[Assessed 108.7%] Land, 13 min from Kita-Hachioji Station, Hachioji, Tokyo

We fixed the location by coordinate calibration. Starting from the property marker coordinates embedded in the listing HTML, we enlarged and read seven block numbers — 7 through 13 of Owada-machi 1-chome — on roadside value map sheet 55059, then fitted an affine transform against the coordinates for each block obtained from the Geospatial Information Authority address API (residuals of 2 to 10 m, scale about 1.03 m per point, or roughly 1:2900, with north nearly up). No extrapolation across sheet boundaries was used. The property falls in block 14, adjoining blocks 13, 5 and 15. It is about 109 m in a straight line from Kitahara International Hospital (Owada-machi 1-7-23), consistent with the 195 m road distance given in the listing.

Since Hachioji has multiplier areas mixed in — areas with no published roadside values — we checked that first. Every street fronting the blocks of Owada-machi 1-chome on sheets 55059 and 55049 carries a roadside value, with no multiplier-area notation. The residential streets nearby run 160D to 175D, and we took the mode of 160D (160,000 yen/sqm) as the conservative figure. On sensitivity: the neighbouring 165D gives 112.1%, one step down at 155D gives 105.3%, and even the lowest band in neighbouring Owada-machi 2-chome at 150D gives 101.9%. The roadside value needed to reach 80% is 117,800 yen/sqm, and applying the 125D to 130D of Owada-machi 3-chome (sheet 55058), the cheapest nearby, still gives 84.9 to 88.3%. No plausible band changes the conclusion. The three-year series follows the same street on the same sheet — the road running south-east from Minamihara Bridge — at 150,000 yen in 2024, 155,000 in 2025 and 160,000 in 2026, a steady 5,000 yen a year. The leasehold ratio symbol is D (60%).

We took the registered 86.93 sqm as the effective land area in full. The private road is recorded separately as "jointly held 112 sqm × 3/18", so it is not included in the 86.93 sqm. Where a share is written as a fraction, it indicates the private road exists as a separate parcel, so we made no deduction. The site plan shows a near-regular shape of about 9.6 m (north) by about 9.0 m (east-west), with a southern edge of 7.3 m plus 2.2 m, and no flagpole strip. The listing carries no note of a sloped portion either.

We inspected two site photos and the site plan. On the frontage to the south-west, the step from the road asphalt up to the brick paving of the plot is a single low rise with a rubber ramp laid over it — about 0.10 to 0.15 m. The porch rises one step of about 0.15 m, so this is not stepped access. The western boundary is a concrete block wall. Towards the road the coping and two to three courses are exposed, with the soil on the neighbouring side sitting roughly at coping level — a difference in ground level of about 0.5 to 0.65 m. The taller wall further in reads 1.0 to 1.2 m in visible height, but the ground difference across it is 0.4 to 0.5 m; the rest stands as screening. On the eastern side the neighbour's concrete parking apron is at much the same level, with only a 0.2 m brick edging at the boundary. There are no slope faces, protective sheeting or cut faces.

We corroborated the terrain with national 1 m laser survey data, measuring 49 points on a 10 m grid across 60 sqm around the property: 115.60 to 117.00 m above sea level, with a maximum difference of 0.4 m between adjacent points. No metre-scale step or retaining wall exists in the landform. This is consistent with the seller's own note that "the plot is flat with no height differences" and "there is no height difference against the frontage road".

The land is held in freehold with the land category residential, and there is no leasehold or fixed-term leasehold interest. Zoning is quasi-industrial with 60% building coverage and 200% floor area ratio, in a quasi-fire prevention district. There is no mention of a cliff ordinance, non-rebuildable status or a proviso road. The listing states explicitly that no building conditions apply, so the homebuilder or contractor is the buyer's choice. Utilities are mains water and public sewerage. There is an old house on the plot, so demolition costs need budgeting. The agent is Tokyu Livable Hachioji, on a brokerage basis, listed 29 August 2026.