www.appraisalinstitute.org Spring 2021 • The Appraisal Journal 95
Peer-Reviewed Article
Introduction
Estimating the external obsolescence of a struc-
ture is a challenging aspect of implementing
the cost approach in appraisal. Because external
obsolescence is driven by factors outside the
property, it is difficult to distinguish between
external obsolescence of the improvements
and reductions in value of the land. If the
appraiser is not careful, it would be easy to inad-
vertently double count these outside influences,
with their effects showing up both in the land
value estimate and the estimated value of the
improvements.
This article shows that external obsolescence
arises only when the existing structure is not the
site’s highest and best use. As a result, external
factors that affect the property’s value are attrib-
utable to the land when the current use is opti-
mal and to the external obsolescence of the
building otherwise. By paying careful attention
to the highest and best use of the site, the
appraiser can more accurately allocate the
impact of external factors to the land and build-
ing value estimates.
This has several important implications for
practicing appraisers. First, it provides the ana-
lyst with a simple and theoretically rigorous test
for determining whether external obsolescence
should be applied in the cost approach. A key
consideration is whether the current use—in
terms of both property type and scale—is the
property’s highest and best use. If the answer is
“yes,” then no external obsolescence of the struc-
ture is present, and any value change due to the
external factor is attributable to the land.
Second, this analysis can help validate the
magnitude of estimated external obsolescence if
it is present. As shown in the discussion that fol-
lows, as long as land value is positive, external
obsolescence is simply the difference between
the value of the land in its optimal use and its
value in the current use. When an appraiser uses
traditional methods to estimate external obsoles-
cence, the resulting figure can be compared with
this benchmark to verify its reasonableness.
Finally, this analysis provides external confir-
mation of the land value estimate that may
have been derived from another source. If the
property’s current use is its highest and best use
and a large estimate of external obsolescence
is required in the cost approach, it may imply
that the external land value estimate needs to
be reevaluated.
Defining and Measuring
External Obsolescence
The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, sixth edi-
tion, defines external obsolescence as “a type of
depreciation; a diminution in value caused by
negative external influences and generally incur-
able on the part of the owner, landlord, or
Land Values and
External Obsolescence
by Stanley D. Longhofer, PhD
Abstract
External obsolescence is perhaps one of the most challenging aspects of implementing the cost approach in
appraisal. Loss due to external obsolescence is driven by factors outside the property, and it can be difficult to
distinguish between external obsolescence of the improvements and a reduction in value of the land. In other
words, external obsolescence is prone to double counting. The purpose of this article is to provide guidance
as to when such value loss is attributable to the land and when it is attributable to the structure. The discussion
demonstrates that external obsolescence can only arise when the existing structure is not the site’s highest and
best use. As a result, external factors that affect the property’s value are attributable to the land if the current use
is the property’s highest and best use and are attributable to external obsolescence of the building otherwise.
Peer-Reviewed Article
96 The Appraisal Journal • Spring 2021 www.appraisalinstitute.org
tenant.”
1
In his Appraisal Journal article, Thomas
Williams, MAI, discusses three categories of
external obsolescence: locational (e.g., a neigh-
borhood whose properties are transitioning into
a new highest and best use), environmental (e.g.,
properties affected by a noxious nearby use), and
economic (e.g., property rent changes in a loca-
tion due to changing economic conditions such
as oversupply).
2
Because each of these external
factors may also affect land values, it can be chal-
lenging to determine how they actually affect
structure values as opposed to the land itself.
3
The Appraisal of Real Estate, fifteenth edition,
suggests two methods for estimating external
obsolescence.
4
When sufficient data is available,
the appraiser might use paired data analysis to
directly compare similar properties with and
without external obsolescence. Second, external
obsolescence might be estimated by capitalizing
the income loss due to the external factor, either
through direct capitalization or discounted cash
flow analysis.
Some authors have proposed more specific
methodologies for estimating external obsoles-
cence due to special influences such as oversup-
ply within a market
5
or market-wide downturns.
6
At the end of the day, however, each of these
methods essentially involves estimating the total
value loss due to the external factor and then
allocating it between the land and the building
in a relatively arbitrary way. The purpose of this
article is to provide guidance as to when this
value loss is attributable to the land and when it
is attributable to the structure.
Perhaps the most practically relevant and the-
oretically satisfying treatment of external obso-
lescence can be found in In Defense of the Cost
Approach: A Journey into Commercial Deprecia-
tion.
7
In this excellent book, Nelson Bowes, MAI,
provides straightforward techniques for estimat-
ing external obsolescence and clearly demon-
strates that it is inappropriate to simply allocate
the impact of external factors based on a land-
to-cost or other arbitrary ratio. All of the book’s
examples, however, are developed assuming an
accurate external land value estimate. The pres-
ent analysis therefore augments this book by
providing a benchmark for validating that the
external land value estimate is reasonable given
the parcel’s highest and best use.
At the heart of the analysis is the residual the-
ory of land values, wherein the value of a parcel
is the difference between its market value and
fair compensation to the other factors of produc-
tion. A direct implication of this theory is that
the outside factors that might cause obsolescence
affect land values first, with structure values
being affected only as a byproduct.
Indeed, the urban economic theory that under-
lies much of appraisal practice is built on the pri-
macy of land values. Thus, to understand external
obsolescence, we must first understand how these
outside factors affect land values.
Land Values and Highest and Best Use
Appraisers and others involved in real estate gen-
erally are quite familiar with the dictum that a
parcel’s land value is determined by its value under
its highest and best use as though vacant, regard-
less of its current use. An important implication
of this idea, however, is less well understood. If
the building or structure present on the parcel
maximizes the land’s value—that is, if the current
use is the parcel’s highest and best use—then any
loss in value due to external factors is attributable
to the land, not the building. In other words,
external obsolescence of the structure arises if and
only if that building is wrong for the site.
1. Appraisal Institute, The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, 6th ed. (Chicago: Appraisal Institute, 2015), s.v. “external obsolescence.”
2. Thomas P. Williams, “Categorizing External Obsolescence,” The Appraisal Journal (April 1996): 148–154.
3. Throughout this article, the term “external factors” is used to refer to anything outside the property that might affect the property’s value,
either by affecting the value of the land or the value of the structure. In contrast, “external obsolescence” refers only to situations where
the external factor affects the value of the structure. Thus, some but not all external factors may result in external obsolescence.
4. Appraisal Institute, The Appraisal of Real Estate, 15th ed. (Chicago: Appraisal Institute, 2020), 591–597.
5. MacKenzie S. Bottum, “Estimating Economic Obsolescence in Supply-Saturated Office Markets,” The Appraisal Journal (October 1988):
451–455. See also MacKenzie S. Bottum and Scott D. Evans, “Supply-Saturation-Induced External Obsolescence: Two Techniques for
Quantifying Value Loss,” The Appraisal Journal (October 1993): 545–552.
6. Mark Galleshaw, “Market-Wide External Obsolescence,” The Appraisal Journal (October 1991): 519–525.
7. E. Nelson Bowes, In Defense of the Cost Approach: A Journey into Commercial Depreciation (Chicago: Appraisal Institute, 2011), e-book.
Land Values and External Obsolescence
www.appraisalinstitute.org Spring 2021 • The Appraisal Journal 97
To see this, consider a vacant parcel of land
with two potential uses that are legally permissi-
ble, physically possible, and financially feasible:
office and retail. The details of these uses are
summarized in the first column of Exhibit 1. If
the property is developed as an office building,
its annual net operating income (NOI) would
be $360,000. Assuming a market capitalization
rate of 8%, the office’s total market value would
be $4.5 million ($360,000 ÷ 0.08). If it costs
$2.5 million to build the office building (and
assuming it would be built without any physical
deterioration or functional obsolescence), this
implies that the land is worth $2 million if it is
developed as an office building (the $4.5 million
overall value less the $2.5 million in construc-
tion costs).
Alternatively, the owner could develop the site
as a retail building. A breakdown of land and
building values where retail is the highest and
best use is depicted in Exhibit 2. This use would
generate annual NOI of $280,000, and assuming
the same 8% market cap rate, the property’s total
market value as a retail building would be $3.5
million ($280,000 ÷ 0.08). Assuming the retail
improvements would cost $1 million to build, the
land’s value in a retail use would be $2.5 million
($3.5 million – $1 million). Because a retail use
brings the highest total economic return to the
land’s owner, the parcel’s highest and best use is
retail. Indeed, if these two uses were proposed by
different developers, the land would be sold to
the retail developer because of their willingness
to pay more for the parcel.
Suppose that the owner develops the land
for retail as described above and then factors
external to the property change. The question
that needs to be addressed is when such factors
would be captured in the land value estimate
and when an adjustment for external obsoles-
cence should be applied to the estimated value
of the structure.
For example, suppose a change in retail demand
at this location causes rents (and hence NOI) to
fall by 10%.
8
This scenario is depicted as Sce-
nario 1 in Exhibit 1, which shows that the prop-
Exhibit 1 Case Study Example: Vacant Parcel with Office and Retail Potential Uses
Potential Uses
Scenario 1
Retail rents fall, no change
in highest and best use
Scenario 2
Retail rents fall, change
in highest and best use
Office Retail Office Retail Office Retail
Net operating income (NOI) $360,000 $280,000 $360,000 $252,000 $360,000 $224,000
Capitalization rate (R) 8.00% 8.00% 8.00% 8.00% 8.00% 8.00%
Market value (V
O
= NOI / R) $4,500,000 $3,500,000 $4,500,000 $3,150,000 $4,500,000 $2,800,000
– Construction cost (C) $2,500,000 $1,000,000 $2,500,000 $1,000,000 $2,500,000 $1,000,000
= Land value in use if vacant (V
L use
) $2,000,000 $2,500,000 $2,000,000 $2,150,000 $2,000,000 $1,800,000
Total value (V
O
) $3,500,000 $3,150,000 $2,800,000
– Land value in highest and best use (V
L
) $2,500,000 $2,150,000 $2,000,000
= Building value (V
B
= V
O
– V
L
) $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $800,000
External obsolescence (EO = V
L office
– V
L retail
)
$200,000
8. In this example, it is assumed that the external factor affecting the parcel is a change in market demand. All of the analysis would remain
the same if the change in rents (property value) were due to a different external factor such as a change in traffic patterns, environmental
concerns, or another externality.
Peer-Reviewed Article
98 The Appraisal Journal • Spring 2021 www.appraisalinstitute.org
Notes: V
O use
is the overall value of property in the given use (office or retail); V
L use
is value of land in that use; V
B use
is value of building in
that use; and C
use
is construction cost new of building in that use. Retail is the highest and best use of this parcel because the value of land
under this use (V
L retail
= V
O retail
– V
B retail
) is higher than its value in an office use.
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
5
5.5
6
Exhibit 2 Case Study Example: Land and Building Value with Retail as Highest and Best Use
V
L retail
= 2.5
V
B retail
= 1.0
C
office
C
retail
V
B office
= 2.5
V
L office
= 2
V
O retail
V
O office
erty is now worth $3.15 million ($252,000 ÷
0.08). In other words, market conditions have
caused the property’s value to drop by $350,000.
In this case, all of the lost value is attributable
to the land. To see this, note that the cost of
constructing the retail building has not changed
(it is still $1 million), so if the land were vacant
it would be worth $2.15 million to a retail devel-
oper ($3.15 million – $1 million). This is still
more than what the land is worth as an office
(assuming that has not changed), so the proper-
ty’s highest and best use remains retail. Since the
land’s value is, by definition, its value under its
highest and best use as though vacant, the land
value is $2.15 million, or $350,000 less than it
was before rents fell, as shown in Exhibit 3.
Thus, the entire value loss is attributable to the
land, and the “external factors” affecting the
property do not result in any external obsoles-
cence to the building.
This will be true as long as retail remains
the property’s highest and best use. Suppose,
however, that retail rents fall even more dramat-
ically, so that the property’s annual NOI falls
to $224,000; this is shown through Scenario 2
in Exhibit 1 and illustrated in Exhibit 4. In this
case, the property’s total value falls to $2.8 mil-
lion ($224,000 ÷ 0.08), making the land worth
Land Values and External Obsolescence
www.appraisalinstitute.org Spring 2021 • The Appraisal Journal 99
$1.8 million ($2.8 million – $1 million) in a
retail use if the property were vacant. This is
now lower than what the land would be worth in
an office use (still $2 million). As a result, the
parcel’s highest and best use is now “office,”
meaning that the land value is $2 million, its
value under the parcel’s highest and best use as
though vacant. The remaining value loss of
$200,000 is attributable to the building in the
form of external obsolescence (denoted in
Exhibit 4 as EO).
These two scenarios demonstrate a simple but
important fact: a building only suffers from
external obsolescence when the property is not
in its highest and best use. As long as the current
use is the highest and best use, any external
factors that change the property’s value will
affect the land value, not the structure value.
External Obsolescence
and Development Scale
On the surface, it might seem that external obso-
lescence rarely occurs given that many if not
most appraisal assignments involve parcels that
are already in their highest and best uses. It is
important to note, however, that if market con-
ditions change such that the property is no lon-
ger developed to the right scale, this too can be a
Notes: V
O use
is overall value of property in the given use (office or retail); V
L use
is value of land in that use; V
B use
is value of building in that
use; and C
use
is con struction cost new of building in that use. When rents decline for retail use, the property’s overall market value in this use
falls as well. Nevertheless, because the highest and best use of parcel remains retail, all of value loss is attributable to land value.
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
5
5.5
6
Exhibit 3 Case Study Example: Falling Retail Rents, No Change in Highest and Best Use
V
L retail
= 2.15
V
B retail
= 1.0
V
O retail
C
office
C
retail
V
B office
= 2.5
V
L office
= 2
V
O office
Peer-Reviewed Article
100 The Appraisal Journal • Spring 2021 www.appraisalinstitute.org
form of suboptimal use. That is, if the current
structure is not the same size as one that would be
built now if the property were vacant, external
obsolescence will occur as well.
9
To see this, consider the residential example
shown as the “Baseline Scenario” in Exhibit 5.
In that example, the subject property is an
older, 1,000-square-foot, single-family home.
The home’s effective age is 30 years out of an
economic life of 50 years. Based on its condition
and age, the house would rent for $1.10 per
square foot per month. Assuming a gross rent
multiplier (GRM) of 100, the property’s market
value using the income approach is $110,000
($1.10 psf × 1,000 sf × 100).
Suppose that the cost of new construction is
$150 per square foot. In this case, the existing
house would cost $150,000 to construct new.
Using the age-life method, the property’s physi-
cal deterioration is estimated to be $90,000
Notes: V
O use
is overall value of property in the given use (office or retail); V
L
is value of land; V
B
is value of building; C
use
is construction cost
new of building in that use; and EO is building’s external obsolescence. If retail rents fall enough that retail is no longer the property’s highest
and best use, additional value loss accrues to the building in the form of external obsolescence.
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
5
5.5
6
{
Exhibit 4 Case Study Example: Falling Retail Rents, Change in Highest and Best Use
V
L
= 2
EO = 0.2
C
office
C
retail
V
B office
= 2.5
V
L office
= 2
V
B
= 0.8
V
O retail
V
O office
9. Some might argue that the incorrect size of a building should be categorized as functional obsolescence. If the missize is entirely internal
to the property, this would be correct. In most instances, however, problems of scale arise because market conditions change the optimal
floor-area ratio for a site. These changes in market conditions are external to the site and therefore their impact should be categorized
as external obsolescence.
Land Values and External Obsolescence
www.appraisalinstitute.org Spring 2021 • The Appraisal Journal 101
[$150,000 × (30 ÷ 50)], while the property’s
remaining physical value is $60,000. Assuming
no functional obsolescence, what remains to be
estimated in order to apply the cost approach is
(1) the value of the land and (2) any external
obsolescence of the building.
The land value is determined by the parcel’s
highest and best use as though vacant. Suppose
that because of changes in market conditions
from when the property was first developed, that
if this were a vacant lot today its optimal structure
would be a 1,500-square-foot house that would
rent for $2.00 per square foot per month.
10
This
structure would cost $225,000 to build ($150 psf
× 1,500 sf) and, recalling that the gross rent mul-
tiplier is 100, the property’s market value would
be $300,000 ($2.00 psf × 1,500 sf × 100). Given
this, the implied value of the land under its high-
est and best use as though vacant—and hence the
land’s correct value—would be $75,000.
From this it is straightforward to determine the
structure’s external obsolescence. The remaining
physical value of the existing building is its
$150,000 construction cost less the physical dete-
Exhibit 5 Highest and Best Use (HBU) and Development Scale
Baseline Scenario Market Rents Rise
Current Structure HBU as Vacant Current Structure HBU as Vacant
Building size 1,000 sf 1,500 sf 1,000 sf 1,500 sf
Effective age 30 years 0 years 30 years 0 years
Economic life 50 years 50 years 50 years 50 years
Rent (psf) $1.10 psf $2.00 psf $1.50 psf $2.40 psf
Monthly rent $1,100 $3,000 $1,500 $3,600
Gross rent multiplier (GRM) 100 100 100 100
Total value (V
O
= Rent × GRM) $110,000 $300,000 $150,000 $360,000
Construction costs $150 psf $150 psf $150 psf $150 psf
Construction cost new (sf × cost psf) $150,000 $225,000 $150,000 $225,000
– Physical deterioration $90,000 $0 $90,000 $0
= Remaining physical value (RPV) $60,000 $225,000 $60,000 $225,000
Land value under current use (V
Lc
= V
O
– RPV) $50,000 $75,000 $90,000 $135,000
External obsolescence (V
L
– V
Lc
) $25,000 $45,000
Remaining physical value (RPV) $60,000 $225,000 $60,000 $225,000
– External obsolescence (EO) $25,000 $0 $45,000 $0
= Structure value (V
B
) $35,000 $225,000 $15,000 $225,000
+ Land value (V
L
) $75,000 $75,000 $135,000 $135,000
= Total value (V
O
) $110,000 $300,000 $150,000 $360,000
Notes: V
O
denotes the overall value of the property, V
B
the value of the structure, V
L
the value of the land (under its highest and best use), V
Lc
the value of the land under
the current use, and RPV the remaining physical value of the structure (construction cost new less physical deterioration).
10. An astute reader will wonder how this relates to the rent on the existing structure. For internal consistency, here it is assumed that the
existing structure’s rent is the highest and best use (HBU) rent reduced to account for the property’s effective age. Specifically, Current Rent
= HBU Rent × [1 – (Effective Age ÷ Economic Life) × (Cost New of HBU ÷ Value of HBU)] = $2.00 psf × [1 – (30 ÷ 50) × ($225,000 ÷
$300,000)] = $1.10 psf.
Peer-Reviewed Article
102 The Appraisal Journal • Spring 2021 www.appraisalinstitute.org
rioration of $90,000, or $60,000.
11
Subtracting
this from the total market value of the parcel
shows that the land’s value under the current use
is $110,000 – $60,000 = $50,000. But as shown
above the actual land value is $75,000—its value
under the highest and best use as though vacant.
The difference, $25,000, is therefore attributable
to the structure in the form of external obsoles-
cence. Once again, the external obsolescence
exists only because the current use is different
from the property’s highest and best use. In this
example, however, the suboptimal use is due to
the size of the structure, not its intended purpose.
It is worth noting that when the suboptimality
of the existing structure is due to the wrong scale
of the building, a rise in market rents can actually
serve to increase the structure’s external obsoles-
cence. To see this, consider what happens in the
example above if market rents for a new structure
increase by 20% to $2.40 per square foot; this sit-
uation is depicted by the “Market Rents Rise”
scenario in Exhibit 5. In this case, the optimal
structure (highest and best use as vacant) will be
worth $360,000 ($2.40 psf × 1,500 sf × 100). The
increase in rents has no impact on construction
costs, so the entire value increase is attributable
to the land, increasing the parcel’s land value to
$135,000.
12
Of course, the parcel is not vacant; it has an
existing structure. The increase in rent causes the
market value of the property in its existing use
to rise to $150,000 ($1.50 psf × 1,000 sf × 100).
13
Given the remaining physical value of the
structure (which remains unchanged at $60,000),
the value of the land under its current use would
be $90,000. Nevertheless, the land’s actual value
is $135,000, its value under its highest and best
use as though vacant. The difference between
these two values, $135,000 – $90,000 = $45,000,
is the structure’s external obsolescence, or its
value loss due to having the “wrong” structure
on the site.
It may seem unusual to have external obsoles-
cence increase when market rents rise. This hap-
pens because the existing structure is not the
structure that would be built if the land were
vacant. As market rents increase, the “penalty”
or value loss from having the wrong structure on
the site increases as well. Because this value loss
has nothing to do with the land, it is rightly
attributed to the structure in the form of exter-
nal obsolescence.
This phenomenon is directly related to tear-
downs. If rents continued to rise, land value
would rise as well and external obsolescence
would increase until the structure value became
negative. Eventually, the structure’s external
obsolescence would become sufficiently large
that it would pay the owner to tear it down and
replace it with a new, correctly sized structure (in
this case, one that is 1,500 square feet).
14
Practical Implications and Conclusions
The purpose of this article has been to highlight
the underlying source of external obsolescence.
A structure suffers from external obsolescence if
and only if the current use is not the property’s
highest and best use, whether this is based on
the functional use or the scale of the building
within a given use.
This idea can be applied in a wide variety of
situations where allocating the impact of external
factors between land and structure values might
otherwise be difficult. For example, in many cases
externalities can have opposite impacts on two
different potential uses. Consider a single-family
home on an arterial street. As traffic on the street
increases, it may lower the value of the parcel as
a single-family home but increase its value for a
retail or office use. Such a change will simultane-
ously increase the value of the land (assuming
the office or retail use is now the highest and best
use) but decrease the value of the existing single-
family structure. The techniques outlined here
can help an appraiser estimate these effects more
accurately and transparently.
11. For simplicity, it is assumed that the structure has no functional obsolescence. If it did, this would be subtracted here as well.
12. Notice that the parcel’s land value rises by more than 20%. This is because the overall value increase is magnified into its land value because
of the property’s “land leverage”; see Raphael W. Bostic, Stanley D. Longhofer, and Christian Redfearn, “Land Leverage: Decomposing
Home Price Dynamics,” Real Estate Economics (Summer 2007), 183–208.
13. Once again, the new rent of the property is related to its highest and best use rent as outlined in footnote 10.
14. It is worth noting that in cases like this, external obsolescence could exceed the remaining physical value of the structure so that the total
structure value is negative. Suppose in the example that the cost of tearing down the existing structure is $15,000. In this case, the structure
value could never fall below –$15,000; if it did, the property owner would simply tear down the existing structure and rebuild the optimal one.
Land Values and External Obsolescence
www.appraisalinstitute.org Spring 2021 • The Appraisal Journal 103
Alternatively, consider how the imposition of
rent controls might affect the value of an apart-
ment property. To the extent that the rent con-
trols do not change the property’s highest and
best use, the entire loss in value from this change
in the legal environment will be attributable to
the land value. If, on the other hand, the parcel’s
highest and best use changes, at least part of the
value loss will be attributable to the structure in
the form of external obsolescence.
Finally, suppose that a parcel is affected by a
nearby environmental catastrophe. As long as
the land still has some positive value after this
event, the external obsolescence of the structure
will simply be the difference between the land
values in the highest and best use and the current
use. If, however, the land becomes worthless
because of the catastrophe, all remaining value
loss will accrue to the structure in the form of
external obsolescence.
To restate this article’s central thesis, external
obsolescence arises when and only when the
existing structure is not the site’s highest and best
use. This simple fact can help practicing apprais-
ers in three ways. First, it allows an appraiser to
quickly and simply determine whether external
factors are affecting the structure value and,
hence, whether an estimate of external obsoles-
cence will be needed. If the current use is the
property’s highest and best use in both type and
scale, no external obsolescence can be present.
All external factors will be captured in the esti-
mated value of the land.
Second, if external obsolescence is present, this
analysis provides a reference point for the magni-
tude of the estimated external obsolescence. In
theory, as long as land value is positive in all
potential uses, external obsolescence must be
equal to the difference between the value of the
land in its optimal use and its value under the cur-
rent use. When an appraiser uses traditional meth-
ods to estimate external obsolescence, the resulting
figure can be compared to this benchmark to help
validate the reasonableness of the estimate.
Finally, the ideas here can help the appraiser
determine whether the independent land value
estimate derived by other means is internally
consistent. If the property’s current use is its
highest and best use and the appraiser cannot
reconcile the cost approach without applying sig-
nificant external obsolescence to the structure,
this raises the question of whether the land value
estimate is correct, since all external influences
in this instance must be attributable the land.
Additional Resources
Suggested by the Y. T. and Louise Lee Lum Library
Appraisal Institute
• Education
• General Appraiser Site Valuation and Cost Approach
• Residential Site Valuation and Cost Approach
• Lum Library, Knowledge Base [Login required]
• Information files—Land and site
• Information files—Value
• Publications
• The Appraisal of Real Estate, fifteenth edition
• In Defense of the Cost Approach
About the Author
Stanley D. Longhofer, PhD, is a full professor and holds the Stephen L. Clark Chair of Real Estate and Finance in
the W. Frank Barton School of Business at Wichita State University. He is also the founding director of the WSU Center
for Real Estate, through which he provides research and educational services to real estate professionals in the Central
Plains region, and is the author of the Center’s annual Kansas Housing Markets Forecast series. He holds a BBA in
economics from Wichita State University and MS and PhD degrees in economics from the University of Illinois.
Contact: [email protected]
