|
The area around London’s Heathrow airport retains its position |
|
The area around London’s Heathrow airport retains its position as
the world’s most expensive industrial location in this year’s edition
of Industrial Space Across the World, a report by global real estate
consultancy Cushman & Wakefield.
One square metre of prime industrial space at London Heathrow costs
Euro 252 per square metre per year to occupy. London is followed by the
Me'ouyan Soreq district in Rishon Le-Zion in Israel in second place and
Tokyo in third.
Industrial Space Across the World looks at 85 of the world’s top
industrial locations. The main global ranking is compiled by taking the
most expensive location in Euro terms in each of the 45 countries
monitored.
In this year’s survey, 90 per cent of the locations showed rising or
stable occupancy costs for industrial space in 2006, with only 10 per
cent showing a fall. Globally rents, which form the main part of
occupancy costs, increased by an average 6.5 per cent in 2006 compared
with 1.8 per cent in 2005.
|
Elaine Rossall, Cushman & Wakefield’s Head of Business Space
Research & Consultancy in Europe, the Middle East and Africa, says:
“Many of the world’s top industrial locations are continuing to benefit
from the globalisation of manufacturing and from the
internationalisation of the main logistics networks. Occupancy costs
are also being driven up in many locations because of competing
pressures from other, more high-value land uses, in particular from
residential and retail.”
Regarding Heathrow, Kevin Storey, Cushman & Wakefield’s Head of
Industrial Space in the UK, comments: “With the opening of Heathrow
airport’s new Terminal 5 in March 2008 leading to the so-called ‘T5
effect’, we can expect an even greater demand for airport-related
industrial and warehouse space. Already the pressure for development in
the immediate Heathrow area, coupled with the lack of available land,
is pushing developers to introduce two-storey warehouses. As an
occupier, you have to need to be in Heathrow in order to justify such
high occupancy costs.” |
|
