[Assessed 82.9%] Land in Sumida Ward, Tokyo — 9 min from Hikifune Sta.

Mukojima 5-chome is split by the Mito Kaido, with values running 410C to 590C on the west side (blocks 3 and 15-30) and 300D to 440D on the east (blocks 33-43) — more than 1.3 times apart. The listing HTML publishes no coordinates and no lot number, so we narrowed the block down using two independent approaches. The first was measuring walking times. We geocoded all 50 blocks in Mukojima 5-chome using the Geospatial Information Authority address API and measured the road distance to each station by pedestrian routing. The listed "9 minutes to Hikifune" (a road distance of 641 to 720 m) is satisfied by blocks 34, 35, 40 and 46. The listed "13 minutes to Oshiage" (961 to 1,040 m; recalculated from the north exit because every block is over 15 minutes from the station centroid) is satisfied by blocks 30, 34 and 35. Only blocks 34 and 35 satisfy both. The second was zoning. National land numerical information puts blocks 34 and 35 in a commercial zone at 80/400, matching the listed 80% coverage and 400% floor area ratio. Neighbouring blocks 33, 36 and 37 are commercial 80/500, blocks 49 and 50 are neighbourhood commercial 80/300, and blocks 1, 4 and 5 are Category I Residential 60/200 — none of which match. Both approaches pointed to the same blocks, placing the site east of the Mito Kaido.

Of the seven residential streets bordering blocks 34 and 35, five read 440C or 440D in fiscal 2026, with the remainder 420D to the north and 430C to the east. We took the mode of 440,000 yen/sqm. The sensitivity is worth stating plainly. At 440,000 yen/sqm the ratio is 82.87%; the neighbouring 430C still gives 80.98% and clears 80%; but 420D on the north side of block 35 gives 79.10%, and 410D further east gives 77.22%. The margin that could flip the conclusion is about 20,000 yen/sqm, so this property is sensitive to which band is chosen. The district-wide mode is 520C (equivalent to 97.9%), pulled up by the higher western bands, but we used the actual bands around the block instead. The three-year series follows the same street on the same sheet (the east-west road through the middle of block 34): 350,000 yen in 2024, 380,000 in 2025 and 440,000 in 2026 — a 26% rise in three years. The leasehold ratio symbols are C (70%) or D (60%), with no E or below.

A setback requirement of 0.63 sqm on the north-west 3.7 m public road side is marked on the site plan. Deducting it from the registered 28.88 sqm leaves 28.25 sqm of usable land. There is no private road burden and no sloped portion noted. Since this is a judgement call we show both figures: deducting the setback gives an assessed ratio of 82.87%, not deducting gives 84.71% on 28.88 sqm. Either way it clears 80%, so the setback deduction does not change the conclusion.

We opened all four photos in the listing (exterior, south-east road, north-west road, site plan). The terrain is flat and both frontage roads are level asphalt, with the road and site surfaces at much the same height. No retaining walls, slope faces or cut faces appear anywhere around the site. There are two concrete steps in front of the entrance, but cross-checked against the air-conditioning unit beside them (about 60 cm high) and the first-floor window sill (about 90 cm), the total rise is about 0.2 to 0.3 m. The low concrete planter to the left of the entrance has soil at the same level behind it, so it does not function as a retaining wall, and it is only about 0.4 m high anyway. Measuring five points within Mukojima 5-chome using national 1 m laser survey data gave elevations from -0.1 m to 1.0 m — low ground with a range of only about 1.1 m across a 500 m square.

Given the 28.88 sqm plot we suspected a party-wall row house and enlarged the exterior photo threefold, splitting it left and right. It is a detached house. Five things confirm it: (1) this building's own external walls rise independently on both sides; (2) it has its own downpipe running the full height at each corner; (3) its own electricity meter is fitted to the right-hand wall; (4) a dark full-height slit is visible between it and the red-tiled building to the right, so no wall is shared; and (5) the roof returns at the eaves on both sides in an independent form, not the continuous roof of a row house crossing a party wall. As the site plan shows, this is a through plot with two frontages — a 4.0 m public road to the south-east and a 3.7 m public road to the north-west — so it is not a flagpole plot and no pole deduction applies.

The land is held in freehold, the land category is residential, and it sits in an urbanisation promotion area zoned commercial with 80% building coverage and 400% floor area ratio. Legal restrictions are noted as "22 m height district, fire prevention district and others". Even on a small plot, three storeys or more is achievable. Special notes and conditions are all "−", and nothing in the body text mentions non-rebuildable status, cliff ordinances, proviso roads or leasehold. It states explicitly: "this is not a plot sold subject to building conditions — you may build with any homebuilder or contractor you choose". Note that the highlights tags include "vacant lot" and "corner lot", but the property summary records the current state as "building present" and the frontage field as "two frontages", which contradicts them; we took the conservative reading of a plot with an existing house.