[Assessed 84.4%] Land Plot, 14-min Walk from Sobudaimae Station, Zama, Kanagawa

A 33.00 million yen plot of land in Midorigaoka 2-chome, Zama, Kanagawa, a 14-minute walk from Sobudaimae Station on the Odakyu Odawara Line. The site is 206.40 sqm (registered, 62.43 tsubo) with no building conditions attached. The survey drawing shows a near-square plot measuring 11.85 m north, 12.72 m east, 14.00 m south and 14.96 m west, with a corner cut of about 3.03 m at the northeast where a utility pole stands.

The assessed ratio came to 84.4%. The site is listed as having a building, but it is sold as land and the listing gives no structure, floor area, build date or layout at all. We therefore did not value the building; the figure is land only. The 2026 inheritance tax roadside value is 135,000 yen per sqm (roadside value map 80048), and the effective site area is the listed 206.40 sqm as-is, giving 27,864,000 yen. Divided by the 33.00 million yen price, that is 84.4%. The roadside value has risen 5,000 yen a year: 125,000 in 2024, 130,000 in 2025, 135,000 in 2026.

The point that deserves the most attention here is the district plan. The remarks state "Midorigaoka Daiichi Residential District Plan area (minimum site area 165 sqm, at least 1.6 m to the northern site boundary, at least 0.8 m from each site boundary to a column)".

First, with a minimum site area of 165 sqm, the 206.40 sqm cannot be split into two lots. Building two houses on subdivided plots is not an option; the site stays as one. On its own it exceeds the minimum, so building itself is permitted. Second, there are wall setbacks: at least 1.6 m from the northern site boundary and at least 0.8 m from each boundary to a column. The zoning is Category I Exclusively Low-Rise Residential at a 50% building coverage ratio and a 100% floor area ratio, so on paper the caps are 103.2 sqm of footprint and 206.4 sqm of total floor area, but in practice the setbacks reduce that.

Demolition costs for the existing building also need to be budgeted. Handover is "negotiable / as-is", and the photos show a single-storey house with a tiled roof still standing. The site is enclosed by an Oya-stone-style decorative block wall and a tall clipped hedge, with a cast-iron gate on the east side. There are many garden trees, including pines and shaped conifers, so removal of the landscaping should be allowed for as well.

On how we read the roadside value: Midorigaoka 2-chome spans three map sheets (80047, 80048 and 80058). The mode among the subdivision roads within the district in 2026 is 135D. The blocks 15 to 21 in the southern half are almost entirely 135D, as are the subdivision roads around blocks 8, 9, 11 and 12. The 140D and 145D values belong to the arterials on the north and west sides, and values of 125D and below are confined to the fringe dropping east to southeast toward the Midorigaoka retarding basin.

The listed address stops at Midorigaoka 2-chome with no lot number, and the listing HTML contains no property coordinates. The latitude and longitude in the listing belong to Sobudaimae Station, not the property. We therefore obtained representative points for every block in Midorigaoka 2-chome (blocks 1 to 24) through the Geospatial Information Authority address API and calculated the straight-line distance from Sobudaimae Station. Consistent with a 14-minute walk are blocks 1 to 5 (about 880 to 930 m) and blocks 8 to 10 (about 1,000 m), and every subdivision road touching those blocks is 135D (only the northern arterial is 140D).

For sensitivity: 135D gives 84.4%, and the adjacent 130D still gives 81.3%, above 80%. The 125D on the eastern fringe would give 78.2%, but that band lies on the sloping edge toward the retarding basin and does not fit the listing's "terrain: flat" and "regular-shaped plot". The leasehold ratio symbol is D throughout the district.

Of the 14 listing photos we examined four exteriors, one other shot and the survey drawing. The site is enclosed by a decorative block boundary wall and a hedge. Measured from a square-on photo, the wall reads 50 pixels against 470 pixels for one side of the site (11.85 m north / 12.72 m east on the survey drawing), which puts its apparent height at about 1.1 to 1.35 m.

What matters, though, is not the total height of the wall but the difference in ground level on either side of it. Analysing the brightness profile along the entrance approach, three tread noses are readable from the road surface, so two or three steps; at 15 to 20 cm per riser the site sits only about 0.3 to 0.6 m above the road. The wall stands on top of that as a boundary wall, with no sign of retaining a metre or more. Even taking the upper bound of 0.6 m, this falls short of our 1 m threshold.

As corroboration, measuring a 120 m square of Midorigaoka 2-chome on a 15 m grid with the Geospatial Information Authority's 1 m laser survey gives a uniform gentle slope of about 3% from 67.5 m to 71.5 m, with no step or terraced grading on the order of a metre. The listing also states "terrain: flat" and "regular-shaped plot", with no note of the cliff ordinance, retaining walls or elevation differences.

The private road burden is none and the setback field is blank. This is not a flagpole plot but a corner lot facing a 5.5 m public road to the east and a 4.0 m public road to the north, so there is no pole to deduct. The corner cut at the northeast is inside the site boundary on the survey drawing and has not been deducted.