In applying the cost approach to an improved property, why is the land component estimated separately under an as-vacant highest-and-best-use premise?
Correct Answer
D) Because the cost approach adds land to the depreciated improvements
The cost approach separates land from the depreciated improvement component. The land estimate uses an appropriate as-vacant highest-and-best-use premise, while the improved property’s use and the contribution of existing improvements are also considered. This does not imply that lenders always require vacant-land comparables or that existing improvements are irrelevant to the overall value problem.
Why This Is the Correct Answer
Option D is correct because the cost approach treats land and improvements as separate economic components and adds the land value to the depreciated improvement cost. That structure requires an independent land estimate, made under an as-vacant highest-and-best-use premise. The cost approach and some income techniques require separate estimates of land value for this reason.
Why the Other Options Are Wrong
Option A: Because lenders require vacant-land comparable sales for each cost approach
Option A, that lenders require vacant-land comparable sales for each cost approach, is wrong because the separation comes from how the cost approach is constructed, not from a lender rule. Land can also be estimated by other recognized methods when vacant sales are scarce.
Option B: Because zoning is measured for vacant parcels of land alone
Option B, that zoning is measured for vacant parcels alone, is wrong because zoning applies to improved and vacant parcels alike. Zoning is not the reason the cost approach values land separately.
Option C: Because existing improvements have no effect on the land’s value
Option C, that existing improvements have no effect on the land's value, is wrong because improvements and the property's current use remain relevant to the overall value problem. The land is valued as vacant because the method adds it to the improvements, not because improvements are irrelevant.
Land plus depreciated building
The cost approach formula is land value + (cost new - depreciation); because land sits outside the parentheses, it must be valued on its own.
How to use: Use this when asked why the cost approach requires a separate site value.
Exam Tip
Answers built on the cost approach formula itself are usually stronger than answers built on a lender or zoning requirement.
Common Mistakes to Avoid
- -Thinking land value is depreciated along with the improvements
- -Believing existing improvements are irrelevant once land is valued as vacant
- -Citing a lender requirement as the reason for separating land
Concept Deep Dive
Analysis
This question tests why the cost approach needs a separate land value. The cost approach is built by adding land value to the depreciated cost of improvements, so the land must be estimated as its own component. The other options state reasons that are either untrue or overstated.
Background Knowledge
The cost approach estimates value as land value plus replacement or reproduction cost new of the improvements, less accrued depreciation. Because land is not depreciated in this model, it is valued separately, usually by sales comparison or another land valuation method.
Real-World Application
An appraiser preparing a cost approach for a newer single-family home first estimates site value from recent lot sales in the subdivision. The appraiser then adds the depreciated cost of the dwelling and site improvements to reach the cost approach indication.
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
For a vacant site, three reasonably probable uses are legally permissible, physically possible and financially feasible. After accounting for their relevant costs, timing and risk, what distinguishes the highest and best use?
Next Question
The subject is a vacant site near a coal-fired power plant. A comparable vacant site without this proximity sold for $740,000. Paired land sales indicate a discount of $150,000 for the proximity stigma, which makes the subject inferior to the comparable. No other adjustments apply. What is the indicated land value of the subject?