The Attorney General of Texas 

March 29, 1978 

JOHN L. HILL 

Attorney General 

Honorable Chet Brooks 

Chairman, Senate Committee 

Opinion No. H- 1146 

on Human Resources 

Senate Chamber 

Austin, Texas 767R 

Re: Approval of subdivision 

plats by a county. 

Dear Senator Brooks: 

You have requested our opinion concerning the authority of the Fort 

Bend County Commissioners Court to require developers to build sidewalks 

and to dedicate’s percentage of residential acreage to other public use prior 

to receiving plat approval. You have asked whether these requirements and 

others contained in the Fort Rend County “Policies for the Approval of 

Subdivision Plats” are in conflict with state statutes. 

Fort Bend County has a population of less than 190,000 and is thus 

governed by article 6626i, V.T.C.S. As we explained in Attorney General 

Opinion H-1057 (1977), article 6626a was enacted in order to provide counties 

of less than 190,000 population authority to establish some substantive 

requirements for the approval of plats. Like article 2372k, V.T.C.S., which 

applies to larger counties, article 6626a was a response to the court’s decision 

in Commissioners Court v. Frank Jester Development Co., 199 S.W.2d 1004 

(Tex. Civ. App. - Dallas 1947, writ ref’d n.r.e.1, in which it was held that 

counties had no authority to establish such substantive requirements. The 

holding of this case remains undisturbed except by articles 6626a and 2372k; 

thus, any substantive requirements for the approval of plats must be 

authorized by those articles. 

Section 3 of article 6626a authorizes counties to require owners of a 

subdivision to provide for rights of way and street cuts. The only general 

authority provided is contained in subsections (e) and (f) which authorize 

“reasonable specifications” for the construction of roads and streets and for 

the provision of adequate drainage for such roads, 

The requirements promulgated by Fort Bend County are valid only to 

the extent they are authorized by article 6626a. The commissioners court 

may adopt regulations requiring street cuts and rights of way in the 

p. 4656 
. 

Honorable Chet Brooks - Page 2 (H-1146) 

dimensions authorized by article 6626a, section 3. They may promulgate drainage 

specifications as well as reasonable specifications for the construction of roads or 

streets, “considering the amount and kind of travel over said streets.” In our 

opinion, our courts would probably hold that the specifications for streets may 

rem&e the construction of sidewalks. where it can be shown that reouirement is 

reasonable in light of the amount andkind of travel over the streets. ‘Grapotte v. 

Adam 

-75 

111 S.W.2d 690 (Tex. 1938); Parra v. P. W. Woolworth Co., Inc., 545 S.W.2d 

596 Tex. Civ. App. - Rl Paso 1977, no writ); Jones v. City of Mineola, 203 S.W.2d 

1020 (Tex. Civ. ADD. - Texarkana 1947. writ ref’d). We therefore believe that the 

authority to e&&h street specifications &I .include the authority to require 

sidewalks, within the limitations set out in article 66264 section 3(e). We fiid no 

provision authorizing requirements for areas of other public use, and conclude that 

such regulations would not be valid. 

SUMMARY ~, 

Fort Bend County may provide requirements for the 

approval of subdivision plats only to the extent such 

requirements are authorixed by article 6626a Requirements 

concernfng sidewalks will probably be held valid as part of 

reasonable specifications for streets. Requirements ‘for 

other areas of public use are not authorized by article 6626a 

and are invalid. 

APPROVED: 

DAMM. KENDALL, Pi$ Assistant 

C. ROBERT HEA 

Opinion Committee 

jst 

up. 4657