By David Robertson, project management partner at Knight Frank Scotland
DEVELOPERS are continuing to look at existing buildings to deliver purpose-built student accommodation (PBSA). And why not? It’s an attractive idea: take a redundant or tired building, retain as much as possible, convert it into student accommodation, and bring it back into productive use.
Across many towns and cities, underused buildings sit in good locations, often close to universities, transport and amenities. At the same time, student accommodation remains buoyant but build costs are challenging, planning is not getting easier and there is pressure to think more carefully about carbon, re-use and existing assets.
All of that sounds like it should make conversion a no-brainer – and sometimes it is the right approach. But it is by no means a shortcut.
Asking the right questions
Some buildings convert well, while others fight you all the way. The trick is knowing which you are dealing with before committing too much money, time and confidence to a particular plan.
Many of the most difficult PBSA projects are the ones that look straightforward in the beginning. But the first question should not be, “How many beds can we get in?”. Instead it should be, “Can this building actually work as good student accommodation without becoming more complicated, expensive or compromised than expected?”.
That is where early appraisals can go wrong. A building can look suitable because the floorplate seems regular, the location is good and the gross area suggests a decent bed count. But once you test the structure, façade, services, fire strategy, acoustics, drainage, daylight, overheating and escape routes, the picture can quickly change.
Pre-made choices
Existing buildings come with existing decisions. The structure, cores and floor-to-ceiling heights are fixed. The façade may not perform. Windows and risers may be in the wrong places. Services may be at the end of their life. There may be also be asbestos, water ingress, heritage issues or abnormal works that were not apparent at the outset.
For PBSA, these issues matter because the delivery programme is unforgiving. The academic year creates a hard deadline, and missing that window can have a much bigger impact than a normal construction delay. It affects income, reputation, operator requirements, funder confidence and the student experience.
A thorough early review
A sensible early review needs to look beyond massing and bed count. It should test whether the building can support the room mix, servicing strategy, amenity offer and compliance route; whether the frame and floorplates work; whether the façade needs intervention; and whether the fire and mechanical, electrical, and plumbing (MEP) strategy is genuinely deliverable.
Cost advice also needs caution – retaining a building does not automatically mean a cheaper project. The frame may be there, but that saving can be offset by façade works, services replacement, structural alterations, temporary works, logistics, compliance upgrades and risk pricing. A low initial cost plan can mislead if it is not based on proper surveys.
The same applies to sustainability. Re-use is often the right answer, with a strong planning and carbon argument for making better use of buildings. But it should be evidenced, not assumed. Some buildings will clearly justify retention. Others will be less clear-cut once structure, condition, layout, operational performance and deliverability are tested together.
Planning also needs early thought. PBSA is not simply a change-of-use exercise. Councils and local authorities will usually want to understand demand, location, neighbouring impact, management, amenity, servicing and the relationship with existing communities. It is not enough to say there is student demand nationally. The proposal needs to explain why this site, building and accommodation mix make sense in a local context.
The design also needs to be honest about the student experience. A converted building should not feel like a compromise carved into bedrooms. Students still need good daylight, safe circulation, decent amenity, study and social space, reliable digital infrastructure, good management and a building that feels secure and well run.
The importance of avoiding assumptions
The most successful projects are those where developers bring the right people around the table early: planning, cost, project management, architecture, M&E, fire, structures, sustainability, operator input and possibly, a delivery contracting partner. None of this should overcomplicate the process – it should avoid false certainty.
For me, the best early advice is practical. From the start, avoid relying too heavily on a desktop bed-count, survey the building properly and, if possible, consider an early strip out phase. Test façade and services assumptions, understand the fire and compliance route, be realistic about programme risk, and involve cost advice that understands refurbishment. You also need to speak to operators and keep asking whether students will actually want to live there.
Striking a D&B deal with major risk transfer might seem like a solution, but if the contractor has issues it ultimately becomes a project issue and when combined with programme pressure things will quickly unravel.
There is a real opportunity in converting existing buildings into PBSA. It can unlock difficult sites, support town and city centres, reduce waste, preserve embodied carbon and deliver accommodation in locations where students want to be. But the opportunity sits in the detail.
The developers who do well in this space will avoid easy assumptions or trying to put all the risk on the contractor. They will test the building properly, build the right team early, understand the planning and operational story, all while keeping a close eye on the point where a project evolves from merely being good idea to becoming a viable project.
