Ground-up and value-add are different questions

Different sources of uncertainty

In a value-add deal, the property exists and is producing income. The central uncertainty is whether your operating thesis is right: whether the rents you have underwritten are achievable, and whether the cost of getting there is what you think.

In ground-up, the uncertainty sits earlier. Cost, schedule, and delivery timing carry the risk, and an error there propagates through every year of the projection. The same template applied to both will be over-engineered for one and dangerously thin for the other.

What that implies for process

It implies different questions at the first pass, not merely different line items. For an existing asset, the first pass should stress the income assumptions. For a development, it should stress the cost and the timeline, because the income assumptions are downstream of both.

Teams that run one process for both tend to discover this late, usually in the form of a development deal that looked fine until the schedule moved.