A custom-built single-family residence includes a 1,200-square-foot indoor lap pool with full filtration, dehumidification, and climate control systems. The owner reports annual operating costs of $18,400 and notes that only 3% of comparable high-end homes in the market include such a feature. A recent sale of a similar home without the pool sold for $1.42 million; the subject sold three months earlier for $1.39 million—but with strong evidence of buyer reluctance and extended marketing time. The appraiser estimates the pool’s reproduction cost new is $215,000, and its contributory value is zero based on paired sales analysis. What is the amount of functional obsolescence attributable to this superadequacy?
Correct Answer
B) $30,000, representing the difference between the two sale prices, adjusted for time and market conditions.
Functional obsolescence from superadequacy is measured by its demonstrable impact on market value—not cost or operating expense. Standards Rule 1-4(b) requires value impact be supported by market evidence. Here, the paired sales provide direct market evidence: a nearly identical property sold for $30,000 more ($1.42M vs. $1.39M), with documented buyer reluctance and longer marketing time—strong indicators the pool impaired marketability and value. Thus, $30,000 is the most supportable measure. Option A violates USPAP by conflating cost with value impact; option C misstates USPAP (superadequacies *are* a recognized cause of functional obsolescence per AO-6); option D confuses annual expense with capitalized value loss. The $30,000 reflects actual market penalty, not hypothetical cost or income.
Why This Is the Correct Answer
Functional obsolescence from superadequacy is measured by its demonstrable impact on market value—not cost or operating expense. Standards Rule 1-4(b) requires value impact be supported by market evidence. Here, the paired sales provide direct market evidence: a nearly identical property sold for $30,000 more ($1.42M vs. $1.39M), with documented buyer reluctance and longer marketing time—strong indicators the pool impaired marketability and value. Thus, $30,000 is the most supportable measure. Option A violates USPAP by conflating cost with value impact; option C misstates USPAP (superadequacies *are* a recognized cause of functional obsolescence per AO-6); option D confuses annual expense with capitalized value loss. The $30,000 reflects actual market penalty, not hypothetical cost or income.
More cost-approach Questions
In a cost approach for a proposed building, the appropriate cost basis is generally:
A 45-year-old office building has undergone multiple high-quality renovations, including HVAC replacement, seismic retrofitting, and full interior modernization. Its functional layout remains competitive with new construction, and it occupies a stable, well-located corridor. The appraiser estimates its total economic life at 70 years. Which estimate of effective age is most supportable under USPAP and recognized cost approach methodology?
A warehouse cost $210,000 to build when the cost index stood at 105. The index is now 210. Its indicated current cost is:
An appraiser is estimating accrued depreciation for a commercial office building using the age-life method. The building was constructed in 1992 and has a total economic life of 60 years. As of the appraisal date in 2024, the appraiser determines the property’s effective age is 36 years due to consistent maintenance, modernized systems, and favorable market perception. What is the percent of accrued depreciation indicated by the age-life method?
Which event would RAISE a building's effective age relative to last year's estimate?
Two identical houses were built the same year; one has been meticulously maintained, the other neglected. Their age-life analyses differ because:
Which statement is MOST consistent with USPAP Standards Rule 6 regarding the identification and treatment of external obsolescence in the cost approach?
A 40-year-old industrial warehouse has undergone no major renovations and suffers from outdated electrical systems, inefficient insulation, and obsolescent loading dock design. Market evidence indicates similar properties typically exhibit functional obsolescence reducing utility by 15% and external obsolescence reducing value by 10%. If the appraiser uses the age-life method with a total economic life of 50 years, how should effective age be adjusted to reflect these conditions?
In developing an age-life depreciation estimate, an appraiser assigns an effective age of 16 years and a total economic life of 40 years. Later, the appraiser discovers that comparable properties in the same submarket have recently sold with effective ages averaging 12 years and total economic lives averaging 45 years — and those sales exhibited superior energy efficiency and adaptive reuse features. What is the appraiser’s USPAP-compliant obligation regarding the original effective age estimate?
The age-life method expresses depreciation as:
People Also Study
Valuation Principles & Procedures
25% of exam
Property Description & Analysis
20% of exam
Market Analysis & Highest/Best Use
15% of exam
Appraisal Math & Statistics
15% of exam
USPAP (Ethics & Standards)
15% of exam
