Corner-Plot Envelope and the 'Relaxation Later' Instruction
Your firm is approached by a developer for a 20-marla (about 4,500 sq ft) corner plot in a Lahore housing scheme. The plot measures 50 ft by 90 ft and abuts a 30-ft internal road on the short side and a 40-ft road on the long side. The client wants shops on the ground floor, three residential floors above, and basement parking for 12 cars. The scheme brochure promises 'maximum covered area'. The building control authority's verified bylaws for this scheme allow a maximum FAR of 1:4, ground coverage of 65%, a front setback of 15 ft, a side setback of 5 ft, and one car space per 1,000 sq ft of covered area. The client's draft shows 72% coverage, a 10-ft front setback, and 9 parking spaces, arguing that the corner location 'deserves' relaxation. Neighbours have objected in writing about parking spillover. The client asks you to submit the draft as an application and to 'sort out the relaxation later'.
1. Calculate the bylaw-compliant envelope and identify which elements of the draft plan fail. Show your working.
Read the worked answer
Plot area = 50 × 90 = 4,500 sq ft. At FAR 1:4, total covered area = 18,000 sq ft. At 65% ground coverage, maximum footprint = 2,925 sq ft. The draft's 72% coverage = 3,240 sq ft, which is 315 sq ft over. The 10-ft front setback is 5 ft short of the required 15 ft. Parking at one space per 1,000 sq ft of covered area requires 18 spaces for 18,000 sq ft, not 9; the basement's 12 spaces are also short unless additional spaces are provided elsewhere. I would not submit the draft. I would redraw to a 2,925 sq ft footprint with the required setbacks, confirm which road frontage is legally the front on a corner plot, and provide 18 spaces. If the client still wants relaxation, I would file a written variance application with a parking and traffic statement, a neighbour-impact statement, and the client's written instruction - not promise approval.
2. The client says submitting first and seeking relaxation later is standard practice and will save two months. How do you respond, and what do you put on file?
Read the worked answer
I would explain that 'submit first, relax later' is not a neutral scheduling tactic. A non-compliant application can be rejected; if approved in error, the approval can be challenged or the work stopped, and the architect's name remains on the drawings. The client also risks losing the two months and paying for revisions. I would recommend a pre-application meeting with the building control authority, then either a compliant submission or a properly documented variance with the neighbour objections addressed. On file I would place my written advice, the client's written instruction if he insists, the bylaw extract relied on, and a clear note that I have not certified compliance. I would not sign a drawing or certificate I know to be non-compliant.