What is the difference between a gross and net lotsize?

[yes4me]

I see this on the plat map and I don't get it. Please someone explain what is going on.

 

[Mike Kennedy]

One California example: City of Millbrae - See FAQ #3. Other Municipal Definitions may vary, check the Municipality where the property is located. Also obtain a Site Survey (Planning, Zoning, Building Departments) as Tax Plats are typically "estimates" for taxation purposes.

http://www.ci.millbrae.ca.us/index.aspx?page=126

 

[sputnam]

Without additional info that isn't shown on the map provided....I don't get it either. Most of the time when I've seen gross/net it's been about Right of Way or ponds or something similar.

 

[Restrain]

Street may be on an easement ROW. I would comment, attach the plat, and use the Net site size.

 

[Sid Holderly]

Not understandable on what is shown. Net is generally smaller than gross in weights and sizes. The lot shown is only about an acre inside the lines. In this area Net is used for net buildable area and Gross for surveyed size including all ROW, roads etc that is within the legal description.

 

[Meandering]

typically, Gross is the entire parcel of land, but net is the usable portion for the lot owner. The differences between gross and net land areas can be easements of all types or wetlands.

Here, it is not uncommon for metes and bounds descriptions to go to the middle of the roads, so the entire parcel would include the roadway, while the net parcel will be the land that is not in the roadway or roadway right of way. This is true of PUDs that put drainage or retention ponds on a larger parcel and sell the parcel to a builder, the drainage pond will not be included in the net acreage but the lot owner will be paying taxes on that portion of land that contains the drainage pond.

.

 

[Ken B]

You need to check your Land Development Code. Based on my experience, net is the space within the property boundary. Gross may include area within the right of way calculated by extending the side boundary lines into one or both of the ROWs adjacent to the property.

In your case, the gross area is almost 5,010 SF larger than the net. This is important if your permitted building size is calculated by gross area and not net area. How the gross site area is calculated is not as important as its importance in calculating the building size which could constructed on the site. On a net area comparison, a developer would likely pay more for a site which has a larger gross area and upon which he could construct a larger building, as a result. Therefore, you may want to compare sites based on gross area.

And taking a second look at the plat, I now don't get it either, because the gross is 5,010 SF smaller than the net, not larger than the net, which is unusual based on my experience. But again, the importance regards which area is used to caculate permitted building area.

 

[Ken B]

Assuming the plat is oriented with north being the top of the plat, if you extend the south boundary line 20' west into the ROW running parallel to the western boundary and extend the east boundary line 20' north into the ROW running parallel to the northern boundary, the indicated area is close to the gross acreage reported on the plat, if we assume the site has right angles. The margin of error using an assumption of right angles is so slight as to indicate the subject's gross area is accurate if it is calculated by extending the calculated area 20' into each of the ROWs.

The area within the boundary lines of the plat is around 1.117 acres, less the area outside of the NWC radius, which is minimal. It is possible there is a transcription error on the plat. Again, I assumed right angles.

If this is a real world problem that needs to be solved, I would check with the zoning and planning department to determine how they calculate gross and net area. If that information indicates the plat is incorrect, I would make the assumption in that regard.

 

[CANative]

Call the County assessor's office and ask for the map maker. Ask him what it means.

 

[Tim Hicks (Texas)]

I have seen lake front lots that stretch into the lake. The net useable lot area is less than the gross lot size.