Which listed condition most directly signals a need to investigate whether a standard proposed building foundation is physically feasible?
Correct Answer
D) Soil that will not support standard foundations
Poor bearing soils can require engineered foundation design or remediation and affect feasible use, time, risk and buyer response. Obtain reliable technical information and market evidence. The market effect is not automatically equal to a repair estimate; other site attributes also require analysis.
Why This Is the Correct Answer
Option D is correct because soil that will not support standard foundations directly affects whether a standard foundation can be built. Poor bearing soils may call for engineered foundations or remediation and can affect feasible use, cost, time and risk, so the appraiser should obtain reliable technical information.
Why the Other Options Are Wrong
Option A: A rectangular shape with level topography
Option A, a rectangular shape with level topography, is generally a favorable site feature. It does not signal a problem with foundation feasibility.
Option B: Frontage on a paved and maintained street
Option B, frontage on a paved and maintained street, relates to access. It is a positive feature and does not raise a question about whether a standard foundation can be supported.
Option C: Availability of public water and sewer service
Option C, availability of public water and sewer service, relates to utilities. It supports development and does not indicate a foundation problem.
Foundations start with soil
A building can only be as stable as the ground beneath it, so soil is the first thing to question for foundation feasibility.
How to use: Use this when a question asks which site factor affects whether a building can physically be built.
Exam Tip
Pick the condition that directly affects the specific issue asked about; favorable features are unlikely to be the warning sign.
Common Mistakes to Avoid
- -Treating a favorable site feature as a feasibility concern
- -Assuming the value loss equals the engineering cost
- -Overlooking soil conditions when testing physical possibility
Concept Deep Dive
Analysis
This question tests which site condition bears most directly on whether a standard foundation is physically feasible. Soil that cannot support standard foundations may require engineered design or remediation. The other choices describe favorable site features, not foundation problems.
Background Knowledge
Physical possibility is one test of highest and best use, and soil and subsoil conditions are important physical characteristics of a site. Foundation design relies on adequate soils information and accepted engineering practice. The market effect of poor soils is not necessarily equal to the repair or engineering cost.
Real-World Application
While inspecting a vacant lot, an appraiser learns from a soils report that the site has expansive clay that will not support a standard slab. She notes the need for an engineered foundation and looks for market evidence of how buyers react to similar sites.
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
In common real-estate terminology, littoral rights are associated with which kind of adjoining land?
Next Question
A comparable vacant site sold for $900,000. Unlike the comparable, the subject site is near a cement manufacturing plant, which makes it inferior. Paired land sales show a proximity stigma discount of $150,000. No other adjustments apply. What is the indicated value of the subject site?