A few years ago I bought in inner city Melbourne. It was a below average house (a knockdown beyond repair) on an above average sized block. I bought it at auction for what I considered land value minus cost of demolition. Since then the suburb median has increased by 45% from about $1.07m to about $1.55m. Questions: 1) Would it be reasonable to assume that most of this rise was due to land price rise? 2) By continuation of this logic that my vacant land (or close to it) would have risen more than house and land? 3) Is there any good data source for historical land prices, rather than historical house prices? 4) Is there a good source of building costs historically? Anecdotally, builders are telling me costs to build have risen sharply over the past 2-3 years (well above inflation) although I don't have hard evidence to back up their claims. If what they say is true, then maybe some of the house price growth is due to increase in building costs.