081a Ak Cncl - General - Capacity and Feasibility Modelling - Hearing Presentation
Transcript of 081a Ak Cncl - General - Capacity and Feasibility Modelling - Hearing Presentation
-
8/20/2019 081a Ak Cncl - General - Capacity and Feasibility Modelling - Hearing Presentation
1/37
Presentation to IHP
Update of Capacity Modelling
Kyle Balderston & Doug Fairgray
for Auckland Council for Topic 081
4 March 2016
-
8/20/2019 081a Ak Cncl - General - Capacity and Feasibility Modelling - Hearing Presentation
2/37
Overview• Prepared in response to IHP Memo (5 November 2015)
•
Key elements sought in Memo: – a revised method to estimate supply that is capable of accommodating the
changes to density rules as proposed by the Council and its forthcoming proposed changes to the spatial application of residential zones.
– An estimate of demand for residential capacity (expressed as dwellingnumbers) throughout the Auckland region, for the period to 2026 and to 2041.
An estimate of overall supply of residential capacity (in tabular form) and a
breakdown of that supply in terms of each type of zone (e.g. Centres, THAB,MHU, Mixed Use, etc.).
– Presentation of supply in the form of “heat maps” or similar (e.g. as at 2026and 2041) to enable easy visualisation of the spatial spread of supply.
– if possible in the time allowed, the estimates of supply be compiled as forecasts, in order for the Panel to be in position to compare supply forecastswith the demand forecasts.”
• Panel advised it seeks “to use the outputs from this work to assess theextent to which the proposed Plan would be adequate to meet forecastdemand for residential capacity for the period to 2026, and to 2041.”
-
8/20/2019 081a Ak Cncl - General - Capacity and Feasibility Modelling - Hearing Presentation
3/37
Contents
1. ACDC Model (purpose, rationale, outputs)2. Estimates of supply (model outputs,
adjustments, supply from other sources)
3. Estimates of Demand (household growth, pluscatch-up of shortfall)
4. Nature of Demand (household types, incomes,
demand by dwelling price)5. Findings to date
-
8/20/2019 081a Ak Cncl - General - Capacity and Feasibility Modelling - Hearing Presentation
4/37
Kyle Balderston
ACDC Model
-
8/20/2019 081a Ak Cncl - General - Capacity and Feasibility Modelling - Hearing Presentation
5/37
ACDC Model
Purpose:“ a revised method to estimate supply that is capable ofaccommodating the changes to density rules as proposed by the Council and its forthcoming proposedchanges to the spatial application of residential zones”
a ‘filter’ on ‘plan enabled’ capacity that indicates, undercurrent conditions, which of those regulatory enabledopportunities might be commercially viable.
Results indicate a higher probability of development(than sites that are not feasible) and show the locationand nature of opportunities ‘unlocked’ by the plan
-
8/20/2019 081a Ak Cncl - General - Capacity and Feasibility Modelling - Hearing Presentation
6/37
Development
that is enabled
Development
that occurs
Not all of what is enabled, happens, but most of what happens, is enabled.
‘Planning’ cant make things happen but is generally a prerequisite, due to the time -cost of
consenting and plan alignment with infrastructure provision.
A small portion of what happens is not enabled.
-
8/20/2019 081a Ak Cncl - General - Capacity and Feasibility Modelling - Hearing Presentation
7/37
All Sites
Tested
Sites withPlan
enabled
Capacity
(CfGS)
Sites that
‘actually’ get
developed in
timeframe
that feasibility
applies to
Sites withCommercially
Feasible &
Plan enabled
Capacity
(ACDC)
Sites with
commerciallyrealisable potential
that is
not plan enabled or
not in model
Probabilistic Filtering
-
8/20/2019 081a Ak Cncl - General - Capacity and Feasibility Modelling - Hearing Presentation
8/37
But what about time?
• ‘Time’ in model only covers development site purchase (@ June 2014Valuations) to Sale of completed developments 18 months later (saleprices and price ceilings calibrated to sales Mid 2014-2015).
• ‘Future’ feasibility not calculated and may be different due to changes inrelativity between purchase price, sale price, improvements, constructioncosts, supply from other developments, demand…
• (Model could do a future feasibility if in/deflation applied to componentsof model and sites assumed to be developed over that period areexcluded)
• Consideration of ‘the future’ therefore requires a consideration widereconomic processes that can be reasonably considered to occur over thetime period being investigated. This may require adjustment of the
‘starting point’ to represent a more ‘normal’ land & house price inflationsituation.
-
8/20/2019 081a Ak Cncl - General - Capacity and Feasibility Modelling - Hearing Presentation
9/37
$0
$500,000
$1,000,000
$1,500,000
$2,000,000
$2,500,000
$3,000,000
$3,500,000
$4,000,000
2 0 1 4
2 0 1 6
2 0 1 8
2 0 2 0
2 0 2 2
2 0 2 4
2 0 2 6
2 0 2 8
2 0 3 0
2 0 3 2
2 0 3 4
2 0 3 6
2 0 3 8
2 0 4 0
2 0 4 2
2 0 4 4
2 0 4 6
2 0 4 8
2 0 5 0
Year
Development Costs Vs Expected Sale Price and Profit ($)
Infrastructure CostsOther CostsConstruction CostsExisting Improvement ValueLand Value
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
2 0 1 4
2 0 1 6
2 0 1 8
2 0 2 0
2 0 2 2
2 0 2 4
2 0 2 6
2 0 2 8
2 0 3 0
2 0 3 2
2 0 3 4
2 0 3 6
2 0 3 8
2 0 4 0
2 0 4 2
2 0 4 4
2 0 4 6
2 0 4 8
2 0 5 0
% M a r g i n
Year
Development Profit Margin (%) vs
Required Profit Margin (%)
Profit Margin % ($Profit/$Revenue)
Minimum Required Profit Margin %
Starting Year Values
2014 2044
Total Construction Costs $ 425,154.00 $ 770,107.62
Land Value $ 455,000.00 $ 1,277,091.14
Improvement Value $ 120,000.00 $ 82,030.42
Other Costs $ 80,000.00 $ 144,908.93
Infrastructure Costs $ 50,000.00 $ 90,568.08
Overall Development Cost $ 1,130,154.00 $ 2,364,706.18
Expected Sale Price $ 1,220,000.00 $ 3,004,690.29
Profit ($) (Costs less Sales Revenue) $ 89,846.00 $ 639,984.11
Profit % ($Profit/$Revenue)
7.4%
21.3%
Minimum Required Profit: 2014 2044
20.0% No Go Go
Earliest Year Development achievesRequired Profit
2040
-
8/20/2019 081a Ak Cncl - General - Capacity and Feasibility Modelling - Hearing Presentation
10/37
Feasible Development Model
Existing Costs and Prices
Model
Future Costs and Prices
Model
(ROI)
Current Costs and
Sale Prices
Expected Rates ofInflation in Costs
and Sale Prices
Not done in model
(see DF Demand vs Supply)
Completed & in model
Capacity for
Growth Model
(Enabled
development and
base parcel data)
-
8/20/2019 081a Ak Cncl - General - Capacity and Feasibility Modelling - Hearing Presentation
11/37
Model Evolution• V1 – PAUP inputs, 64k (013 E.G. Report)
• V1 – ACAP inputs, 181k (apply exact same 013 E.G.method to new enabled opportunities from density rule changes)
• V2 – ACAP Inputs, 108 – 144k (PF/AT quick reviewresults in imposition of price ceilings to remove sales of largeexpensive dwellings in low value areas (as per supplied LUTs) +
some minor adjustments)• V3.6 ACAP Inputs, 198-256k (9 developments per site,
calibrated dwelling size and prices to to Price ceilings/sales records,accidentally impose PF noted corrections for houses and terraces toapartments)
• V3.7 ACAP Inputs, 224-308k (as per 3.6 but re-corrected apartments)
-
8/20/2019 081a Ak Cncl - General - Capacity and Feasibility Modelling - Hearing Presentation
12/37
Headline Totals
• ACAP based Results are arguably more noticeable for their similarity thandifferences
• PAUP to ACAP rules have IMO made a more significant difference than iterations tomodel (as should be expected), however Model v3 is much ‘better’ than v1 and v2.
• V2 to V3 iteration change results from 9:1 difference in developments tested andbetter sizing houses to ceilings.
-
8/20/2019 081a Ak Cncl - General - Capacity and Feasibility Modelling - Hearing Presentation
13/37
Spatial results (Capacity)V1 PAUP V1 ACAP V2 HPC
V3.7 Max
Return
•
Much as per the Totals, spatial Results are arguably more noticeable for theirsimilarity than differences.
• Consistency of spatial distribution of both ‘clusters of potential’ and areas wherelimited development appears possible under the regulatory and commercial
• ACAP rule change increases concentration of opportunity for small scaledevelopments (density relaxation) but not location. Only spatial zone changes willalter spatial distribution of opportunities.
-
8/20/2019 081a Ak Cncl - General - Capacity and Feasibility Modelling - Hearing Presentation
14/37
Sales Location (Value) and feasible
developments
-
8/20/2019 081a Ak Cncl - General - Capacity and Feasibility Modelling - Hearing Presentation
15/37
Land Value to Floorspace Price
Denser developments are able to moderate the cost of new floorspace on expensive land (compared toless dense developments) but are more expensive on lower value land. The simple best fit curve slopeand relative position are a function of regulation, and model assumptions.
-
8/20/2019 081a Ak Cncl - General - Capacity and Feasibility Modelling - Hearing Presentation
16/37
V3 Results super summary
• How much – quite a lot
• Where – donut with a candle in the middle
•
What price – good range, limited cheaperdwellings (role of inputs? Test ‘very small’
typologies?)
• What size – good range, mostly larger (but
closely linked to price)
-
8/20/2019 081a Ak Cncl - General - Capacity and Feasibility Modelling - Hearing Presentation
17/37
What else can we use model to
investigate?• High level spatial form – how does PAUP align to:
– AP development strategy?
– Councils stated rezoning principles?
– Infrastructure capacity & planning
– etc.
• Location based assessments (e.g. # or % of development within x distance of y features, or within area z)
• Quick assessments of relative capacity value of potential zonechange submissions (based on results from ‘similar’ locations)
• ‘Slice and dice’ (highly atomistic geography and multiple criteria re
zone, price, size, type, land area etc.)• Economic assessments
• Much more yet to be thought of.
-
8/20/2019 081a Ak Cncl - General - Capacity and Feasibility Modelling - Hearing Presentation
18/37
Quick assessment example
“The Zone-U-Lator”
PAUP Average Residential Zone Density DATA ONLY.xlsx
http://localhost/var/www/apps/conversion/tmp/scratch_3/PAUP%20Average%20Residential%20Zone%20Density%20DATA%20ONLY.xlsxhttp://localhost/var/www/apps/conversion/tmp/scratch_3/PAUP%20Average%20Residential%20Zone%20Density%20DATA%20ONLY.xlsx
-
8/20/2019 081a Ak Cncl - General - Capacity and Feasibility Modelling - Hearing Presentation
19/37
Spatial Results (Heatmaps)
+
Existing Relative dwelling density Feasible capacity relative density
Existing Relative dwelling density compared to change (capacity) in relative
density if all feasible developments were realised.
-
8/20/2019 081a Ak Cncl - General - Capacity and Feasibility Modelling - Hearing Presentation
20/37
ACDC Model Further Evolution• ‘perpetual beta’ – new/more data/information requires
constant update
• Perceptions and the relative importance of‘consistency’ vs ‘good enough’ vs ‘chasing ‘accuracy’’;
• Development of suppressed ‘Future’ component based
on exogenously input ROI assumptions;• Discussions with economic modellers re potential GEM
and/or spatial economic models (AMM) etc. (calculateROI dynamically );
•
Significant interest re application to NPS on UrbanDevelopment
• Group should be proud of what it has collectivelyachieved under difficult circumstances.
-
8/20/2019 081a Ak Cncl - General - Capacity and Feasibility Modelling - Hearing Presentation
21/37
Dr Doug Fairgray
Using the ACDC and other information
to consider overall developmentcapacity, over time
-
8/20/2019 081a Ak Cncl - General - Capacity and Feasibility Modelling - Hearing Presentation
22/37
Dwelling Capacity utilising ACDC
Model captures a key commercial process
(residential development) at a single point in time Process is influenced by economic conditions at
that point, and longer term economic trends
Use model outputs as snapshot of start point, butseek to remove distortion due to specific /unusual economic conditions – hence adjustment
Important to interpret outputs carefully
ACDC a ‘snap-shot’ model - does not allow for feedbackeffects (as economic model would)
Base process relatively consistent over time, outputsvary with circumstances and trend
-
8/20/2019 081a Ak Cncl - General - Capacity and Feasibility Modelling - Hearing Presentation
23/37
Dwelling Capacity - Adjusted• Adjusted downward for effects of high dwelling price inflation to 2015
•Allows some inflation effect (at long term mean)
• Places greater weight on gains from intensification itself
• Same method as in 059-063 and January 28 evidence
-
8/20/2019 081a Ak Cncl - General - Capacity and Feasibility Modelling - Hearing Presentation
24/37
ACDC Range of Indicators
Dwelling typology Dwelling price
Size
By location
Overall numbers are useful, but key importance is
ability to understand the characteristics and
implications of the new dwelling estate
-
8/20/2019 081a Ak Cncl - General - Capacity and Feasibility Modelling - Hearing Presentation
25/37
-
8/20/2019 081a Ak Cncl - General - Capacity and Feasibility Modelling - Hearing Presentation
26/37
Dwelling Capacity to 2026 - Medium
Model outputs adjusted, mean of selections
Increase in feasible capacity over time (as per mean historic rates) Add other sources to create full regional picture, over time
SOURCE OF CAPACITY Inside MUL Outside MUL TOTAL
Residential Zones 148,000 16,000 164,000
Business Zones 54,000 4,000 58,000
Total Developable Capacity1
202,000 20,000 222,000
Increase in Feasible Capacity 2
89,000 4,000 93,000
Special Areas 10,000 4,000 14,000 Rural Areas - 5,000 5,000
Housing NZ 10,000 - 10,000
Future Urban Zone - 55,000 55,000
TOTAL 311,000 88,000 399,000
1: Currently viable ACDC15 v3.7 Model, adjusted downward for price inflation 2014 to 20152: From Fairgray EIC on Topic 059-063 EIC Tables 4.4, 6.1, 6.2, 6.4 and 6.5
-
8/20/2019 081a Ak Cncl - General - Capacity and Feasibility Modelling - Hearing Presentation
27/37
Dwelling Capacity to 2026 - Low Model outputs - lowest 3 selections, then factored down, and
Lesser increase in feasible capacity over time
18% (-58,000) lower than medium estimate
Low end of range from other sources
SOURCE OF CAPACITY Inside MUL Outside MUL TOTAL
Low Estimate
Total Developable Capacity1
175,000 18,000 193,000
Increase in Feasible Capacity 2
61,000 3,000 64,000
Special Areas 10,000 4,000 14,000
Rural Areas - 5,000 5,000 Housing NZ 8,000 - 8,000
Future Urban Zone - 49,000 49,000
TOTAL 254,000 79,000 333,000
1: Currently viable ACDC15 v3.7 Model, adjusted downward for price inflation 2014 to 2015
2: From Fairgray EIC on Topic 059-063 EIC Tables 4.4, 6.1, 6.2, 6.4 and 6.5
-
8/20/2019 081a Ak Cncl - General - Capacity and Feasibility Modelling - Hearing Presentation
28/37
Demand for Dwellings
Demand based on households = dwellings (1:1) Projected household growth by StatisticsNZ (2015)
Substantial growth in both Medium and High projections..
..plus dwelling shortfall (2013)
Additional dwellings = growth plus shortfall
-
8/20/2019 081a Ak Cncl - General - Capacity and Feasibility Modelling - Hearing Presentation
29/37
Housing Demand and Capacity to 2026 Table 5.7, examines margin of capacity over demand
Expressed as dwellings, % of demand and years’ of growth
Compares medium capacity and medium growth, through to lowcapacity and high growth
Indicates reasonable margin to 2026 (low capacity and high growth)
SCENARIO Inside MULOutside
MULTotal Inside MUL
Outside
MULTotal Inside MUL
Outside
MULTotal
Surplus/Shortfall Margin (%) Margin (Years)Medium Capacity
Medium Growth
70:30 Outcome 202,000 42,000 244,000 185% 91% 157% 24.1 11.9 20.5
60:40 Outcome 218,000 26,000 244,000 234% 42% 157% 30.5 5.5 20.5
High Growth
70:30 Outcome 174,000 29,000 203,000 127% 49% 104% 16.5 6.4 13.5
60:40 Outcome 193,000 10,000 203,000 164% 13% 104% 21.3 1.7 13.5
Low Capacity
Medium Growth
70:30 Outcome 146,000 33,000 179,000 134% 72% 115% 17.4 9.3 15.0
60:40 Outcome 162,000 17,000 179,000 174% 27% 115% 22.7 3.6 15.0
High Growth
70:30 Outcome 118,000 20,000 138,000 86% 34% 70% 11.2 4.4 9.2
60:40 Outcome 137,000 1,000 138,000 116% 1% 70% 15.1 0.2 9.2
-
8/20/2019 081a Ak Cncl - General - Capacity and Feasibility Modelling - Hearing Presentation
30/37
High Level Comparison
Capacity through intensification plus other sources indicates that
capacity in total is greater than projected demand to 2026
Caveats
Forward-looking assessment has a range of uncertainties, especially
2026+
Longevity of strong in-migration growth is not known
Ability of construction sector to deliver
Effects of the SHAs
Differing views on the ACDC Model
Total capacity is only one part of the full picture
Nature of capacity, including prices
Location of capacity
-
8/20/2019 081a Ak Cncl - General - Capacity and Feasibility Modelling - Hearing Presentation
31/37
Nature of Demand for Dwellings
Consider detail as well as the high-level outcome• Households have varying needs and ability to pay for
housing
• Affordability is an important issue
• Location affects affordability of living
• Auckland market has not delivered lower cost dwellings
(for a variety of reasons)
-
8/20/2019 081a Ak Cncl - General - Capacity and Feasibility Modelling - Hearing Presentation
32/37
Assessing Net Demand for Dwellings by
Price/Value Band
(Section 6 of EIC)• Identify key segments of market & projected growth
• Estimates of demand by dwelling price band
• Add in lower income hshlds not active in market• Allow for effect of market ‘churn’, affects dwelling
availability
•Estimate net demand by price band
-
8/20/2019 081a Ak Cncl - General - Capacity and Feasibility Modelling - Hearing Presentation
33/37
Demand for Dwellings by Price Band to 2016
Medium growth - demand throughout price spectrum
Particular demand in lower end of market - under $500,000
1,700 to 2,700 dwellings pa
Additional demand to catch up past shortfall (another 1,100 pa)
-
8/20/2019 081a Ak Cncl - General - Capacity and Feasibility Modelling - Hearing Presentation
34/37
Demand for Dwellings by Price Band to 2016
High growth also has particular demand in lower end of market
2,600 to 3,800 dwellings pa Additional demand to catch up past shortfall (another 1,100 pa)
-
8/20/2019 081a Ak Cncl - General - Capacity and Feasibility Modelling - Hearing Presentation
35/37
Demand and Potential Supply
ACDC output allows comparison of feasible capacity with current($2015) sales by price band
PAUP provisions suggest a price structure generally compatible…
…however, a substantial gap in the lower price bands
-
8/20/2019 081a Ak Cncl - General - Capacity and Feasibility Modelling - Hearing Presentation
36/37
Some Implications
• Gap apparent in dwelling lower price bands
• Consistent with Auckland’s recent history - dwellingsupply, market and sector structures
• …and with ACDC Model inputs (limited dwellingoptions in
-
8/20/2019 081a Ak Cncl - General - Capacity and Feasibility Modelling - Hearing Presentation
37/37
End
Questions?