An appraiser observes that a subject property’s tax assessor record lists a site area of 0.38 acres. The appraiser’s survey shows dimensions of 150 ft × 120 ft. Assuming no measurement error, what is the most likely explanation for the discrepancy?
Correct Answer
C) The tax record reflects lot area before a recent plat correction
Convert survey dimensions to acres: 150 ft × 120 ft = 18,000 sq ft. One acre = 43,560 sq ft → 18,000 ÷ 43,560 ≈ 0.413 acres — not 0.38. 0.38 acres × 43,560 = 16,553 sq ft. Difference is ~1,447 sq ft — too large for rounding. A plat correction (e.g., boundary adjustment, vacated alley, or lot line revision) commonly causes such discrepancies between older tax records and current surveys. USPAP Standards Rule 1-2 requires the appraiser to reconcile such differences and cite the source of the most reliable data — typically a current ALTA/NSPS survey. Option C identifies the most probable cause: tax records lag official plat revisions. Option A is implausible because easements don’t increase lot area; B is incorrect — rods are obsolete and not used in modern tax assessments; D contradicts the stem, which states the survey shows 'dimensions of 150 ft × 120 ft' — a simple rectangle, implying full lot measurement.
Why This Is the Correct Answer
A plat correction is the explanation that actually produces a durable mismatch of this size between an assessor's file and a current survey. Boundary line adjustments, vacated alleys or rights of way, lot splits and consolidations, and recorded corrections all change the legal lot while the assessor's area figure continues to carry the old number until the roll is updated, which can lag by a cycle or more. The magnitude fits too, since fourteen hundred fifty square feet is roughly a strip about ten feet wide along one of the long dimensions, the sort of area a vacation or boundary adjustment transfers. The appraiser's obligation is then to rely on the survey, disclose the discrepancy and the source relied on, and note the assessor figure as unreconciled secondary data.
Why the Other Options Are Wrong
Option A: The tax record includes a recorded easement area not part of the fee simple
An easement burdens land the owner still holds, so it does not add or subtract acreage from the parcel, and an assessor including easement area would if anything make the recorded figure larger rather than smaller. The option is tempting because easements do affect utility and value, but it addresses rights within the boundary rather than the location of the boundary itself.
Option B: The tax assessor used rod-based measurement while the surveyor used feet
Rods are a historic unit equal to sixteen and a half feet, used in older metes and bounds descriptions, and modern assessment rolls carry area in square feet or acres rather than rod-based measure. Even if rods were involved, a unit conversion applied consistently would not generate a fourteen hundred fifty square foot shortfall; it would produce a clean multiple, not a partial difference.
Option D: The surveyor measured only the buildable portion, excluding wetlands
The stem gives the survey as a simple rectangle of one hundred fifty by one hundred twenty feet, which is the full parcel and not a subset of it, and surveys establish boundaries rather than classify usable ground. Wetland delineation is a separate exercise that a surveyor might map inside the boundary, but it would never be reported as the parcel's dimensions.
Forty-Three Five Sixty
Memorize 43,560 as the acre. Multiply the dimensions, divide by 43,560, and compare. When two sources disagree, the survey wins and the assessor gets a footnote.
How to use: For any site size discrepancy, do the conversion first so you know the size of the gap, then eliminate explanations that cannot produce a gap that large. Only then choose among the remaining causes.
Exam Tip
Convert before you read the options; knowing that the gap is about fourteen hundred fifty square feet rather than a rounding difference eliminates two choices immediately.
Common Mistakes to Avoid
- -Accepting the assessor's site area without checking it against a survey or plat
- -Reporting both figures without reconciling them or saying which was relied on
- -Mishandling the acre conversion and concluding the difference is rounding
- -Confusing an easement, which affects rights, with a boundary change, which affects area
Concept Deep Dive
Analysis
This tests area conversion plus the reconciliation of conflicting data sources, which is routine work in identifying the subject. Start with the arithmetic: one hundred fifty feet by one hundred twenty feet is eighteen thousand square feet, and an acre is forty-three thousand five hundred sixty square feet, so the survey indicates about four hundred thirteen thousandths of an acre. The assessor's thirty-eight hundredths of an acre is about sixteen thousand five hundred fifty-three square feet, roughly fourteen hundred fifty square feet less, which is far outside anything rounding could explain. STANDARD 1 requires the appraiser to identify the characteristics of the property relevant to the assignment and to correctly employ recognized methods, and STANDARD 2 requires a report that is not misleading, so the appraiser must reconcile the conflict and state which source was relied on and why. Assessor records are secondary data compiled for taxation and are routinely stale, while a current survey is the authoritative statement of the boundary.
Background Knowledge
You need to know that one acre equals forty-three thousand five hundred sixty square feet and to be able to convert rectangular dimensions to acreage quickly. You should also know the reliability hierarchy of site data, with a current survey and recorded plat above assessor records and listing sheets, and that conflicting data must be reconciled and the source relied upon disclosed.
Real-World Application
You are appraising an infill lot where the assessor shows thirty-eight hundredths of an acre and the owner hands you a current survey showing a clean rectangle of eighteen thousand square feet. You pull the recorded plat, find that the city vacated a ten-foot alley along the rear and the strip was added to this lot, rely on the survey for site area, and disclose both figures in the report along with the reason for the difference and the source you relied upon.
More Property Description Questions
A property is located in FEMA flood zone AE with a base flood elevation of 485 feet. The lowest floor is at 487 feet. What is the significance for the appraisal?
In a leasehold estate, the tenant's interest in the property is called:
A ground lease typically involves:
An appraisal of a rented single-family home where the lease runs another four years at below-market rent is valuing which interest, from the owner's side?
A duplex operates legally in a zone later rezoned single-family. What is its status, and the key appraisal question?
Which component carries roof loads down to the foundation in a typical wood-framed house?
A property owner wants to operate a daycare center in an area zoned for single-family residential use. What would they most likely need to obtain?
A deed restriction that prohibits the construction of fences over 4 feet in height is an example of:
Room count in residential appraisal conventionally excludes:
Type I construction classification typically refers to buildings with:
People Also Study
Real Estate Market
13.6% of exam
Land or Site Valuation
4.5% of exam
Sales Comparison Approach
16.4% of exam
Cost Approach
13.6% of exam
Income Approach
8.2% of exam