Pittville Student Village:
Student Numbers

Scope of the paper

  1. This paper provides an operational appraisal of the size of the University’s application for the development of a student village at the Pittville site. Specifically it addresses a concern raised in previous discussions about the size of the development in terms of the requirement to provide a total of 794 beds on the site (including the existing 214). The paper sets out the evidence and rationale for the University’s position that 794 beds is necessaryto meet student accommodation needs and ensure the University is able to compete effectively in attracting new students. That has a direct bearing on the financial viability of the University.

Introduction

  1. The University of Gloucestershire has been part of the town of Cheltenham since the early 19th century. During this period is has changed in both name and focus but has always prided itself on its close links and contribution to its local region. The University has reacted proactively to the changing higher education market but faces challenges with the inherent constraints of its inherited estate, including both the quantity and quality of its student accommodation.

Student Accommodation as part of the University Business Model

  1. The past decade has seen rising student expectations about the quality and nature of their University experience. This partly reflects the long term social trend of rising public expectations affecting all public services. In higher education it has been accelerated by higher student fees introduced in 2012 (rising to £9,000 per year) and the removal of former controls on the number of students any University may take.
  1. The consequence is that student recruitment is now a much more competitive process for Universities than before. Successful management of recruitment is business critical. Student fees now account for the great majority of the University’s income - in 2014/15, fees and student-related grants account for £55m out of the University’s total projected income of £74m. Each UK/EU student pays tuition fees of £9,000 per year. So the University’s viability is critically dependent on our competitive position in the student recruitment market.
  1. Students take account of a variety of factors in choosing a University. But increasingly, one of the factors is the availability of good residential accommodation. When students are moving away from home for the first time, it is understandable that they and their parents will want to know where they will live as well as what they will study. They want assurances that the accommodation will be safe, convenient, well managed and with good facilities. So at open days for applicants, this is a frequent area of inquiry - what accommodation does the University offer? In our 2014 survey of students who declined a place, 78% said that ‘guaranteed accommodation’ was either important or extremely important to their choice of University.
  1. In response to these trends, all Universities have been seeking to improve their offer of accommodation, in order to remain competitive in student recruitment. A common benchmark for all Universities is to be able to offer, as a minimum, all first year students accommodation in University owned or supported residences where students will be together during their first year in a safe, University-managed environment, where they can get to know each other, the University and the town. Most Universities also seek to offer accommodation to international students and postgraduate students, again in response to market demand. Many international students, faced with the additional challenges of not merely moving away from home but moving to another country with a different language and culture understandably want the security of knowing they can live in University managed accommodation. Since the international student market is exceptionally competitive, Universities have responded to that market demand.
  1. It is important to note that this demand from students is not just about the quantity of accommodation, but also about how it is configured and supported. What students want is to be with other students, in a safe environment managed by the University, and with on-site social, catering and IT facilities. Consequently, that drives towards the clustering of accommodation in student villages, which can be cost-effectively supported with staffing, communal facilities and management resources. So the attractiveness of student accommodation to applicants also depends on its massing, structure and servicing as a community, not just on the absolute number of beds available. The community character of student accommodation is also vital for its viability, which has led many universities to establish student villages to build a community of students. Some examples of student villages that operate successfully across the country are:

Student village / Bed numbers
Storthes Hall, Huddersfield / 1,386
Endcliffe & Ranmoor, University of Sheffield / 3,000
Cheney Student Village, Oxford / 750
McMillan CLV, Greenwich / 824
Student Village, University of Bedfordshire in Luton / 1,845
Frenchay Student Village, Bristol / 1,932
Oadby Student Village, Leicester / 1,959
  1. All these trends have resulted in massive investment by Universities in student accommodation all around the country. Data from the 2014 Statistics Report of the Association of University Directors of Estates (AUDE) shows that capital spend on residential accommodation across the university sector increased by 280% between 2001/2 and 2012/13 (latest available figures). In this report AUDE states:

Institutions recognise the need to provide a good level of accommodation as part of their recruitment campaign. It is a key issue particularly for parents and carers to ensure that a student is provided with a safe and appropriate environment, especially in their first year away from home.

Institutions recognise this, and are partly expending their own capital to ensure that provision is adequate. They are also working in partnership with the private sector to ensure appropriate provision is secured fortheir students

The attached press articlesillustrate these effects regionally and nationally.

UOG Current Student Accommodation Stock and Target

  1. Against this background, in order that we can remain viable and competitive in our market, the University of Gloucestershire’s aim for its accommodation policy is to guarantee a place in a managed hall of residence to:
  1. all first year students (including first year international students)
  2. all 2nd and 3rd year international students
  3. all international pathway students (i.e. students entering the UK via a sub-degree programme delivered at the University’s INTO Gloucestershire centre).
  1. This target is representative of what other competitor Universities are offering. As such, it is imperative for the University to be able to achieve this target, if we are to be able to compete in attracting new students.
  1. At present the University is unable to meet this target by a long way. The latest official (HESA) data (2014/15) recorded 7,966 students at the University (excluding students enrolled on University courses at partner institutions in the UK and abroad). Student numbers since 2007/08 have been affected by sector trends, in particular the changes to student fees. However, growth has been generally steady at approximately 2.1% each year. In the current recruitment cycle for enrolment in Autumn 2015, applications are up over 6% compared with last year, which is significantly higher than the rest of the University sector.
  1. During this period the University’s accommodation offer has not kept pace. The University has 989 beds in its own managed halls of residence. The shortfall of beds in September 2014 against the target set out in paragraph 9 was 482. Given the rise in applications for 2015/16, we are planning growth of approximately 4.5% in new first year enrolments. In addition, enrolments to the INTO Gloucestershire Centre for international students taking pathway programmes for entry to HE have almost doubled in the last year, with every indication that this planned growth will continue.
  1. Our current estimate is that this will result in a shortfall against target of approximately 663 beds in September 2015.
  1. Students who cannot be placed in managed halls of residence are directed to beds in leased halls and private lets. The latter are not subject to the terms and conditions of conduct that students are required to sign for approved halls. From the students’ point of view, for the reasons give above, private let accommodation is very much a second best option, because it does not offer a student community. Some applicants will therefore choose to go elsewhere, to a University which can guarantee them University-managed accommodation.
  1. As part of the development of the Pittville proposals, a technical and detailed due diligence report has been commissioned by a third party (DTZ) in order to assess the robustness of the development case. They have concluded as follows:

“The current Student per Bed ratio (SBR) in Cheltenham is 3.3:1 indicating that there is a structural shortfall in the supply of rooms. When considering Student:Bed ratio based on demand for first year students and all international students (students who currently apply for rooms) the ratio is at 1.6:1, and lies at 1.3:1when considering the demand pool just for first year students. The ratios are above national averages of 1.1:1 for first years; indicating that there is strong demand for accommodation which is currently not being met.”

Future Prospects

  1. As explained above, our best estimate is that the shortfall of accommodation for the academic year commencing Autumn 2015 will be 663 beds.
  1. That situation will get worse in future years. The University’s strategic plan sets a goal of growth in our student numbers. At around 8,000 students currently, the University is small by UK University standards. The average University is now close to 20,000 students. So for our longer term viability we need to expand, and current application rates suggest that that is a realistic goal. Such growth is strongly in the interests of Cheltenham and Gloucestershire given the economic, social and cultural benefits the University brings to its locality (discussed in more detail below).
  1. The consequence is that student demand for on-campus accommodation will rise if we are to keep meeting the target stated in paragraph 9; and if no action is taken to expand our accommodation estate, the shortfall will therefore also rise. The table below sets out current estimates for the demand pool for students identified as being the most likely to reside in on-campus accommodation over the next few years.

2014/15 / 2015/16 / 2016/17 / 2017/18
Total demand pool of Cheltenham students (see para 19 below) / 1,471 / 1,652 / 1,955 / 2,142
Total number of student beds currently available in Cheltenham / 989 / 989 / 989 / 989
Shortfall in beds in Cheltenham / 482 / 663 / 966 / 1,153
  1. The figures for the “total demand pool” include all 1st years, plus 2nd & 3rd year international students and students studying on our INTO Gloucestershire pathway programmes at the Park Campus. Although a modest number of local students are placed in University accommodation, the demand pool figures exclude students whose parental address is in Gloucestershire and the surrounding counties of Herefordshire, Worcestershire, Bristol, South Gloucestershire, Swindon and Wiltshire, on the assumption that such students will generally live at home.
  1. Postgraduate students are not currently offered halls accommodation by the University. A decision has been made to plan on the basis that 120 postgraduates should be included in the projected student accommodation at Pittville. This is in direct response to the public consultation, as one way of addressing concerns about potential noise and disruption by placing older postgraduate students (generally working off campus on work placements during the day) in accommodation facing Albert Road and New Barn Lane. The numbers shown in the table do not include postgraduates because the scheme is still subject to planning approval. Their inclusion would effectively reduce the number of beds available for 1st years and international students by 120.

The Pittville Student Village

  1. The University has owned the Pittville campus since the 1960s. It used to be a mixed use site for both teaching and student accommodation. However, as part of a wider University restructuring, all teaching at the Pittville campus stopped in 2011 and was moved to other University campuses in Cheltenham. The teaching accommodation at these other campuses has been developed to house the subjects moved there and is now well established. The former teaching accommodation at Pittville has been left empty since 2011, and is now in a state of serious disrepair and dilapidation such that the University is now commencing demolition.
  1. The student accommodation at Pittville – 214 beds in total – has remained at the site and, although the accommodation itself is becoming in need of refurbishment and the wider campus environment is in a poor state, the location is popular and convenient for students whose courses are Cheltenham based. It is a brownfield site in need of development, but with the advantage of convenient amenities nearby for students to enjoy, including Pittville Park, the Racecourse, easy access to the University’s teaching campuses, and the retail, entertainment and cultural facilities of Cheltenham. So it is a very attractive and suitable environment for a student village.
  1. When it was operating as a combined teaching and student accommodation campus, 1,300 students and some 250 staff were based there. So previous occupancy has been nearly twice as intensive as the proposed 794 student village in terms of the number of people using the site. The site is self-evidently capable of accommodating 794 students without excessive density. Indeed, the building plans for the village presented to Planning Committee on 23rd January represent a reduction of 50% in thebuilt footprint of the site compared with the old teaching buildings, with a corresponding increase in green landscaping.
  1. The campus offers an excellent opportunity for a dedicated student village. It already has 214 beds in place, with a large building (the Media Centre) that can be converted into a reception and facilities building. As noted above, the goal is to create a community, not just a given number of bedspaces. So the former Media Centre will house a student refectory and bar, a gym, a study space with computers, a small shop, and a faith space, reception space and 24 hour security. The campus would be fully landscaped, and incorporate security features such as CCTV and intruder fencing around the accommodation blocks. The whole design creates a functioning community designed to meet student needs.
  1. The configuration of the site is important for its viability. There are already 214 beds on the site, which will remain fully functional with some refurbishment. And the Media Building lends itself to conversion to provide the social and communal facilities listed above. If a different location was chosen to provide the same total number of beds with the same communal facilities, the cost would be a great deal higher, because the 214 beds and the Media Building would have to be built from scratch, rather than the much lower cost of refurbishing buildings which are fit for purpose and structurally sound. This cost advantage from using the Pittville site in this way is estimated at some £14m and is a significant element in the overall financial viability of the development scheme.
  1. The proposed scale of the student village also creates benefits for amenity. By locating a significant number of students together at the village, it becomes operationally easier and more cost-effective to provide 24 hour site management and security. The University and Uliving each have considerable experience in managing student accommodation and are well placed to manage a facility of this type. Whereas a more distributed and dispersed approach makes site management harder to achieve and more expensive.
  1. The University’s estate strategy ensures that teaching space is given priority on its teaching campuses. Space for additional development at the Park, Francis Close Hall and Hardwick campusesis severely limited for various reasons, including the listing of existing buildings (at Park and FCH), the density of existing buildings (at FCH) and restrictions on further building on green spaces (at Park and Hardwick). Any future development on those sites will prioritise the provision of suitable teaching accommodation for our intended growth in student numbers, and therefore they do not offer opportunities for increasing student accommodation.
  1. Consequently, if the Pittville student village cannot be developed to achieve the number of accommodation units proposed, the only alternative way of meeting the shortfall in accommodation identified above would be to spread student beds across other sites in the town. As previously mentioned, this is not a viable option and it would have several disadvantages:
  1. The density of student occupancy of private rental accommodation is already high in some parts of Cheltenham (notably the St Pauls area), and the local community and councillors are concerned that that density should not increase.
  2. Spreading students across a wider area does not create the coherent student community, supported by appropriate communal facilities and management protocols, needed to meet student expectations.
  3. Consistent, effective and financially viable site management arrangements will become more difficult to implement. Amenity concerns raised in relation to Pittville make it clear that effective management of students is something that councillors and residents are keen to ensure happens.
  4. Given land values in Cheltenham, the University cannot afford to purchase additional land in competition with other developers.
  5. Any other site would incur significant additional cost compared with the Pittville site given the ability to continue to use some of the buildings already at Pittville as noted above.

Wider Economic and Community Benefit

  1. This note has set out the implications of the proposed Pittville development for the University’s sustainability and financial viability. But the development would also create wider benefits for Cheltenham and Gloucestershire.
  1. The University commissioned an independent consultancy, Biggar, to assess and quantify the University’s economic, social and cultural impact on Cheltenham, Gloucestershire and nationally. The full report is available on our website at [ The University is a major business in its own right, with an annual turnover in excess of £70m, and employing over 800 staff. Each student brings average spending power of £12,000 each year on accommodation and living costs, in addition to their tuition costs. This means that a student village accommodating 794 students represents £9.5 million annually of expenditure within the locality.
  1. In terms of wider economic benefits, the Biggar analysis estimates that the University contributed:
  1. £143m Gross Value Added (GVA) and supported 1,905 jobs in Gloucestershire in 2013/14
  2. £383m GVA and 3,753 jobs in the UK
  3. £1 GVA directly generated by the University generates £8.36 for UK economy.
  1. The University has been part of the community of Cheltenham for over 170 years. In 2013/14 the University purchased £2.8m of goods and services in Cheltenham; employed 597 staff who live in the town; and University students spent £37.9m in the town. In addition to all those economic effects, the University contributes widely to the cultural and social life of the town. Its campuses enjoy good relationships with local residents via their Community Liaison groups. Campuses are open to local people and groups in a variety of ways including for public lectures, student shows, access to catering, use of sports facilities and schools activities.

Conclusion