Zürich’s land is worth about CHF 2.5 billion more than it was, and the money does not exist. The figure comes from a revaluation that cantonal law requires every four years for property in the Finanzvermögen. This round also brought the cantonal Steuerlandwerte up to date for the first time since 2009. Finance head Daniel Leupi (Grüne) put it flatly, as reported by sda: “Es handelt sich um einen reinen Buchgewinn, es fliesst kein einziger Rappen zusätzlich in die Stadtkasse.”

On Friday 6 November, in the Budget 2027 Novemberbrief, the Stadtrat proposed a way to make that paper number do work. Per the city’s own release, the package has three parts:

• Wohnraumfonds, CHF 800 million: CHF 750 million on top of the CHF 50 million already budgeted, for contributions that keep Kostenmieten low.
• Rahmenkredit, CHF 1.75 billion: an amount that depends on the actual gain, to move properties from Finanzvermögen into Verwaltungsvermögen for non-profit housing, with competence delegated to the Stadtrat.
• A Gemeindeordnung change: so the city can grant Baurechte to private non-profits and foundations on favourable terms.

None of it is decided yet. The package goes to the Gemeinderat and partly to voters. The final valuation arrives in spring 2027 and may differ from CHF 2.5 billion.

A valve that turns one way

The core component is the reclassification. Land in the Finanzvermögen could, in theory, be sold. Once it sits in the Verwaltungsvermögen, beside schools, hospitals and non-profit housing, it cannot. As Dominik Fischer explains in Tsüri, the gain cannot fund a land purchase either, because it is not liquid. The Rahmenkredit therefore works as a one-way valve. Land leaves the market at peak book value and does not come back.

The ledger shows the same effect. A deficit of CHF 407 million becomes a surplus of CHF 1.34 billion, while cash flow stays at CHF 335.3 million. The accounts move and the cash does not. Leupi’s stated aim is to secure affordable housing “ohne dass die Verschuldung zusätzlich ansteigt”.

According to sda, Leupi also said the revaluation itself would push up rents in city apartments, and the package is meant to offset that. Philippe Koch, the city’s Delegierter Wohnen, describes the backdrop: “Die Boden- und Immobilienpreise sind horrend gestiegen in den letzten Jahren und steigen weiter.” Tsüri reports two further constraints. S&P Global has moved Zürich’s outlook to negative, and Leupi has cut the property-purchase budget from CHF 600 million to CHF 150 million a year. Land already held counts for more.

←TODAY: 27 % of Zürich’s 215,000 rental flats are non-profit, and the 2011 Drittelsziel needs about 25,000 more by 2050.
→3012: the cities that kept their ground still set their own rents; the ones that sold it only negotiate.
Fulcrum: a revaluation is a market signal, and reclassification turns that signal into a permanent public asset.

The people who bought the ground

The gain exists because earlier councils, voters and the unnamed staff who negotiated parcel after parcel bought land and kept it. SP Gemeinderat Florian Utz is quoted in his party’s statement, as reported by Tsüri: “Zum Glück haben vorangehende Generationen in Land- und Liegenschaftskäufe investiert.” The objections concern method rather than housing. The FDP, whose Stadt Zürich party is led by president Përparim Avdili, writes in its statement: “Der Buchgewinn darf nicht verwendet werden.” The GLP says the Stadtrat “verplant den Buchgewinn ohne Begründung”. The AL backs the CHF 750 million but is sceptical of “einer pauschalen Kompetenzübertragung”.

The trade-off is plain. Land locked into the Verwaltungsvermögen gives up every future sale option, and money committed against a valuation that is not yet final carries valuation risk.

The scale, from the city’s Programm Wohnen 2026: at the end of 2023, 58,000 flats were non-profit. The city held 11,000, city foundations 4,500 and private non-profits 42,500. About 5,500 already stand on city land in Baurecht. That is the model PAZ walked through at Kalkbreite: a cooperative on city ground, with rent set on cost.

Atelier: If favourable Baurecht passes, a larger share of Zürich’s next housing competitions will be commissioned by cooperatives and foundations. These clients read a feasibility study through the Kostenmiete, not through exit value. Your Monday move is to open the office’s feasibility template and turn land value from a hard-coded cell into a named input that a client can change.

Hack: Make the land under a cost rent visible by sweeping it. Treat land value as a variable and watch the monthly figure respond. The yield and area are placeholders, not the city’s Kostenmiete formula.

build, rate, area = 30e6, 0.03, 2400   # CHF, assumed yield, m² rentable
for land in (12e6, 14e6, 16e6):        # CHF, land value scenarios
    rent = (land + build) * rate / area / 12
    print(f"{land/1e6:.0f}M land -> {rent:.1f} CHF/m²/month")

Wire land to a Grasshopper number slider and the client sees the sensitivity in the meeting, not in an appendix.

From where I sit, half a century on, the cities that came through the land squeeze were the ones that kept their ground. Before your next cooperative pitch, build the land slider into your model.