Housing Market Note - Savillspdf.savills.com/documents/2015-06-04ValueofLand.pdf · Housing Market...
Transcript of Housing Market Note - Savillspdf.savills.com/documents/2015-06-04ValueofLand.pdf · Housing Market...
4th June 2015
Housing Market Note
Residential Research
THE VALUE OF LAND A Leveraged Bet On House Prices? Land is the fundamental ingredient in the construction of new homes. Many of the issues limiting the rate of new home building can be traced back to the pricing and availability of land for residential development.
The availability of development land is constrained by the planning system but also by other factors. Land is generally an appreciating asset and many landowners’ price expectations will be firmly set. Even if planning regulations were eased further, there are limited incentives for landowners to sell at a faster rate than they are currently as that might compromise the price they achieve. That is particularly the case where the land is already generating an income through other uses.
Development land is typically valued using a residual approach with reference to comparable transactions. A developer assesses what new build house price is achievable in that location with reference to prices and sales rates in the second hand market and on nearby comparable new build sites. At a very basic level (assuming no affordable housing, S106 or CIL), multiply that new build house price by the number of homes to be built on the land and you arrive at the gross development value (GDV) of the site. The underlying value of the land is then the GDV less the cost of development and less an appropriate allowance for profit as the formula opposite shows.
When in competition with other developers and assuming discipline on appropriate profit margins, the winning bidder will typically be the one that pushes for a combination of the highest new build price, the highest density (subject to planning) and the lowest build cost (unless one offsets the other). With land typically bought up front, this approach sets the target new build house price in stone. Developers will then only build and sell homes at the rate dictated by market demand for this target new build price. It is through this mechanism that the 10 to 1 ratio between overall housing market transactions and private housing starts is thought to arise.
We can demonstrate the link between house prices and land values using a simple model. It uses Nationwide new build house prices as a proxy for GDV and the only input. It is based on an old land buyer’s rule of thumb: land is 1/3rd of GDV. Therefore the modelled land value is 1/3rd of the house price. The volatility in land prices is accounted for by assuming that the remaining 2/3rds (effectively costs and profit) are sticky and do not fall. Therefore land values absorb the full impact of any falls in house price and the full benefit from any rises while house prices are below their previous peak. The model output (red line) does a reasonable job of tracing actual land values up until two years ago.
Neal Hudson Associate Director
07590 531150 [email protected]
@resi_analyst
Residual Land Value =
Gross Development Value -
Development Costs -
Profit
Fig 1 – Residential Development Land Values
Source: Savills using VOA and Nationwide
Savills Greenfield Land Index
Valuation Office Agency
(discontinued)
Modelled Using New Build House Prices
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
Q1
1985
Q1
1986
Q1
1987
Q1
1988
Q1
1989
Q1
1990
Q1
1991
Q1
1992
Q1
1993
Q1
1994
Q1
1995
Q1
1996
Q1
1997
Q1
1998
Q1
1999
Q1
2000
Q1
2001
Q1
2002
Q1
2003
Q1
2004
Q1
2005
Q1
2006
Q1
2007
Q1
2008
Q1
2009
Q1
2010
Q1
2011
Q1
2012
Q1
2013
Q1
2014
Q1
2015
Inde
x (2
007
peak
= 1
00)
Start of Help-to-Buy Equity Loan
2
4th June 2015
Housing Market Note
Other Factors At first sight, the model’s output suggests that there is substantial room for uplift in land values. However, the model is oversimplified by intention and the reality is more complex and varies by local market. Calculating actual land values has to account for a mix of property use classes; a mix of tenures; site remediation; infrastructure and CIL; affordable housing contributions; and other costs. It will also include forecasts for rates of sale, house prices and construction costs. These will then be balanced against the developer’s required rates of return. This all adds a degree of uncertainty to the calculation.
Many developers and housebuilders will remain cautious despite the current strength of the new build sales market. Housebuilders’ profit margins may be returning to pre-recession levels but there are other potential economic, political and market risks that warrant some caution. Build cost inflation and labour availability have been top of the constraints list recently and explain some of the underperformance. The need to absorb CIL and the lower value of affordable housing will continue to contribute to the gap between the model and actual land values in some markets. With large scale Government support of the housebuilding sector through the likes of Help-to-Buy, there will be political uncertainty created by the election cycle and a lack of long-term cross-party strategic planning for the provision of new homes.
Our house view is more balanced and suggests that the full uplift in land values will only be realised in markets with high housing demand and constrained land availability. There are currently a relatively high number of consents coming through the planning system compared to new housing starts although they are unevenly distributed across the country. Where starts exceed planning consents, this could lead to increased demand for land and an associated rise in land values. Thanks to the mechanisms detailed in this note, higher land values could then limit sales rates in markets unable to absorb higher new build prices. This approach means that developers and housebuilders will continue to build homes at a rate dictated by how fast they can sell them based on the price they had to pay for the land. The need for more land to be released is apparent.
Planning issues will always be a valid go-to complaint for developers but recent evidence suggests that the availability (and cost) of materials and labour has been a bigger constraint over the last couple of years. Survey responses from the HBF survey suggest these issues are declining in importance but remain high relative to recent years. The uncertainty around future build cost inflation will inevitably limit land prices to some degree.
Fig 2 – House Builder Production Constraints
Source: Home Builders Federation
Prior to 2001, indicators for build costs suggest that they generally matched the trend in house prices. That relationship broke down between 2001 and 2007 when house price inflation substantially outpaced build costs. The relationship has resumed post recession and the recent house price rises have been matched by increases in build costs.
Fig 3 –Build Costs Compared to Nationwide New Build House Price
Source: Nationwide, Holmans, BIS, ONS, BCIS
Labouravailability
Materials availabilityLand
availability/prices
Planning delays
Development finance
0102030405060708090
100
Q1
2000
Q1
2001
Q1
2002
Q1
2003
Q1
2004
Q1
2005
Q1
2006
Q1
2007
Q1
2008
Q1
2009
Q1
2010
Q1
2011
Q1
2012
Q1
2013
Q1
2014
Q1
2015
% c
onsi
derin
g fa
ctor
a 'm
ajor
co
nstra
int'
NationwideNew Build
House Price
Holmans
BIS
ONS
BCIS
5060708090
100110120130140150160
Q4
1973
Q4
1975
Q4
1977
Q4
1979
Q4
1981
Q4
1983
Q4
1985
Q4
1987
Q4
1989
Q4
1991
Q4
1993
Q4
1995
Q4
1997
Q4
1999
Q4
2001
Q4
2003
Q4
2005
Q4
2007
Q4
2009
Q4
2011
Q4
2013R
eal p
rice
indi
ces
(Q4
2001
=100
)
4th June 2015
Housing Market Note
The performance of local land values since the market peak in 2007 broadly reflects the underlying performance of the local housing market. There are exceptions that highlight local approaches to development and land release. Cambridge has seen similar or higher house price growth than other markets yet land values are lower relative to peak. This reflects the local approach where more land has been made available, including some from the Greenbelt, and there is clarity on the level of affordable housing required.
Fig 4 – Development Land Value & House Price Change From 2007 Peak
Source: HM Land Registry, Savills
Although not directly relevant to the above analysis, the chart opposite shows the trend in land values between 1892 and 1969. The substantial premium for commercial land across the period and the divergence in value between residential and agricultural land from the 1930s are both interesting features and reflect the importance of location in land values. Care should be taken in reading too much into any single year given the data collection periods.
Fig 5 – Land Values & Housebuilding
Source: Bank of England, EA Vallis, Estates Gazette
Previous Issues Peak Loneliness
http://sav.li/43c
Size Mattershttp://sav.li/3z8
This report is for general informative purposes only. It may not be published, reproduced or quoted in part or in whole, nor may it be used as aprospectus, agreement or other document without prior consent. Whilst every effort has been made to ensureany direct or consequential loss arising from its use. The content is strictly copyright and reproduction of the whole or parwritten permission from Savills Research.
-10%
-5%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
-60%
Hou
se p
rice
chan
ge fr
om 2
007
peak
£100
£1,000
£10,000
£100,000
£1,000,000
Pric
e pe
r acr
e (lo
g)
Development Land Value & House Price Change From 2007 Peak
Source: HM Land Registry, Savills Land Values & Housebuilding – 1892 to 1969
Bank of England, EA Vallis, Estates Gazette (1973), DCLG
Size Matters http://sav.li/3z8
Housing Delivery http://sav.li/3wo
general informative purposes only. It may not be published, reproduced or quoted in part or in whole, nor may it be used as a
prospectus, agreement or other document without prior consent. Whilst every effort has been made to ensure its accuracy, Savills accepts no liability whatsoever for any direct or consequential loss arising from its use. The content is strictly copyright and reproduction of the whole or par
60% -40% -20% 0%Land value change from 2007 peak
Cambridge
Reading/Bracknell
UK
Milton Keynes
Norwich
Telford
Lincoln
Housebuilding (rhs)
Industrial
Commercial
Residential
Agricultural
£100
£1,000
£10,000
£100,000
£1,000,000
1890
1894
1898
1902
1906
1910
1914
1918
1922
1926
1930
1934
1938
1942
1946
1950
3
Development Land Value & House Price Change From 2007 Peak
Pension Reform http://sav.li/3ul
general informative purposes only. It may not be published, reproduced or quoted in part or in whole, nor may it be used as a basis for any contract,
its accuracy, Savills accepts no liability whatsoever for any direct or consequential loss arising from its use. The content is strictly copyright and reproduction of the whole or part of it in any form is prohibited without
20% 40%Land value change from 2007 peak
Oxford
Sevenoaks
London
Residential
Agricultural
0
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
250,000
300,000
350,000
400,000
450,000
1954
1958
1962
1966
1970
Ann
ual h
ouse
build
ing