Hypothetical Questions for Cofifa

[HeavenUniv.]

Cofifa,
IF the Hyatt, Heldrich, or any of the Johnson & Johnson buildings in New Brunswick/Piscataway were to become available, could they be turned into dorms/classroom space/other uses for Rutgers ? Would Rutgers be interested? Could it be done at a fairly reasonable cost? Thanks for any opinions.

 

[Korbermeister]

Cofifa,
IF the Hyatt, Heldrich, or any of the Johnson & Johnson buildings in New Brunswick/Piscataway were to become available, could they be turned into dorms/classroom space/other uses for Rutgers ? Would Rutgers be interested? Could it be done at a fairly reasonable cost? Thanks for any opinions.

Weird question.. Do you have any inside info that any of the buildings will be available?

 

[srru86]

I have it from a very highly placed and reliable source that we are not looking to expand the number of on-campus beds. The recent buildings make us the largest on-campus residential provider beating out Ohio State.

The plan is to build new residences. As those come online we will knock down older, more expensive to renovate, residences that are past their prime. First to go likely Davison Hall on Busch.

 

[retired711]

I have it from a very highly placed and reliable source that we are not looking to expand the number of on-campus beds. The recent buildings make us the largest on-campus residential provider beating out Ohio State.

The plan is to build new residences. As those come online we will knock down older, more expensive to renovate, residences that are past their prime. First to go likely Davison Hall on Busch.

This makes sense to me. The New Brunswick/Piscataway campuses are not expected to grow; the feeling is that they are at their limit. Better to focus on improving the on-campus beds rather than adding to them.

 

[Scarlet Pride]

Pretty sure Davidson is already scheduled for demolition. It's no longer in use and while there aren't firm plans in place it sounds like they will build new dorms on that same site.

 

[HeavenUniv.]

Korber,
No inside info.--just curious if it ever happens.

 

[RUnTeX]

I have it from a very highly placed and reliable source that we are not looking to expand the number of on-campus beds. The recent buildings make us the largest on-campus residential provider beating out Ohio State.

The plan is to build new residences. As those come online we will knock down older, more expensive to renovate, residences that are past their prime. First to go likely Davison Hall on Busch.

Not that it matters, but I thought in the past it was Michigan State that was #1 (not OSU), with R-NB #2. Anyhow, when you consider some of the enrollments of large, public universities, it's amazing that on-campus bed numbers are not necessarily proportionate to full time student numbers. R-NB has long been what appears to be an over-provider of on-campus living and that is an expensive proposition not only for initial construction cost, but also ongoing maintenance (often deferred), capital expenditures, etc. to keep the facilities in decent shape.

As to the OP, many schools have been getting more and more creative and innovative with their real estate portfolio strategy relative to subsidizing/financing student housing and academic spaces, particularly the more urban schools and their land-constrained campus footprints. Frankly, what Rutgers has done with DEVCO in NB as well as in Newark is worthy of substantial recognition in terms of re-purposing existing assets (in some cases under-utilized), both physical buildings as well as land, in order to modernize the campuses.

 

[Scarlet Pride]

Actually residence halls are not cost problem. They are a revenue center for schools. That's not to say they could just go out and replace all the old dorms easily but it's much easier to get a dorm built and maintained than an academic building. Residence life and dining are prime money makers.

 

[RUnTeX]

Actually residence halls are not cost problem. They are a revenue center for schools. That's not to say they could just go out and replace all the old dorms easily but it's much easier to get a dorm built and maintained than an academic building. Residence life and dining are prime money makers.

Interesting, thanks for your perspective. I'd be curious why some schools are privatizing all or part of their housing portfolio if they can make $ rather than letting developers in on the deal.

 

[Scarlet Pride]

Privatizing dorms is often done because it's quicker or easier to get things built by a private developer. Developers can also take advantage of tax breaks/credits to bring the costs down and maximize their profits. While it's always easier to finance a dorm vs an academic building that might not be the school's priority. Some schools don't want to take on the debt load even though it's not particularly risky because it might impact either their perception by the public or when they go to finance other projects. Some schools just want to have someone else manage it. There are a lot of reasons but most of them are about not having to put out capital at the front end. I don't think privatizing dorms is good policy and I think a lot of schools are going to find problems down the line with these partnerships. There are times when working with 3rd parties makes sense for particular projects but not across the board.