HOW TO ASSESS THE DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL OF LAND
Development potential is assessed across five dimensions: policy position, physical capacity, access and services, constraints, and deliverability. Each is evidenced separately and none can be substituted for another. Potential is a reasoned judgement about likelihood, not a certified property of the land.
UPDATED 2026-09-01 · WRITTEN FOR: DEVELOPERS AND PROMOTERS JUDGING WHETHER A SITE IS WORTH PURSUING.
THE FIVE DIMENSIONS
- POLICY — where the site sits relative to settlement boundaries, allocations and designations, and what the plan says about growth here.
- CAPACITY — realistic developable area after constraints, buffers, access and open space.
- ACCESS AND SERVICES — highway relationship, visibility, utilities and whether third-party land is needed.
- CONSTRAINTS — flood risk, heritage, ecology, topography, contamination history and protected features.
- DELIVERABILITY — ownership complexity, existing use, occupiers, timing and cost of resolving unknowns.
WHY A SINGLE SCORE MISLEADS
A composite score blends dimensions that behave differently. A site can score well on capacity and policy while being undeliverable because of one access issue. Keeping the dimensions separate preserves the failure modes, which is where the decision actually lives.
ANTICIPATE, DO NOT ASSERT
Evidence supports statements like “the policy position has weakened since the last refusal” or “adjacent approvals suggest the principle is being accepted locally”. It does not support statements about what a determination will be. Anticipating direction is useful; asserting outcomes is not honest.
RECORD THE CASE, NOT JUST THE CONCLUSION
Write the case so someone else can attack it. List the evidence, the assumptions, and the unknowns that would change the answer. That document is what survives staff turnover, market shifts and a two-year gap between first look and acquisition.
- Planning outcomes are determined by the authority and cannot be forecast with certainty by any tool or method.
- Constraint data is indicative and does not replace site-specific technical assessment.
- Capacity estimates depend on assumptions that must be stated to be meaningful.
- Viability depends on cost and value inputs outside the scope of evidence gathering.
- Hold each dimension separately against a persistent site record with its supporting evidence.
- Track how the evidence picture changes over time, including new nearby decisions.
- Distinguish known, supported, indicated and unknown so the weak points stay visible.
- Interrogate the record with Ask AXARA and see the evidence behind each answer.
What makes land suitable for development?
A combination of policy support, physical capacity, workable access, manageable constraints and a deliverable ownership and timing position. Weakness in any one can be decisive.
Can development potential be scored automatically?
Partly. Individual factors can be evidenced and compared, but a single automated score hides the specific failure that usually decides a site.
Does being outside a settlement boundary rule a site out?
Not necessarily, but it usually raises the policy hurdle substantially and shapes the kind of proposal that has a chance.
How do I estimate developable area?
Deduct constraint areas, buffers, access requirements and open space from the gross parcel, and state every assumption you used. Present it as a range.
How long should this assessment take?
An evidence-based first pass is usually a matter of hours. The expensive work is what follows on the sites that survive it.