On Fri, 30 Jul 2004 11:13:40 -0700, Mary Krimmel wrote: >At 10:26 AM 7/30/04 -0400, you wrote: >>Can anyone assist me with calculating the acreage of the following >>irregular shaped lot? >> >>32.00 x 124.27 x 173.74 x 100.79 x 32.69 x 83.88 x 288.74 x 328.53 >> >>Replies to firstname.lastname@example.org >> >>Thanks, Darlene > >Problems like yours come up again and again on this list. It's surprising >that the message hasn't reached everyone who is aware of the list that for >any area with more than three sides, the area cannot be found from only the >lengths of the sides.
I'm sure that by now, it has surpassed even the angle trisection.
>No one can help much without more measurements, either diagonals to break >up the lot into virtual triangles or else angles, which should add to 1040 >degrees. Although you do not say, I assume that the measurements are in >feet and they list the sides in order. It is hard to believe that the edges >of such an irregular lot would be measured so precisely as to four >significant digits. Perhaps you can make do with an estimate if it is not >practical to measure the diagonals or the angles. Can you get a surveyor's >record of the lot from some official source like county records?
This used to be my line. I just want to say that there is nothing unusual about representing the length of a boundary course to the nearest hundredth of a foot, no matter how large or irregular the parcel is. In fact, it is the standard everywhere I have worked in the United States.
If those dimensions came from a deed description or a plat, then they are probably accompanied by bearings. Include those with the description and it is likely that someone here can help. I say "likely" out of optimism, not confidence. Deed descriptions are often written by people who are not surveyors and have no understanding of the geometry they are putting on record.