My client has a pie shaped lot (67). Does he have 2 side lines or would you say that the rear line is continuous along with the rest of the south lines of the lots in the same block?
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk
Punt (that's a suggestion).
If you're looking at zoning/setbacks, it might depend on which way the house is oriented.
The house is pretty close to parallel to the chord of the curve. I've called the city and have asked for a clarification on the definition of side or rear.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk
By our local code: the rear line is the furthest line from the street that joins a common (side lot) line shared with an adjacent lot. And that is paraphrased. Around here that particular lot would have a side lot line of 130.52' and a rear line of 155.22'. The remaining lot line would be considered frontage..
And I've seen a jillion variances in setbacks with pie-shaped lots. Council okays pretty much everything if it "looks" right.
I've never read anywhere where the duties of a registered land surveyor compel him or her to decipher setbacks or restrictions that were either poorly written or else written with the lack of forethought to cover vagaries like you've encountered.
If I felt like I had to declare or show one way or another, I would err on the more restrictive side every time. But really, I fail to see how it is your responsibility to clarify this. Let the title company decide how they want to handle it.
This is a local authority question. What ever the local authority says is the way to go. If they don't answer, go with the most restrictive situation on both sides.
Refer to the definitions in the zoning code. Where I live, there would be no rear on lot 67.
What I have also seen on lots like this is to construct an arc matching the rear yard setback from the point (SE corner) and intersect the side yard setback from the two side lines.
I could argue that he has two side lines, and his rear line is a single point, line of length zero. That probably won't fly with bureaucrats who haven't studied much mathematics.
Edit: I like ekillo's post, which amounts to the same thing I was trying to describe.
Lot 58 seems to have a similar config... if so, how is that lot being restricted? Precedent in the neighborhood is usually more convincing.
arctan(x) what is your roll in all this? Yep, it matters... do you want it to be all sidelines or more rear yard?
ekillo, post: 425413, member: 773 wrote: What I have also seen on lots like this is to construct an arc matching the rear yard setback from the point (SE corner) and intersect the side yard setback from the two side lines.
That's what I've seen locally. A couple of the jurisdictions add a stipulation that the rear setback line has to be a certain minimum length. You end up drawing in the side setbacks, then sliding equidistant up the side setback lines until the rear line is the required length. This method typically only comes into play on thin pie shaped lots.
arctan(x), post: 425391, member: 6795 wrote: My client has a pie shaped lot (67). Does he have 2 side lines or would you say that the rear line is continuous along with the rest of the south lines of the lots in the same block?
Judging by the way that the plat was drafted, I'd guess that the subdivision was recorded in about 1990 or so. Is the house more than twenty years old as well?
[Edit: apparently not:
@33.0008728,-97.1932155,202m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m5!3m4!1s0x864dd170dc95681b:0x64f627ba515fe812!8m2!3d33.0005815!4d-97.1918368?hl=en"> https://www.google.com/maps/place/Oak+Hill+Dr,+Trophy+Club,+TX+76262/ @33.0008728,-97.1932155,202m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m5!3m4!1s0x864dd170dc95681b:0x64f627ba515fe812!8m2!3d33.0005815!4d-97.1918368?hl=en
flyin solo, post: 425398, member: 8089 wrote: I've never read anywhere where the duties of a registered land surveyor compel him or her to decipher setbacks or restrictions that were either poorly written or else written with the lack of forethought to cover vagaries like you've encountered.
If I felt like I had to declare or show one way or another, I would err on the more restrictive side every time. But really, I fail to see how it is your responsibility to clarify this. Let the title company decide how they want to handle it.
Nothing compels a land surveyor to do any work, but why would you not want more proffesional oppurtunites? In the communities I have the most experience on I can't think of any one else besides a land surveyor and the local governmet itself who could provide that service.
Quite often guidance is provided by a diagram in the zoning book. Sometimes just words. A generally rectangular corner lot can have 1 or 2 front yards and 1 or 2 rear yards and sometimes it is the way the house is oriented that governs which is the rear. As to a pie shaped lot I have even seen it explained as 2 side yards, with the rear being an arc per the rear setback distance from the point.
There is no one answer.
Paul in PA
A common 'out' when things are confusing used to be 'however planning asserts'. These days you see morr flexibility where the owner can pick from a few options then live with that choice.
An arc from the rear corner is a very reasonable solution. Absent further language I would advocate that position for my client.
I got involved in this one because the owner wants to build an outdoor kitchen by the pool. He needs the building setback lines shown on a drawing for the City permitting department. This subdivision was created in 1976 and replatted in 1977. The home is listed as being built in 1979.
If the 155.22' line is the rear line then there would be a 20' building line along that line.
If the 155.22' line is the side line, then there is just a 10' wide easement centered on the property line.
The southwest corner of the home extends about 12 feet into the 20' building line.
If they treat the SE corner point as the rear, the 20' arc wouldn't interfere with the outdoor kitchen.
I'm leaning toward this being a side line, but we'll see what the City has to say about it.
arctan(x), post: 425441, member: 6795 wrote: I got involved in this one because the owner wants to build an outdoor kitchen by the pool. He needs the building setback lines shown on a drawing for the City permitting department. This subdivision was created in 1976 and replatted in 1977. The home is listed as being built in 1979.
If the 155.22' line is the rear line then there would be a 20' building line along that line.
If the 155.22' line is the side line, then there is just a 10' wide easement centered on the property line.
The southwest corner of the home extends about 12 feet into the 20' building line.If they treat the SE corner point as the rear, the 20' arc wouldn't interfere with the outdoor kitchen.
I'm leaning toward this being a side line, but we'll see what the City has to say about it.
If the ordinance doesnt say otherwise, just draw it up with the arc as the rear setback. Act surprised if they question it...
I was involved in a court case about this very same question. The Judge concluded the a line cannot be both a side line and a rear line. Because both adjoining lots utilize the lines as side lines, they are both side lines. The rear setback was determined to be radial from the point that the two side lines intersect.
Let your local planning department make the call and have them put it in writing. Show their decision on the plat and reference the letter.
A misrepresentation on zoning, even by mistake, will teach you why Surveyors should stay out of the business of determining zoning issues.
It comes down to the fact that zoning issues are malleable and as such cannot be a statement of fact. It's an opinion. Facts are what we should deal in.
