing and opening a new facility (e.g., design fees, financing costs, permits, land purchase, parking, furniture, landscaping). Construction costs include only the cost to build the residential facilities (i.e., living units and public/common areas); they do not include costs for classrooms, dining facilities, other nonresidential space, furniture, or other costs not directly related to construction.

This is an increase in double-occupancy bedrooms in comparison to previous survey administrations. Some construction projects included a combination of single- and doubleoccupancy bedrooms (18.4%). Most of the new construction units included public spaces and amenities in and around the facility, such as laundry facilities (83.1%), lobby (81.4%), staff offices (79.7%), wireless Internet (76.3%), and staff apartments (74.6%). The majority also included an electronic security system (i.e., card reader and/or cameras) (71.2%). The most common in-room/unit amenities were furniture (91.5%), Internet access (89.8%), cable TV (88.1%), and telephone outlets (84.7%). Other common in-room/unit amenities included air conditioning (83.1%) and individual temperature control (81.4%). Tax exempt revenue bonds were the most frequently used method of funding for the projects (56.9%), followed by bank loans (12.3%) and reserve funds (10.8%). State ap-

propriations accounted for less than 2% of all funding methods. If a project were debt financed, the college or university was generally responsible for the debt (93%), followed by the institutional foundation (7%). While the majority of projects were not seeking LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) certification, 44.2% of projects were incorporating sustainable design features. Of the 17.3% seeking LEED certification, 7.7% had obtained certification so far. Average project and construction costs varied, depending on the types of facilities constructed. Additionally, not all pertinent cost data were provided by respondents, so the following cost data are based only on the responses of those who provided cost, number of beds, and gross square footage information. The average costs for suite-style facilities, super suite-style facilities, and apartment facilities are provided in Table 2. It should be noted that these costs represent facilities incorporating a single type,
V o l u m e 3 6 , No. 2 • 2 0 1 0

87
The Journal of College and University Student Housing - Volume 36, No. 2

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of The Journal of College and University Student Housing - Volume 36, No. 2
