Building setback??

First topic message reminder :

TGIS po mga master.. ask ko lang po kung niimplement paba ung building setback sa building code sa mga common sa residential area? pasincya po mga master d kasi ako arki kaya tanung lang ako ng tanung dito. salamat po

.

Well, if that is what you think is right, it's up to you.

My position is, a mere subdivision rule cannot supercede a law which guarantees both the right of the lot owner and the state.

"the rule is this: the more stringent (or stricter) requirements prevail."

This is only applicable if we are comparing like for like - Law vs. another Law. Example: Fire Code of the Philippines Vs. National Building Code. You cannot compare a Law created by Congress and signed by the President of the Philippines to a rule created by subdivision homeowners.

.

^this is not what I think. honestly, kung ako lang ang masusunod, as a property owner, syempre mas gusto ko mas malaki ang floor area ko. dun na ako sa 2 meter setback restriction lang. what you need to know is when people buy properties (most especially in high-end villages), you are bound by the village's deed of restrictions. this is considered a contract that the property owner is bound to follow. in fact, some property developers ANNOTATE the deed of restrictions on the title of the owner. as long as the deed of restrictions is not against any law we have, the deed of restrictions prevail. let me make it clear, this is not what I think. ask any architect or real estate broker who are updated with policies, they will know. hindi ko ito gawa-gawa. kung 4 meters ang nakalagay sa deed of restrictions, 4 meters ang masusunod at hindi 2 meters.

tama si redbull, minsan mas malaki pa ang setback requirements ng subd kesa sa NBC, pero napansin ko na sa mga subd na malalaki ang cut ng lote ito madalas ma encounter. As an architect, you have to follow their guidelines, kung ipipilit mo na dapat 2 mts. lang, walang mangyayari sa reklamo mo, in the end, the owner will just say, "sige sundin mo na lang" para matuloy lang ang project,,we just don't know kung anong reason ng mga subd. Anfd take note, minsan mas strict pa ang subd sa pagpapatupad ng mga guidelines kesa sa munisipyo.

.

O siya. I rest my case.

.

Subdivision Developments follows the Rules stated on the National Housing Authority and with the general consideration stated on the PD1096. After the development additional interlan guidelines will be created which is called the "BY LAWS". which governs now certain restriction to all homeowners that is why models units on different types of lot subdivision are being created or constructed not to mislead all buyers.

.

I consulted my alter-ego and he brought me here >>> http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2000/dec2000/gr_134284_2000.html

Wow! thanks for sharing, very interesting read.

I want to share also kung anong ginagawa ng ibang owners, which is very similar sa case na ito. Ang iba naman, nagsusubmit sila ng plans for approval sa subd which follows the rules and guidelines of the subd. And yun din ang sinusubmit nila sa building permit. But, kapag construction phase na, irerevise na nila ang mga plans with violation without the knowledge of the subd. Well kung hindi sila masisita, e di lusot sila di ba, pero just in case masita sila ng subd. hindi na nila irerevise yung plan according sa guidelines.

Ang consequence nito is, hindi na nila ma rerefund yung construction bond from the subd. Which is hundreds of thousands sa mga exclusive subd. Minsan millions pa. But the decision to revise the plans with violations is 100% from the owner. Their point is, ok lang na hindi na nila ma refund yung pera as long as masunod yung gusto nila. Pero the subd will not file a case kasi kumita sila. Kaya ang ginagawa ng mga subd ngayon is, linalakihan nila ang construction bond, sa iba millions na, para sundin talaga ng mga owners ang guidelines nila.

whey09 wrote:tama si redbull, minsan mas malaki pa ang setback requirements ng subd kesa sa NBC, pero napansin ko na sa mga subd na malalaki ang cut ng lote ito madalas ma encounter. As an architect, you have to follow their guidelines, kung ipipilit mo na dapat 2 mts. lang, walang mangyayari sa reklamo mo, in the end, the owner will just say, "sige sundin mo na lang" para matuloy lang ang project,,we just don't know kung anong reason ng mga subd. Anfd take note, minsan mas strict pa ang subd sa pagpapatupad ng mga guidelines kesa sa munisipyo.

tama ka sir whey, what is stated in NBC are just minimum requirements & you can go beyond that... kahit na nasa minimum setback ka na but again may rules and guidelines din ang subdivision na sinusunod, sa ayaw at sa gusto mo pwede nila ipa kickout ang owner pag di sumunod because they have the power to do so, kaya nila ibalik lahat binayad ng owner. Not unless if yung rules and guidelines nila ay mababa pa sa minimum requirements na nakasaad sa NBC pero mahirap yata mangyari iyon ...

whey09 wrote:Wow! thanks for sharing, very interesting read.

I want to share also kung anong ginagawa ng ibang owners, which is very similar sa case na ito. Ang iba naman, nagsusubmit sila ng plans for approval sa subd which follows the rules and guidelines of the subd. And yun din ang sinusubmit nila sa building permit. But, kapag construction phase na, irerevise na nila ang mga plans with violation without the knowledge of the subd. Well kung hindi sila masisita, e di lusot sila di ba, pero just in case masita sila ng subd. hindi na nila irerevise yung plan according sa guidelines.

Ang consequence nito is, hindi na nila ma rerefund yung construction bond from the subd. Which is hundreds of thousands sa mga exclusive subd. Minsan millions pa. But the decision to revise the plans with violations is 100% from the owner. Their point is, ok lang na hindi na nila ma refund yung pera as long as masunod yung gusto nila. Pero the subd will not file a case kasi kumita sila. Kaya ang ginagawa ng mga subd ngayon is, linalakihan nila ang construction bond, sa iba millions na, para sundin talaga ng mga owners ang guidelines nila.

pwede din ganyan mangyari, pag approve sa building permit e rerevise nila yung setback according na sa NBC. pwede sila lulusot diyan.. kasi pasok pa sila sa minimum requirements sa NBC. kahit sa korte mananalo sila kasi Presidential Decree cannot be overpowered by a subdivision rules & regulations... kaya nga lang di na nila makukuha yung bond...

To give more clarity, The reason why their is this "BY LAWS" or the internal policy is to give access for any special arrangement pertaining to the housing unit made into contract between the policy owner(the subdivision) and the member(the home owner)...

oRangE.n.GreeN wrote:.
However....... (to be continued)

hindi ko alam kung ano pa yun "to be continued" mo. baka pareho lang din ng sasabihin ko. let us not get bits and pieces from an article. bottom line of the case brought up by orange.n.green is this: the court asked rosa-diana to pay ayala 2.5M plus 250,000 for lawyer's fees plus development charges (computation is in the article) simply because rosa-diana did not follow the deed of restrictions EVEN IF the building they constructed is not violative of the NBC. pwede naman sabihin ng korte na ang masusunod ay yung requirements sa NBC kaya hindi kailangan magbayad si rosa-diana. pero ang nasunod ay yun guidelines ng ayala. eh since tapos na yun construction ng building, pinabayad na lang si rosa-diana ng mga damages.

anyway, nalihis na tayo sa initial concern ko. baka may iba pang expert dyan. gusto ko lang malaman yun interpretasyon ninyo. salamat.

.


Mr. Redbull. We are in discussion here with the objective of enlightening one another. I trust that you share the same objective. I'll reserve my comment for later.


By the way, pwede po bang malaman kung anong subdivision po ang nag-iimposed ng 4-4-4 sa setback.


.

^hi mr. orange.n.green. i agree with you. i want to be enlightened and i also want others enlightened (if you are referring to my post about the final decision of the court for rosa-diana to pay damages to ayala). i took the initiative to summarize the decision of the court for the benefit of the others who might not have the time to completely read the case.

Possible yung 4-4-4 na setback. That's a very good subdivision if you may ask. Meron kami nagawan, 6-2-2-2 sa main road, 4-2-2-2 sa minor road. all the way up ang setback, roof lang ang pwede magoverhang ng 1m.

Ibang area sa alabang village yata at 5-3-3-3 ang setback. At pag naviolate mo ito, hindi mo na mababawi ang construction bond.

.

Olrayt... Several points mr. redbull:

1. Kung nabasa nyo po ang aking naunang comment, I said "Unless I waive my rights", i.e. enter into a contract or covenant and agree to the deed of restrictions. Kaya nga, I rested my case your honour when you mentioned the "Deed of Restriction".

2. Without the above or without entering into a covenant, again, as per my opening statement your honour, you are not bound by any subd. rules or construction guidelines because it is not a law of the land unlike P.D. 1096 - this is my point.

3. Sa kaso nitong si Rosa-Diana, sa bandang huli ang pinag-uusapan nila ay ang contract na pinirmahan ng magkabilang panig your honour.

Again, ito po yung nakalagay sa aking comment:

"Obligations arising from contracts have the force of law between the contracting parties and should be complied with in good faith." - excerpt from the document

Pero, hindi po na-challenge ang statement ng Trial Court regarding the provisions ng PD 1096.

My interpretation is nanaig ang practicality over the deed of restriction kase nga matagal ng nakatayo ang building at ina-assume ng court your honour na fully tenanted na ito. On the other hand, kung ang pagkakatayo ay labag sa polisiya ng estado na:

"to safeguard life, health, property, and public welfare, consistent with the
principles of sound environmental management and control"

sa aking sariling pananaw, dahil hindi naman tayo abogado, ay malamang pinatanggal na yung extra floors o kaya hindi na pinatirhan.

Kailangan talagang magbayad ni rosa-diana sapagkat ang isinumite nyang plans kay Ayala ay 24-metre high, 7 storey building samantalang ang isinumite nya sa building official ng Makati ay 91.65-metre high, 38 storey building. As it stands, the building is 133.65 metres high! A clear gross violation of the Deed of Restriction - but not violative of P.D. 1096.

At saka, ang ibinayad nya kay Ayala ay presyo lang ng isang unit, gets?





.

bokkins wrote:Possible yung 4-4-4 na setback. That's a very good subdivision if you may ask. Meron kami nagawan, 6-2-2-2 sa main road, 4-2-2-2 sa minor road. all the way up ang setback, roof lang ang pwede magoverhang ng 1m.

Ibang area sa alabang village yata at 5-3-3-3 ang setback. At pag naviolate mo ito, hindi mo na mababawi ang construction bond.

Thanks Bokkins, I am aware na may mga subd. talagang nag-iimpose ng ganyang restrictions. Well, yan ang weakness ng deed of restriction, walang permanent protection kase nga interests lang ng private parties ang pinag-uusapan. Walang third party to legally impose the rules. Sa kabilang banda, may building official at DPWH na nagpapatupad ng PD 1096.


.

mga Idol, saan ko po dapat iconsider ang setback ko from property line? sa porch po ba or sa mismong wall na? sana masagot agad kasi nalilito po ako eh. anyway, this is my first post hehe!

kingrex15 wrote:mga Idol, saan ko po dapat iconsider ang setback ko from property line? sa porch po ba or sa mismong wall na? sana masagot agad kasi nalilito po ako eh. anyway, this is my first post hehe!

Yup sa property line... after considering all required setback now that the time you can design for floor plan...

Magandang araw po sa lahat ng cgpians... may katanungan po ako sa setback kung inaallow ba nila na naka usle ng 0.5m ang CR ng bahay na babawas sa 1.5m required. kagaya ng drawing ito... censya na po sa drawing di po kc architect... thanks po and more power...

Hindi po. Pero kung nasa 2nd floor, pwede. considered as overhang.