JIM MAlTOX 

Attorney General 

Suprem Coutt BulldInS 

P. 0. Box 12S4S 

Auslln. TX. 78711.2548 

51214752w)l 

1d.r 9101874.1337 

T*lecopler s12J47M2SS 

714 J4ckMfl. Suite 700 

qaaar. TX. 752024508 

214i742dS44 

4824 Ah,,4 A”% SultO 180 

El P44o.n. 7wo52793 

01- 

n 

31 Texan. wte 700 

HOUIfon. TX. 770029111 

713/22358(# 

MS Broaw~y. SIllto 312 

&ubboch TX. 704014479 

006i747.5222 

uo9 N. Tenfh. Suit. 6 

MCAllm, TX. 7ssol-l-se5 

512fM24M7 

200 Mrln Plaza. SUN* 400 

hn AnIonlo. TX. 7-2797 

51212254101 

An Equ4l Opponunltyl 

Alfkm4llre Acflon Employer 

The Attorney General of Texas 

December 30. 1983 

Honorable Robert D. Miller 

Howard County Attorney 

Room 205, Courthouse 

Big Spring, Texan 79720 

Opinion No. JM-121 

Rs: Approval of maps or plats 

by city council or city planning 

cmssion under article 974a. 

V.T.C.S. 

Dear Mr. Miller: 

You have requested our opinion on several questions concerning a 

city’s authority to extend tte subdivision ordinance into approved 

subdivision plate within the city’s extraterritorial jurisdiction 

~[hereinafter RTJ]. You have asked what cltandards a city may or is 

required to adopt in Its approval process of subdivision plats in ~the 

ETJ. You have also aeked whether a city may adopt a different set of 

standard8 for subdivisions located within the ETJ AS opposed to those 

located within the city limits and whether the city may adopt 

different standarda within the RTJ itself for aubdlvl6lons dependirig 

upon the proximity of a rubdlvialon to the corporate limits of the 

city. In your final question you ask whether a city may require a 

subdivision to be brought up to city standards as A condition for 

annexation or furnishing services to the area. 

Many of your questions up be l nawered by article 6626~. 

‘i7.T.C.S.. A. -ended during the most recent legislative session. Actr, 

.1983, 68th Leg.. :ch. 327. at 1717. This statute, formerly applicable 

only to count1es.uader 190.000 population , controls the plat approval 

proceaa and the RTJ for ell countlen vith an exception not pertinent 

to your inquiry. We note that the former version of article 6626a WAS 

placed in the county road end bridge act without amendments. Acta 

1983, 68th Leg., ch. 288, 12.402. at 1459. Rowever, eince chapter 

327 is a later enactment of the came legislative session. we believe 

that it controls over the subdivision regulation provisions. sections 

2.401 and 2.402, of the county Road and Bridge Act. 

Article 6626~ nov provides in part as follows: 

Sec. 1. (A) [applies to all counties1 

(b) The owner of any tract of land situated 

without the corporate limit6 of any city in the 

State of Texan. who may hereafter divide the same 

in two (2) or more parts for the purpose of laying 

p. 510 
Honorable Robert D. Miller - Page 2 (JM-121) 

out any subdivision of any tract of land. or an 

additton without the corporate limits of any tom 

or city, or for laying out suburban lots or 

building lots. and for the purpose of laying out 

streets, AllS,‘S. or parks, or other portions 

intended for public use, or the use of purchasers 

or ounere of lots fronting thereon or adjacent 

thereto, shall cause a plat to be made thereof, 

which shall accurately describe all of said 

subdivision or . . . giving the dimensions thereof 

of said subdivision or addition and the dimensions 

Of Ally lots, streets, alleys, parks, or other 

portions of same. intended to be dedicated to 

public use or for the use of purchasers or owners 

of lots fronting thereon or adjacent thereto, 

provided. however, that no plat of any subdivision 

of any tract of land or any addition shall be 

recorded’unless the same shall accurately describe 

all of said subdivision . . . . 

Section 3 of article 6626~ grants to the commissioners court the 

authority to adopt requirements for the streets right-of-way in 

subdivisions In addition to the “shoulder-to-shoulder” width. Section 

3(e) grants the commissioners court the authority to adopt “reasonable 

specificationsl’ for “road construction within the SubdivIsion” and 

section 3(f) gives the county Authority to- adopt road drainage 

regulations. The subdivider may also be required to post a bond with 

a county in an amount not to exceed the estimated cost of road 

constructlon. Id. 53(g). 

- 

The commissioners Court may refuse to approve a subdivislon plat 

unless it meets with the county’s subdivision road standards. Id. 54. 

Section 4A(a) is A new provision and specifically authorit= the 

county to sue for injunction and damages in the event that the 

county’s road specification are ViOlAtAd. It also declares A 

violation of the regulations adopted by the commissioners court to be 

A class “B” misdemeanor. 

Article 6626a.a. V.T.C.S., .is A new statute adopted this year. 

Acts 1983. 68th Leg., ch. 327. 52. at 1720. It provides in part in 

section 2 AS follows: 

under t extraterritorial 

:~rifE:;on as defin:d b:“&rsticlr 970a] no plat 

shall be filed with the county clerk without the 

authorization of both the city and the county. 

Inside said extraterritorial jurisdiction, the 

city shall have independent authority to regulate 

subdivisions under [article 970a) and [974a] and 

other statutes applicable to cities: and the 

county shall have independent authority to 

p. 511 
Honorable Robert D. Miller - Page 3 (JM-121) 

regulate subdivisions under [article 6626a] and 

other statutes applicable to counties. Inside 

said extraterritorial jurisdiction vhenever such 

city regulations conflict with such county 

regulations. the more stringent provisions of such 

regulations shall govern; and in unincorporated 

areas outside said extraterritorial jurisdiction 

city shall have no authority to regulate 

subdivisions or to authorize the filing of plate, 

except AS provided by The Interlocal Corporation 

Act [article 4413 (32~11. 

This uew statute -states that a city has authority to regulate 

subdivisions pursuant to articles 970. and 9748 but that the city has 

uo authority to regulate eubdlvleione outside of the city’s ETJ. 

Article 970.. V.T.C.S.. the Municipal Annexation Act, eetabliehee the 

ETJ of the city of Big Spring at one mile. Id. 13(A)(2). Section 4 

of the Municipal Annexation Act permits 7 city to extend Its 

subdivision ordinance into its ETJ: 

The governing body 9f any city may extend by 

ordinance to all of the area under its 

extraterritorial jurisdiction the application of 

such c*ty’s ordinance eetebllshing rules and 

regulations governing plate and the subdivision of 

land; provided, that any violation .of any 

provision of any such ordinance outside the 

corporate limits of the city, but within such 

city’s extraterritorial jurisdiction. shall not 

constitute A misdemeanor under such ordinance nor 

shall any fine provided for in such ordinance be 

applicable to a violation within ruch SXtrAterritorial jurisdiction. However, any city vhf& 

extends the AppliCAtiOn Of Its ordinance 

establishing rules and regulations governing plate 

And the subdivision of land to the area under its 

extraterritorial jurisdiction shall have the right 

to Institute an action in the district court to 

enjoin the violation .of any provision of such 

ordinance in such extraterritorial jurisdiction. 

and the district court shall have the power to 

grant any or all types of injunctive relief in 

such cases. 

Article 974a. V.T.C.S.. on the other hand, provides for city plat 

approval of subdivisions within five miles of the city limits. 

Section 1 of article 974. requires developers of subdivisions within 

five miles of a city’s corporate limits to prepare a plat for city 

approval. Section 4 of the statute provides that the city must 

approve a subdivision plat within five miles if the subdivision 

p. 512 
Honorable Robert D. Miller - Page 4 (JM-121) 

conforms to the city’s general growth plan. The section provides in 

full AS fOllOws: 

If such plan or plat, or replat shall conform 

to the general plan of said city and its streets. 

alleys, parks, playgrounds, and public utility 

facilltiee. including those which have been or may 

be laid out. and to the general plan for the 

extension of such city and of its roads. streets, 

and public highways within said city and within 

five miles of the corporate limits thereof, regard 

being had for access to and extension of sewer and 

water mains and the instrumentalities of public 

utilities. and if same shall conform to such 

gAnArA1 mleS And regulatione. if any. governing 

plats and subdivieione of land falling within its 

jurisdiction as the governing body of such city 

may adopt and promulgate to promote the health, 

safety. morale or general welfare of the 

community, and the safe, orderly and healthful 

development of Said cormaunity (which general rules 

and regulations for e&d purposes such cities are 

hereby authorized to adopt and promulgate after 

public hearing held thereon). then it shall be the 

duty of said City Planning Coannission or the 

governing body of such city. AS the case Mayo be, 

to endorse approval upon the plat, plat or replat 

submitted to it. 

Section 4. to simply paraphrase, requires the city to approve a 

subdivision plat if it is in harmony with the city’s subdivision 

ordinance. Article 6626 also provides for municipal approval of 

subdivlelon plats within five miles of the corporate limits of any 

municipAllty. The five mile ,range for city approval of subdivision 

plats contained in articles 6626 and 974a is not explicitly repealed 

by the new statute. article 6626~~. However, we believe that the five 

mile range is impliedly repealed and a city may not exercise any plAt 

approval authority outside of its AXtrAterritOriAl jurisdiction which 

for some cities may be lees. than five miles. Article 6626aa 

explicitly states that outside of the ETJ a city has no authority to 

regulate subdivisions or to approve plats. 

We believe that a city is not authorized to adopt a lesser set of 

standards for the approval of subdivisions within the city’s ETJ. 

Article 970a provides for the extension of the city’s subdivision 

ordinance. Regardless of whether a city has extended its subdivision 

ordinance or not into Its ETJ, article 974a requires a city to approve 

any subdivision plat therein If it conforms to the city’s “general 

plan” for Streets, parks, utilities, and the like, and also if the 

subdivision plat conforms to the 

p. 513 
Honorable Robert D. Miller - Page 5 (JM-121) 

general rules and regulations, if any. governing 

plate and subdivisions of land falling vithin its 

jurisdiction as the governing body of such city 

may adopt and promulgate. 

Id. Any rules that a city adopts concerning the approval of 

rubdivieion plats must relate to the promotion of the “health. safety. 

morals or general welfare of the community, and the safe, orderly and 

healthful development of said community.” Id. Obviously, this is a - 

broad grant of authority. 

Our determination that a city may not adopt different standards 

for subdivieion plat approval in them ETJ makes it unnecessary to 

answer your inquiry concerning the authority of A city to require the 

subdivision to be brought up to standards before annexation. 

SUMMARY 

A city may approve or disapprove subdivision 

plate vithin that city’ a extraterritorial 

jurisdiction established under article 970a if the 

plats conform to 

JIM MATTOX 

Attorney General of Texas 

TOM GREEN 

First Aeeietant Attorney General 

DAVID R. RICHARDS 

Executive Assistant Attorney General 

prepared by David Brooks 

ASSiStAnt Attorney General 

APPROVED: 

OPINION COMMITTEE 

Rick Gilpin. Chairman 

David Brooks 

Colln Carl 

Susan Garrison 

Jim Moellinger 

Nancy Sutton 

p. 514