So we are trying to buy a house on 1.5 acres of land and the appraisal came back really low. There weren't very many good choices for comps, so two of the comps she chose were on small lots, ~3000 and ~7000 sq ft. She adjusted for this by adding $2000 and $1000 adjustments, respectively. This was based on land sales, she included this info of two sales in a nearby town: Property A ~7000 sf ft site sold for $3200/Property B ~3400 sq ft site sold for $3200. So based on that, I am lost as to how she decided that adding on an additional 60,000 sq ft or so in land could only be worth a thousand or two. I looked up the actual sale, it was actually three lots that sold for $9600, if that makes a difference. The house we want to buy includes 8 additional lots, not counting the lot it is on. I did call her and ask her how she arrived at just valuing 1.41 acres at $2,000 and she threw around a lot of appraiser terms like "extraction" "highest and best use" "qualitative analysis". I wanted her to walk me through it, like say I used this formula, plugged in these variables and that's how I arrived at those numbers but she said she couldn't do that. Her main argument was that nobody would want 1.5 acres in a town, that would only be appealing if it were rural, so you could own a lot of livestock (you can own some livestock but obviously there are more limitations than if you were in the middle of nowhere). But the property she compared it to that sold for $3200 a lot is also in the middle of a town, so you'd have the same livestock restrictions and it still sold for that much. So is there any justification for valuing 8 lots at just a fraction of the price that 1 lot would cost nearby?