adverse site condition

[MNRural]

Subject backs a busier than typical residential road so I checked 'yes' under 'Are there any adverse site conditions.....' in the site section.

UW says that a busy road is not considered an adverse site condition (box should only be for easements, encroachments, environmental conditions, land uses), says it is confusing since it is also noted on the view.

I disagree and believe that the box must be checked for anything less than the ordinary site. Does anyone agree with UW?

 

[J Grant]

If you marked adverse site conditions, page 1, I'd tend to agree with UW on this one.

Adverse view that could affect value is what this house has, which you noted. As a separate item/issue, the adverse site conditions on page 1 is separated out for there for easements, encroachments, env conditions.

 

[Randolph Kinney]

Subject backs a busier than typical residential road so I checked 'yes' under 'Are there any adverse site conditions.....' in the site section.

UW says that a busy road is not considered an adverse site condition (box should only be for easements, encroachments, environmental conditions, land uses), says it is confusing since it is also noted on the view.

I disagree and believe that the box must be checked for anything less than the ordinary site. Does anyone agree with UW?

What is the noise level? FHA has a maximum db level noise level that would disqualify the loan without abatement, for example

Traffic by itself is not adverse to livability.

 

[Michigan CG]

The road is not part of the site.

 

[sail143]

Underwriter is correct. The road is beyond the site.

 

[Terrel L. Shields]

Externality...which should impact the land and improvements and is avoided by using comps with the same issue.

 

[MNRural]

Michigan, I'm willing to change my opinion, but I don't think it has to be specifically part of or within the site (hence the term 'external'). If the site backed a nuclear landfill, I'd check yes. The landfill is not part of the site.

I guess I take the question quite literally. "Are there any adverse site conditions or external factors?"

A busy road creates external obsolescence, adverse noise, and views. Its not quite as appealing as a typical residential site surrounded by other compatible homes with no outside influences.

 

[Michigan CG]

Michigan, I'm willing to change my opinion, but I don't think it has to be specifically part of or within the site. If the site backed a nuclear landfill, I'd check yes. The landfill is not part of the site.......

I have a one-acre site to appraise. It has water, natural gas and an engineered septic system. It backs to a nuclear landfill, as does the sites to the right and the left.

I have a one-acre site to appraise. It has NO water (have to drill a well), natural gas and an engineered septic system. It backs to a nuclear landfill, as does the sites to the right and the left.

My second property has a problem in that it needs a well on the site. In both cases the nuclear land fill is a neighborhood characteristic, outside of the subject site.

 

[MNRural]

I disagree. Otherwise, the word 'external' wouldn't be included on the question.

 

[Michigan CG]

I disagree. Otherwise, the word 'external' wouldn't be included on the question.

Well now dang-it, making me think a little harder. I pulled up a 1004. On that line it says ...."or external factors (Easements, encroachments, environmental conditions, land uses, etc.)?"

The first three are definitely ON SITE items. Land uses might be able to be interpreted as being outside the site, but I think I will stick with my original opinion.