[Assessed 84.7%] Detached house in Ageo, Saitama — 20 min from Higashi-Omiya Sta.

The listing gives no lot number, and Oaza Haraichi is a wide area spread over 17 road price map sheets. We overlaid the listed distances (Haraichi-minami Nursery 330 m, Haraichi-minami Elementary School 550 m, Higashi-Omiya Station 1,600 m, and 20-minute walks to Haraichi and Yoshinohara stations), requiring the straight-line distance from each facility not to exceed the listed distance, and narrowed the area to the east side of the Saitama–Shobu prefectural road (lower left of map 38182, upper left of 38191, upper right of 38190). This is an estimate of an area, not an identification of the lot number.

On the 2026 road price maps, the local streets in the estimated area were: 82,000 and 83,000 yen/㎡ five each, 87,000 yen/㎡ four, 84,000, 85,000 and 88,000 yen/㎡ two each, and 79,000 and 76,000 yen/㎡ one each (excluding 93,000 yen/㎡ on the prefectural road). The most common values, 82,000 and 83,000, were tied, so we adopted the lower 82,000 yen/㎡ as the representative value. On map 38182 the same route went from 79,000 to 80,000 to 82,000 yen/㎡ over three years. If the area is narrowed further, streets at 87,000 yen/㎡ dominate and the assessed ratio would be about 86.3%; at the lowest value in the area, 76,000 yen/㎡, about 82.7%. A street at 63,000 yen/㎡ west of the prefectural road, near the boundary with the multiplier-method area and treated as outside the estimated area, would give about 78.3%. The listing is in the urbanization promotion area, and the estimated area lies within the zone covered by road prices.

Because the registered land category is farmland (field), the land is valued as comparable to residential land, deducting only the land-leveling cost of 800 yen/㎡ from Saitama Prefecture's 2026 table of residential land preparation costs, for a unit price of 81,200 yen/㎡. The photos show gravel with no trees and the lot at road level, so tree clearing, fill and earth-retaining costs were not deducted, and because it is a field rather than a wet paddy, no ground improvement cost was deducted either. As the site is already prepared and under construction, without the leveling deduction the ratio would be about 84.9%.

The 79 ㎡ private road burden is listed as a 1/4 co-ownership share, so we regard it as a separate parcel and did not deduct it from the listed surveyed lot area of 132.3 ㎡. The floor area of 104.33 ㎡ fits within 132.3 ㎡ × 80% floor area ratio = 105.84 ㎡; if the 132.3 ㎡ included the road share, the remaining lot would exceed the floor area ratio, which is consistent with this reading.

We checked all ten on-site photos taken during construction. The private road in front (northeast) is an unpaved gravel road about 4 m wide, and the lot, the private road and the neighboring lots are at almost the same ground level, with no step to the paved public road at the entrance of the private road. The neighbor across the private road has a boundary wall of about three block courses plus a fence, but the base of the wall and the gravel are at the same level, so it does not retain soil. The two houses stand side by side along the private road as separate buildings; this is not a flag-shaped lot or a row house. No photo shows the southwest (rear) boundary head-on, but flat gravel can be seen continuing to the back between the buildings. GSI elevation data also shows the surroundings of the estimated position at about 13.7–14.4 m, flat.