Site - 120 Feet wide - Wide enough ?

Purchased the site and it works out 135 sq ft wide now ! Site taken from the ditch and not the middle of the road and i got .95 of acre not .88 ;-)
 
1. Sq. Feet is a measure of area not width ( or indeed length).

2. Surely to God you didn't think that your site was measured from the middle of the road?

I suspect sydthebeat was right.
 
he is on about road frontage, whats the big mystery?

And Billk, before you start trying to be a smart man, get your information right, a site IS measured from the middle of the road for ownership purpose, "surely to god" you would know this? ;)

Thanks for the lesson on sq feet though, never knew that.
 
Having gone through a site purchase myself, I can confirm that one of the first things I learned was that the Length of the site was measured from the middle of the road to the back of the site. Our site measured 35m wide by 78 metres long. I think the O P wants opinions on whether a more square site rather than a rectangular one would be more suitable for building. IMO I would prefer a recangular one, with a long back garden. More room to sides of building doesn't do it for me, whats to gain from it ?

Yours

Secman
 
Firstly, i hope to god the OP has gotten his answer to his question. Im not going to go into how his width increased because its measured from the centre of the road..... his house must be at 90deg to it... and thats a whole other issue....

Secondly, regarding whether the area is to include the road or not.. a few points..
If you agree to purchase a site of say 0.5 acres, that will the area of land you will occupy.... not including the road.....that 0.5 acres will be measured as actual land area.
Its only in the marking of Land registry maps does this 'middle of the road' issue occur. This is simply a residual convention that has continued since its inception. Therefore where your 0.5 acres is marked for land registry, its marked to the centre of the public road and the area the measured... so it could end up at 0.6 or whatever.
This actually means nothing.... it does not mean that you own the public road. You will see in situations where the road is not public that the area is not measured to the centre of the road. I supposed its just a measure to ensure all land is registered.
 
I asked for the site to be measured from the ditch not the middle of the road like it was on the map, they couldn't increase the lenght and i push it up to .95 acre, therefore the width went to around 135 ft. Sorry if i confused you by placing the sq ft instead of ft. This post will be deleted if not edited immediately lads, some of ye need to have a good look at yourselfs, the sound guys came back with a decent answer !
 
Louthman...

if your site is 135 foot wide, and its 0.95 acres in total... then your site is only 28.5 ft deep......... thats a terribly proportioned site..... thats goiung by how you have described your site in the above posts... are you in error???

so if you place a house on it, it wont have a back garden, assuming the dwelling faces the road.
 
Do the maths mate, .95 acre is massive site, 135 is a good width. It is about 320 long ! I will have some Garden !
 
I have just recieved planning permission for a 2500 sq ft house on a 1 acre site, (112 feet wide). The site is wide enough - so long as you can satisfy the visibility splays there should be no problem widthwise.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top