A comparable in the same subdivision but backing a retention pond requires:
Correct Answer
A) A view or site adjustment supported by market evidence
Why this is correct: The correct answer is 'A view or site adjustment supported by market evidence.' As the original explanation states, features like a retention pond can affect value positively or negatively, depending on local buyer perceptions. The sales comparison approach requires adjustments for differences between the subject property and comparables, but the amount and direction of any adjustment must be based on market data, such as paired sales analysis within the same subdivision. Why the other choices are wrong: 'No adjustment at all, since the subdivision is identical' is wrong because properties within the same subdivision can still have significant locational differences that the market recognizes. 'Exclusion from the comparable set entirely' is incorrect; a property backing a retention pond is still a valid comparable if properly adjusted. 'An automatic premium of five percent' is wrong because adjustments should never be automatic or based on a fixed percentage; they must be derived from specific market evidence. Exam tip: For any adjustment question, remember the USPAP and appraisal principle: adjustments must be based on market-derived data, not rules of thumb.
Why This Is the Correct Answer
The correct treatment is a view or site adjustment whose amount and direction come from market evidence rather than assumption. A subdivision with pond-backing and interior lots selling side by side is close to an ideal paired-sales laboratory, since builder, age, style, and school district are held constant. If the paired sales show no consistent difference, the supportable conclusion is a zero adjustment, and that too is a market-derived result rather than an assumption.
Why the Other Options Are Wrong
Option B: No adjustment at all, since the subdivision is identical
Being in the same subdivision holds many variables constant but not lot-level location, which includes view, orientation, traffic exposure, and adjacency to common areas or drainage. Assuming identity because the plat is identical skips the analysis the approach requires. It is tempting because same-subdivision comparables feel like they need no work, and that complacency is exactly what the question targets.
Option C: Exclusion from the comparable set entirely
Excluding the sale throws away a comparable that is otherwise nearly ideal, since it shares the subject's subdivision, builder, and market segment. A feature that can be adjusted for does not disqualify a comparable; that is what the grid is for. Exclusion is reserved for sales that are not arm's length or not reflective of the market at all.
Option D: An automatic premium of five percent
An automatic 5% premium is a rule of thumb applied without evidence, and it also presumes the pond is a positive when it may well be a negative in this market. Rules of thumb fail the support requirement, and this one fails it twice by fixing both the direction and the amount in advance. Candidates pick it because a specific number feels more rigorous than 'it depends,' but unsupported precision is the weaker answer.
The Market Decides, Not You
Say it before every adjustment: the market decides the sign and the size, not the appraiser. A pond is not good or bad in the abstract; it is whatever the paired sales in that subdivision say it is. Your opinion about ponds is not evidence.
How to use: When an option offers a fixed percentage or declares a feature always positive or always negative, discard it. The surviving answer is nearly always the one conditioning the adjustment on market evidence, and that pattern holds across view, corner lot, pool, and busy-street questions.
Exam Tip
Any answer containing 'automatic,' 'always,' or a fixed percentage for a physical feature is a distractor; the exam consistently rewards market-derived support.
Common Mistakes to Avoid
- -Assuming same-subdivision comparables need no location or site adjustments
- -Applying a fixed percentage for a view or site feature instead of deriving it from paired sales
- -Presuming water features are always a premium when local buyers may discount a drainage basin
Concept Deep Dive
Analysis
This item tests the principle that every adjustment must be market-derived, applied to a site or view feature whose effect on value is genuinely ambiguous. A retention pond can read as a water view and an open-space buffer, which some buyers pay a premium for, or as a mosquito-breeding drainage basin with maintenance obligations and a safety concern for families with small children, which other buyers discount. Nothing in appraisal theory predetermines which way it cuts; only the local market does. The appraiser's job is therefore to test the question empirically, usually through paired sales within the same subdivision where every other variable is close to constant, and then apply whatever adjustment the data supports, including none. Properties in one subdivision are not automatically equivalent, because location varies at the lot level as well as the neighborhood level.
Background Knowledge
You need to understand paired sales analysis as the primary technique for extracting adjustment amounts, and the requirement that adjustments be supported by market evidence rather than by convention. You should also know that view and site influence are recognized elements of comparison, and that the same physical feature can be a positive in one market and a negative in another.
Real-World Application
An appraiser in a 180-home subdivision pulls eight sales, four backing the retention pond and four interior, and finds pond lots selling about $4,000 higher on average after controlling for GLA. The report cites those pairings as the support for a positive site adjustment rather than relying on the appraiser's impression of the view.
More Sales Comparison Questions
Excess land differs from surplus land in that excess land:
A paired sales analysis reveals that homes with stainless-steel appliances sell for $2,100 more than identical homes with standard appliances — but only when the homes are priced below $350,000. In the subject’s neighborhood, median sale price is $410,000. What is the appraiser’s obligation regarding the $2,100 appliance adjustment?
GLA differs by 210 sq ft between subject and comparable. Paired sales support $65 per sq ft of living area. The line adjustment is:
Paired sales are drawn from transactions six months apart in a stable market. The time adjustment needed is:
The most appropriate unit of comparison is determined by:
A comparable superior to the subject in every adjusted category should produce an indication that is:
Three sales support $520,000; the borrower's purchase contract is $505,000. May the appraisal conclude above the contract price?
A comparable sold for $300,000 with the seller carrying a loan 2 points below market, a benefit worth $8,000. What is its cash-equivalent price?
Why is a foreclosure sale generally a poor comparable in a stable market?
A comparable sold 8 months ago for $250,000 in a market appreciating 6% per year. What is the time-adjusted price?
People Also Study
Real Estate Market
13.6% of exam
Property Description
11.8% of exam
Land or Site Valuation
4.5% of exam
Cost Approach
13.6% of exam
Income Approach
8.2% of exam
Previous Question
An appraiser analyzes three paired sales to isolate the effect of a fireplace. In Pair 1, the property with a fireplace sold for $12,000 more; in Pair 2, $10,500 more; and in Pair 3, $13,500 more. All pairs are highly similar and recent. The appraiser selects $12,000 as the final adjustment. Which principle best supports this selection?
Next Question
A comparable's recorded price includes a $9,000 credit for repairs the buyer agreed to complete. The appraiser should: