Gypsum leads materials deflation

August 11, 2010

The Labor Department's composite measure of average prices received for the entire range of construction materials and supplies declined by 0.2 percent between August and September of this year. This marked the fifth consecutive month of decline for the composite price index, which reached a peak-annualized rate of 2.8 percent inflation during April.

The September 2000 composite index level was 0.1 percent below its reading for the same month of 1999. Price trends have varied widely between specific kinds of construction materials. The sustained increase in oil prices has pushed asphalt prices sharply higher. But the inflation rate for gypsum products-which led all construction categories with a better than 17-percent rise during 1999-turned to deflation during the third quarter of this year as more production capacity came on board at the same time that construction market demand began to cool. Lumber prices also have moved sharply lower during 2000 after inflation in this product group peaked at 8 percent in the final quarter of last year.

Commercial, industrial & institutional (CII) construction spending (Billions of current dollars)



Spending in August 2000 Percent change from August 1999 Spending in Jan.-Aug. 2000 Percent change from Jan.-Aug. 1999 1999 total spending Annual percent change 1999 2000 2001

CII total

$27.80

12.8%

$196.79

10.0%

$273.47

3.6%

6.7%

3.4%

Commercial

11.74

12.1

85.39

9.3

119.65

8.1

5.6

0.4

Office

4.63

13.2

34.30

12.3

46.57

10.3

8.8

5.1

Retail

5.66

11.2

39.96

8.8

57.14

6.6

5.6

-4.0

Hotel/motel

1.44

12.1

11.14

2.5

15.94

7.6

-3.7

2.0

Industrial

3.58

20.1

25.44

8.4

34.90

-13.8

7.7

5.0

Institutional

12.49

11.5

85.96

11.1

118.92

5.4

7.6

6.0

Health care

1.65

11.9

12.58

10.2

17.59

-0.6

7.1

2.8

Education

5.94

15.7

37.64

16.0

49.51

7.8

11.0

8.0

Other institutional

4.90

6.6

35.75

6.7

51.82

5.3

4.6

5.1

Multifamily

2.43

-1.2

18.72

3.7

27.26

10.9

2.0

4.4



Source: U.S. Dept. of Commerce; forecast: Cahners Economics

Cost comparisons per square foot in select metro markets



Auditorium'00 '99 % chg. Fire station'00 '99 % chg. Gymnasium'00 '99 % chg. Library'00 '99 % chg.

Atlanta

96.78

92.00

5.2

87.07

78.32

11.2

88.24

78.81

12.0

90.75

80.32

13.0

Baltimore

98.82

93.95

5.2

88.91

80.84

10.0

90.10

81.29

10.8

92.67

82.85

11.9

Boston

125.95

120.48

4.5

113.31

103.61

9.4

114.84

104.25

10.2

118.11

106.25

11.2

Chicago

119.49

114.33

4.5

107.50

98.32

9.3

108.95

98.93

10.1

112.05

100.83

11.1

Cleveland

111.31

105.83

5.2

100.14

91.01

10.0

101.49

90.22

12.5

104.38

92.98

12.3

Dallas

93.87

89.64

4.7

84.45

76.47

10.4

85.59

76.95

11.2

88.03

78.42

12.3

Denver

102.59

97.33

5.4

92.30

83.70

10.3

93.54

84.22

11.1

96.21

85.83

12.1

Detroit

114.11

108.80

4.9

102.66

93.56

9.7

104.04

94.15

10.5

107.01

95.95

11.5

Houston

96.78

92.31

4.8

87.07

79.38

9.7

88.24

79.87

10.5

90.75

81.41

11.5

Kansas City

107.54

101.63

5.8

96.75

86.78

11.5

98.05

86.32

13.6

100.85

88.99

13.3

Los Angeles

118.42

113.21

4.6

106.54

98.05

8.7

107.79

97.96

10.2

111.05

98.84

11.2

Miami

93.76

88.82

5.6

84.36

77.12

9.4

85.49

76.86

11.2

87.93

78.33

12.2

Minneapolis

119.92

113.92

5.3

107.89

97.97

10.1

109.34

98.58

10.9

112.46

100.47

11.9

New Orleans

93.44

88.11

6.1

84.07

76.08

10.5

85.19

76.24

11.7

87.62

77.70

12.8

New York City

145.87

138.10

5.6

131.23

118.41

10.8

132.99

119.15

11.6

136.79

121.43

12.6

Philadelphia

120.78

115.56

4.5

108.67

99.38

9.3

110.12

100.00

10.1

113.27

101.91

11.1

Phoenix

97.21

92.51

5.1

87.46

79.55

9.9

88.63

80.05

10.7

91.16

81.59

11.7

Pittsburgh

110.99

105.73

5.0

99.85

90.92

9.8

101.19

91.49

10.6

104.08

93.24

11.6

Portland

116.37

109.52

6.3

104.69

94.18

11.2

106.10

94.77

12.0

109.13

96.58

13.0

St. Louis

111.53

106.65

4.6

100.34

90.65

10.7

101.68

91.22

11.5

104.58

92.97

12.5

San Diego

115.51

110.03

5.0

103.92

94.62

9.8

105.31

95.21

10.6

108.32

97.04

11.6

San Francisco

133.49

127.86

4.4

120.09

109.77

9.4

121.71

110.46

10.2

125.18

112.58

11.2

Seattle

114.32

109.21

4.7

102.85

92.79

10.8

104.24

93.17

11.9

107.21

94.96

12.9

Washington, D.C.

103.67

98.86

4.9

93.27

84.31

10.6

94.52

84.84

11.4

97.21

86.46

12.4

Winston/Salem

82.89

79.40

4.4

74.57

69.04

8.0

75.58

68.70

10.0

77.73

70.02

11.0



NOTE: Costs as shown are for the basic building and do not include: 1. sitework (site clearing and grading, utilities, paving, landscaping, site improvements); 2. land costs; 3. development costs; 4. specialty finishes or equipment. Square foot costs vary significantly from project to project due to quality, complexity and economic climate. Each project should be examined individually. For a detailed list of building components included in these figures, see Means Square Foot Costs.

R.S. Means Co., P.O. Box 800, Kingston, MA 02364, (781) 585-7880, (800) 448-8182

For more data, visit R.S. Means on the Web atwww.rsmeans.com.

To use an interactive tool that helps project costs, visit www.buildingteam.com .

         
 

Comments on: "Gypsum leads materials deflation "