What distinguishes an easement appurtenant from an easement in gross?
Correct Answer
A) An appurtenant easement benefits a particular parcel
An appurtenant easement benefits a particular dominant parcel. An easement in gross benefits a person or entity without a dominant parcel. Recording, duration, transferability and termination require the actual instrument and applicable law; those issues are not resolved by a universal twenty-year rule.
Why This Is the Correct Answer
Option A is correct because an appurtenant easement exists to benefit a particular dominant parcel, such as a right of way that lets a landlocked lot reach a public street. An easement in gross has only a servient estate and no dominant parcel. That benefit-to-a-parcel feature is the distinguishing element.
Why the Other Options Are Wrong
Option B: An appurtenant easement cannot be recorded in the land records
Option B says an appurtenant easement cannot be recorded in the land records. Appurtenant easements can be recorded, and recording is not what separates them from easements in gross.
Option C: An appurtenant easement expires after twenty years
Option C says an appurtenant easement expires after twenty years. Duration depends on the actual instrument and applicable law; there is no universal twenty-year expiration that defines the type.
Option D: An appurtenant easement benefits a utility company
Option D says an appurtenant easement benefits a utility company. A utility's easement typically benefits the company rather than a dominant parcel, which describes an easement in gross.
Appurtenant attaches to land
An appurtenant easement is attached to a neighboring parcel; an easement in gross is held by a person or entity with no benefited parcel.
How to use: Use this to classify an easement by asking whether a benefited parcel exists.
Exam Tip
Ask who or what benefits: a parcel points to appurtenant, while a person or company points to in gross.
Common Mistakes to Avoid
- -Calling a utility easement appurtenant
- -Assuming easements expire after a fixed number of years
- -Believing appurtenant easements cannot be recorded
Concept Deep Dive
Analysis
This question tests the defining difference between the two types of easements. An appurtenant easement benefits a particular parcel, called the dominant estate. An easement in gross has no dominant estate and benefits a person or entity instead.
Background Knowledge
An easement is a right to use another's land for a specific purpose. The burdened land is the servient estate; in an appurtenant easement, the benefited land is the dominant estate. Recording, transferability, duration and termination depend on the instrument and applicable law.
Real-World Application
An appraiser valuing a rear lot finds a recorded right of way across the front lot to the street. Because the easement benefits the rear parcel, the appraiser treats it as appurtenant and considers its effect on both properties.
More Land/Site Questions
How should an appraiser account for a site's access to public sewer compared with competing sites that require septic systems?
Which fact, if supported by competitive-market evidence, most directly supports a unit-price premium for an otherwise comparable site?
A rectangular site's frontage is doubled while its depth is halved, keeping area constant. What is the likely value effect in a retail district?
A downtown site's zoning height limit is reduced from six stories to three. Buyers in this market had been paying for six-story development potential. What effect on land value is most supportable?
A zoning change increases permitted density from four to eight units per acre. What is the likely effect on site value?
Using the allocation method, market evidence supports a typical land-to-total-property-value ratio of 28% for similar improved properties in the subject’s location. An improved comparable sold for $825,000. What land (site) contribution is indicated by applying that ratio?
An appraiser is valuing a vacant site near a landfill. A similar vacant site that is not affected by the landfill sold for $480,000. Paired land sales indicate that proximity to the landfill lowers site prices by $70,000. No other adjustments apply. What is the indicated value of the subject site?
An appraiser is extracting site value from a $600,000 cash sale. The seller's records show an original construction cost of $250,000 and a depreciated book value of $110,000. The appraiser estimates current replacement cost new at $400,000 and accrued depreciation from all causes at $100,000. What is the indicated site value?
Three parcels assembled under single ownership (standard appraisal guidance assemblage) support separate as-is values of $290,000, $340,000, and $250,000. After assemblage for a higher-utility use, the combined site is valued at $1,050,000. Assemblage costs (demolition, legal, holding, and related) total $55,000. What is the indicated net plottage (plottage increment after assemblage costs)?
A comparable commercial site with 65 front feet sold for a cash-equivalent price of $585,000. Per standard appraisal guidance, sale price per front foot is a vacant-land unit of comparison when frontage is a primary value determinant. The subject site has 72 front feet and is otherwise similar. What indicated land value does the front-foot unit support before other adjustments?
People Also Study
Real Estate Market
13.6% of exam
Property Description
11.8% of exam
Sales Comparison Approach
16.4% of exam
Cost Approach
13.6% of exam
Income Approach
8.2% of exam
Previous Question
A cash-equivalent vacant-site sale of $400,000 has 50 front feet. Market analysis supports applying its rate per front foot to an otherwise matched subject with 60 front feet. What land indication results?
Next Question
Three recent vacant-land sales of similar highest-and-best-use acreage closed at: Comp A $1,050,000 for 12.0 acres; Comp B $960,000 for 10.0 acres; Comp C $1,250,000 for 12.5 acres. The subject is 8.0 acres and is otherwise comparable after unit-price reconciliation. Per standard appraisal guidance sales-comparison land valuation using $/acre, what indicated land value results after taking the arithmetic mean of the three $/acre unit prices and applying it to the subject?