Re: RS vs. CR What are the differences?
Posted: Mon Aug 28, 2023 1:14 pm
In simplest term, material, by legal definition means a point at which those two things can no longer be called the same (because they have s significant, or material impact elsewhere).
Let's look at this little more closely - in building terms, when it comes to encroachments and setback lines, most items, even in tight areas are looked at within a tenth. (Zoning, planning, permitting) you are only dealing sub tenth in highly packed downtowns or high-rise buildings when you have to deal with fitting steelwork. Even in older downtowns, no-one is likely to have an issue over a tenth.
So if you are dealing with 0.07' and calling it the same thing, the risk of creating a problem by calling them the same thing is negligible, or immaterial.
0.5', in same downtown scenario, very likely material. In minimum size subdivision lots, probably material, in large agricultural or open space lands, probably not material.
Another way Material is described is "likely to result in a different outcome" (when making decisions based on the results).
For example, is it likely to result in a land title dispute? A utility suddenly not being covered by an easement or a ROW? Encroachment likely to cause a dispute? (Does anyone care of a zero lot line building is 0.05' over or under? How much time would you have to spend surveying a good sampling of a building facade to determine if it os 0.05' over or under, and how high does the precision of your PL need to be to have that level of certainty???
Maybe others have had to do this, only time I ever had to worry about something this tight was when fitting prefab steel together, or setting up a control network.
If we had accuracy standards for different types of surveys, we could conceivably have some guidelines of ranges within which something would transition from immaterial to convincingly material, or expressed as risk scales.
Let's look at this little more closely - in building terms, when it comes to encroachments and setback lines, most items, even in tight areas are looked at within a tenth. (Zoning, planning, permitting) you are only dealing sub tenth in highly packed downtowns or high-rise buildings when you have to deal with fitting steelwork. Even in older downtowns, no-one is likely to have an issue over a tenth.
So if you are dealing with 0.07' and calling it the same thing, the risk of creating a problem by calling them the same thing is negligible, or immaterial.
0.5', in same downtown scenario, very likely material. In minimum size subdivision lots, probably material, in large agricultural or open space lands, probably not material.
Another way Material is described is "likely to result in a different outcome" (when making decisions based on the results).
For example, is it likely to result in a land title dispute? A utility suddenly not being covered by an easement or a ROW? Encroachment likely to cause a dispute? (Does anyone care of a zero lot line building is 0.05' over or under? How much time would you have to spend surveying a good sampling of a building facade to determine if it os 0.05' over or under, and how high does the precision of your PL need to be to have that level of certainty???
Maybe others have had to do this, only time I ever had to worry about something this tight was when fitting prefab steel together, or setting up a control network.
If we had accuracy standards for different types of surveys, we could conceivably have some guidelines of ranges within which something would transition from immaterial to convincingly material, or expressed as risk scales.