IBJNews

Purdue board OKs building 3rd luxury dorm tower

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Purdue University trustees have approved building a third luxury dorm tower even through the school has vacancies in the existing towers for the coming semester.

The board on Friday approved a $20.6 million construction contact for the First Street Towers project. University officials say the bid from Hagerman Inc. of Fort Wayne was $5 million less than expected.

The new tower will include 174 rooms with single air-conditioned rooms with private baths like the towers that opened last year. The room-and-board fee of about $14,900 is about $5,000 more than Purdue's next most-expensive housing plan.

Purdue Treasurer Al Diaz said that despite about 40 vacancies in the current towers, he believed the construction project should go forward because the tower could not be built at this price in the future.

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Real World .. edit
    Edit...

    "When was the last time a university president announced a wage and benefit wage FREEZE for faculty? Why are the presidents NOT pressing for their employees to join the state health insurance program that is estimated to save the state hundreds of millions. "

  • Real world
    The real world is one in which one has to reduce expenses when income falls and not continue to spend in the face of a deteriorating economy.

    The universities should be striving to provide valuable learning experiences at a lower cost today than yesterday.

    I have few clients who can continually raise prices. In fact, most have had to reduce prices or become much more efficient to maintain profitability.

    As long as universities and private school attendees can tap student loans, the schools have no incentive to become more efficient.

    When was the last time a university president announced a wage and benefit wage hike for faculty? Why are the presidents pressing for their employees to join the state health insurance program that is estimated to save the state hundreds of millions.

    What people say and write means nothing. It's what they do that defines them and schools are doing virtually nothing to adjust to a slowing economy, loss of jobs and students with fewer resources except cry, "Uncle".
    • Construction Cost
      If it's truly "luxury housing" the $118,000 per unit is about right, and comparable to what a nice apartment unit would cost to build. Again, if the students (or their parents) have the money and wish to pay for it, so be it.
    • Dorms Are Paid With Resident Fees
      The school is charging market rate for the housing, so who cares? A private developer would not charge more. And, probably a private developer would have a hard time getting financing to build the tower in the first place. Not to mention, they would not have access to the land, since Purdue controls it. I think it's pretty absurd for a student to pay that much for dorm housing. That said, if a student or (more likely) their parents have the money and wish to pay for "luxury housing" so be it.
    • Nauseating...
      Define "real world" Bob.
      • Expensive
        Hmmm, $20.6M for 174 single rooms + baths? That's >$118k each. Seems a little expensive to me, but hey, maybe that's why higher education is so expensive!
        • What are these people thinking
          Let's find private investors to build these dorms if they're such good deals.

          Cut tax flows to universities now and make them live in the real world.
          • Architect?
            Who's the architect for this project?

          Post a comment to this story

          COMMENTS POLICY
          We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
           
          You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
           
          Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
           
          No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
           
          We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
           

          Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

          Sponsored by
          ADVERTISEMENT

          facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

          Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
          Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
           
          Subscribe to IBJ
          1. How can any company that has the cash and other assets be allowed to simply foreclose and not pay the debt? Simon, pay the debt and sell the property yourself. Don't just stiff the bank with the loan and require them to find a buyer.

          2. If you only knew....

          3. The proposal is structured in such a way that a private company (who has competitors in the marketplace) has struck a deal to get "financing" through utility ratepayers via IPL. Competitors to BlueIndy are at disadvantage now. The story isn't "how green can we be" but how creative "financing" through captive ratepayers benefits a company whose proposal should sink or float in the competitive marketplace without customer funding. If it was a great idea there would be financing available. IBJ needs to be doing a story on the utility ratemaking piece of this (which is pretty complicated) but instead it suggests that folks are whining about paying for being green.

          4. The facts contained in your post make your position so much more credible than those based on sheer emotion. Thanks for enlightening us.

          5. Please consider a couple of economic realities: First, retail is more consolidated now than it was when malls like this were built. There used to be many department stores. Now, in essence, there is one--Macy's. Right off, you've eliminated the need for multiple anchor stores in malls. And in-line retailers have consolidated or folded or have stopped building new stores because so much of their business is now online. The Limited, for example, Next, malls are closing all over the country, even some of the former gems are now derelict.Times change. And finally, as the income level of any particular area declines, so do the retail offerings. Sad, but true.

          ADVERTISEMENT