Lot width measured at building setback line rather than ROW?

[saluki]

Does 2008 have an options for the minimum lot width to be measured at the building setback line rather than the ROW?

If not is this something that is being incorporated into a service pack or future release?

How many people would be interested in this feature?

[C3D_RickGraham]

I would.

wrote in message news:5581274@discussion.autodesk.com...
Does 2008 have an options for the minimum lot width to be measured at the
building setback line rather than the ROW?

If not is this something that is being incorporated into a service pack or
future release?

How many people would be interested in this feature?

[Anonymous]

saluki wrote:
> Does 2008 have an options for the minimum lot width to be measured at
> the building setback line rather than the ROW?
>
> If not is this something that is being incorporated into a service
> pack or future release?
>
> How many people would be interested in this feature?

It's not in the program, I haven't heard it mentioned for a service
pack, and everyone I speak to is interested in it. Manchester knows
about it.

--
Jason Hickey

Civil 3D 2007, SP3
Dell Precision M70
2 GIG RAM, 256 MB nVidia Quadro FX Go1400
Intel Centrino 2 gHz Processor

www.civil3d.com

[mpowelljr]

Yep, that would be an awesome feature, has anyone posted it in the wishes forum?

[C3D_RickGraham]

LOOOOOOONG time ago I did

wrote in message news:5581540@discussion.autodesk.com...
Yep, that would be an awesome feature, has anyone posted it in the wishes
forum?

[Anonymous]

we told Dave S that a long time ago. Even if we get that, lot layout is tricky.

saluki <>
|>Does 2008 have an options for the minimum lot width to be measured at the building setback line rather than the ROW?
|>
|>If not is this something that is being incorporated into a service pack or future release?
|>
|>How many people would be interested in this feature?
James Maeding
Civil Engineer and Programmer
jmaeding - at - hunsaker - dotcom

[acoursen]

Tricky is a nice way of saying it. No need to introduce more complexity. However, I would take having the setbacks automatically offset and dynamic to the parcel lines.

Andy

[saluki]

"No need to introduce more complexity.", i agree however . . .

some municipalities define lot width at the building setback line and the developers expect their lots laid out based on the width at the building line.

Granted it may average out throughout the development, but the developer doesn't want to loes a foot here and a foot there.

Plus you don't want to have some of your lots not meet the minimum requirements.

With no support for lot width at the building line we will be unable to use Civil 3D on half our residential projects.

[jwedding]

The amount of time you spend tweaking lots is insignificant to the amount of
time you spend doing other things in the subdivision process. It doesn't
make sense to think of C3D in terms of single tasks, but in terms of the
job. Perhaps you can lay out lots faster in some other application, but the
95 other tasks that are faster in C3D more than make up for it.

This is a red herring at best.

--
James Wedding, P.E.
Engineered Efficiency, Inc.
Civil 3D 2007
XP Tablet, SP2, 2GHz, 2G
www.eng-eff.com
www.civil3d.com

[Anonymous]

How does this affect whether you can use C3D?

Just layout the lots using Base Acad commands or the LDT Companion Lot tools
(they never had setback measurements either) and convert the linework to
parcels or trace over the linework with Parcellines. Heck, I have yet to
find an auto-parcel layout tool that I've used more than the basic Autocad
commands.

Using this excuse to not use C3D sounds more like you don't want to use it
anyway.

wrote in message news:5582468@discussion.autodesk.com...

With no support for lot width at the building line we will be unable to use
Civil 3D on half our residential projects.

[acoursen]

I'm not saying it wouldn't be nice, but parcels are a bear in its current state. And what do you do with lots fronting on the outside of a curved street? I have a municipality that allows shorter frontages at the ROW but must meet the width at front setback. Not along the curved portion but as measured along a line tangent to the mid point of the setback.

>>With no support for lot width at the building line we will be >>unable to use Civil 3D on half our residential projects.

I don't see why you can't use the C3D on all you residential projects. Are you looking to automate the whole process? While it is becoming a powerful tool, there will always be trial and error in any design process, including (especially?)parceling. What I do when I need measuring of the setback width I will draw a line and label it with a general line label. Then you can tweak parcel and setback line and get pretty quick feedback on what you have vs. what's allowed. There may be better ways but it works for me.

Andy

[Anonymous]

saluki wrote:

> With no support for lot width at the building line we will be unable
> to use Civil 3D on half our residential projects.


With what program and method do you currently lay out parcels?

Just because there's a tool doesn't mean you have to use it. Lines,
curves, offsets, etc. still work fine in Civil 3D - we CAN lay out lots
the way we've done it for years.

Saying you can't use C3D because of lot layout tools is like me saying I
can't drive a car because it doesn't have chrome wheels...

--
Jason Hickey

Civil 3D 2008
Dell Precision M70
2 GIG RAM, 256 MB nVidia Quadro FX Go1400
Intel Centrino 2 gHz Processor

www.civil3d.com

[mpowelljr]

I typically just offset my setback to the correct distance, rough in my parcels with slide angle and then start at one end with a circle that the radius is the minimum width with the center placed at the intersection of the setback and the first line of the over all parcel boundary and then grip edit my parcels to the intersection of the circle and the setback line, let the intelligent object do the rest of the work for me by extending itself back to the ROW line and to the rear parcel line... is there a quicker way?

[Anonymous]

that's been on the wish list for awhile now.

you can layout lots from the setback lines you have to calc. the arc length that you need for each radius. (take 4ever!!) it needs to have an option to use short chords and to lock in the min. value even is the lot is concave or convex.
but iam sure when that is released it will not work any how.

[billneu]

http://www.surveymonkey.com/Users/98180881/Surveys/841903733647/5482649D-D543-402A-8FCC-CA373F7A6965.asp?U=841903733647

See wish number 12.

To see the results of the above poll go to my Blog and on the left hand side you will see a link to the results.

Bill Neuhauser P.E.
Alignex Inc.
www.c3dtrixbybillneu.com

[dana.probert]

i have used a trick where i make a bogus frontage line at the setback and lay in the lots that way, then erase that line, explode the inside lines, extend, etc, etc. it doesnt take too long and makes for magically even frontage at the setback line.

it is fast, easy to erase and start over, easy to redo, easy to iterate.

civil 3d parceling is great and fast for some stretches, while your old standby methods still work fine along the tricky parts. i have personally found for my projects (i can;'t speak for other parts of the country) that the time saved on the fast stretches is pretty significant over the old LDT and ACAD methods I used to use.