ORDER N0. 20768 APPROVAL OF VARIANCE FOR TRACT 123 OF KERRVILLE SOUTH II TO BE DIVIDED INTO TV7O PARTS BY METES AND BOUNDS On this the 27th day of January 1992, upon motion made by Commissioner Morgan, seconded by Commissioner Lackey, the Court UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED BY A VOTE OF 4-0-0, to give variance from notices and the division of tract 123 of Kerrville South II to be divided into two parts by metes and bounds with the approval of the County Attorney's Office. COMMISSIONERS' COURT AGENDA REQUEST ~ncecr riio~ncu nn1G ORIGINAL AND FIVE COPIES OF THI~REQUEST AND DOCUM NTS TO BE REVIEWED BY THE COURT MADE 8Y: ~/7Q~ /e ~/~~i9es MEETING DATE: / 2~ 9~ S PLEASE STATE REASON OFFICE: TIME PREFERRED: /D.'3o ESTIMATED LENGTH OF PRESENTATION: -~ ~ ~'"`~~S PERSONNEL MATTER - NAME OF EMPLOYE: / /~ NAME OF PERSON ADDRESSING THE COURT: ~"ter/~- ~/~q~s Time for submitting this request for Court to assure that the matter is posted in accordance with Article 6252-17 is as follows: * Meetings held on second Monday: 12:00 P.Y1. previous Wednesday * Meetings held on Thursdays: 5:00 P.M. previous Thrusday THIS REQUEST RECEIVED BY: THIS REQUEST RECEIVED ON All Agenda Requests will be screened by the County Judge's office to determine ff adequate Information has been prepared for the Court's formal consideration and action at time of Court meetings. Your cooperation wfti be appreciated and contribute towards your request being addressed at the earliest opportunity. See Agenda Request Guidelines. EXECUTIVE SESSION REQUESTED: YES NO Guadalupe Survey Company Guadalupe Wastewater Company 313 B Mill Run Road . Kemille, Texas 78028 Phone: 512-895-1808. FAX 512-895-3539 Kerr County Commissioners Court January 22, 1992 Kerr County Courthouse 700 Main Street Kerrville, Texas 78028 RE: Request for Josephine Delacerda, a variance to the Kerr County Subdivision "Rules and Regulations" dated January, 1984 and as recorded in Volume 291, Page 329 of the Deed Records of Kerr County. Gentlemen, Josephine Delacerda is the owner of Tract 123 (pages 3 & 4 herein) of Kerrville South II, a subdivision of record in Volume 4, Page 64 of the Plat Records of Kerr County. Tract 123 contains 5.845 acres including the county road right of way easement. She desires to convey 2.805 acres to her son.The property is served by a central water system and the division of~this tract as proposed will not violate the subdivision restrictions (page 11 herein) which states, "No tract may be subdivided into less than 2 1/2 acres without permission of the developers in writing." Both tracts are over 2.5 acres and will front on existing county maintained roadways so no dedication of streets, alleys or parks to the public or purchasers are contemplated. Water and electrical lines are in place along the frontage of both tracts. Specifically, we would like a variance to the General Provisions of Section I on Page 1 (see page 12 herein) of the above referenced subdivision regulations. This would alleviate the need for replotting this tract. Opinions from the State's Attorney General Office supporting this request are attached (pages 5 thru 10 herein) for your review. Both the 1984 and the 1989 opinions state that platting is only required when land is being divided "and " roads, alleys or parks are being dedicated to the public or purchasers. In addition, please see the attachment (page 13 herein) being Section 232.010 of the Texas Local Government Code which allows County Government to approve divisions of platted lots by metes and bounds. The fact that the property can be divided by a metes and bounds description as determined by the State and that the division of the subject property does not violate the subdivision restrictions is a blessing. If this property were required to be replotted, all 148 land owners would need to be contacted by certified letter at a cost between $500 to $700. People who live as much as a mile and a half away as the crow flies and over 3 miles as the car drives would be contacted in regards to this matter. In other words, people who seldom if ever drive by her property will have a say in what she does with her property. Page 1 In addition to the herein requested variance, we request the Court to make whatever motion is necessary to allow the Director of the Kerr County Environmental Health Department to issue a permit to construct a wastewater disposal system on tract A of this proposed property split once an approved site plan and design for a wastewater system has been submitted and approved. The assistant County Attorney, Stan Reid, suggested I contact and get input from the following parties: 1. Franklin Johnston, the County Engineer. 2. David Litke, Director, Kerr County Environmental Health Department 3. Home Owners Association or if none, original developers. 1. Mr. Johnston has been contacted in regards to this matter. The roadways, as stated before, are existing and County maintained. Drainage patterns have already been established, partly by a natural drainage swale which crosses both tracts A and B and by a corrugated metal pipe ( CMP ) which brings storm water from the south side Codrington Drive to the north side and across the front of tract B (see sheet 4 of this package). Mr. Johnston has no problem with this proposed property split, however he would like a drainage easement to cover the existing drainage facilities and swales. The owner has no problem granting this easement if this is a requirement. 2. Mr. Litke has visited the site and agrees a wastewater treatment system can be installed on tract A which will meet State and County Construction Regulations for On-site Wastewater Disposal Systems. The existing system on tract B has been recently upgraded and is a licensed system. 3. Mr. Streeter King a former officer in the home owners association known as " Kerrville South II Owners Association, Inc.' was contacted in regards to this matter. He said the association had been dissolved and that local attorney Tom Terrell had performed the necessary paper work. In lieu of their approval, 2 contacted the developers, Lehmann and Monroe, officers in Energy-Land Inc. Attached is letter from Gordon Monroe which documents their approval of this split. I will bring to the commissioners meeting a letter from Gordon Monroe stating he has no objection to the split as he has orally agreed but is presently out of town. In summation, we feel the strict enforcement of the subdivision regulations is a hardship for the property owner. In addition, we feel the owners desires do not violate any state laws or subdivision restrictions and that. this division of property is in harmony with intent of this development. Respectfully submitted by, Charlie Digges fo Guadalupe Survey ompany RPLS Registration No. 4061 Page 2 Z~`:~ ~3 ~0 ~~ ~ ~ = I ... \ \ -_ ~ a ` ~ i ' c -~~ ~~ ` ~\ ~ is ~ ,~`~ t ~ ~ ?. 8S Ac a°c 44 I .~ -~ ... L. '` ~N?'W.~ L NIYJ1~ \ 4LL' 't~~ ',• 9 h ~\ , 1 iV~ /V6• ~~~ ~ Gg ~~." r Z¢ \ \ i GI 7 ~ c. 7 IC./6 Ac. apr 1 ~-"`~i,~ < 10 ~ 92 ~ :.. ?h s I ;. - 111 \,_CEr.-~ • ~" ~ `~ 29 ' cvv. ~ 5a i ~/ ~ 1 -1~1D~ D4J~ WED$ 22/ 1~, .• \~~' 12 i~ -r tics I ~.a ~.. i 7p I 73 5 Ac. .+~N,!j=~ % © 1 •.~ ••o A<- 13 91 M , ~ i~ S$ I I ~ann 1 a .elX, IS Sc ~lF~ s (! ~Jc,~J ~ C T ~ nl i ° ~ , 74 i~AC7r \ 124 , ~, J I ~s ~ ~r2s ~ , .. Sp ~ ~ ( L1~ IL j sa o, _ ti of 75 122 131 0 Sp ~ h + I ;.: 67 132 2 i 30 ~ . ~ ' ..,.s8 2 133 e 12. W ~ Iy \ s I38 ~ 5B c • 7B ~~ 121 Q ~' I v 63 ' o~ 134 T 4 o°y 139 ,4 4 ' l `1 120 136 137 141 IZF +!r 4' ~`1 L O o' ~9 ~ CLEAR Sprt~tlG`a Rbt~yG,.-,~ EST 4TE.S ~3~ d~ S m 22 ~~ _ tot' x \)~ `b o bT 21 ~ 8 \2~2\ S`` F ~ ~ `` "rebY certifies that ~~ti~r~ments of tha this e~rh rli ~.. <: nn ~ZZ //( /~ // // /~l ~`~'~ ~~ .G. BCS a` P ' ~ °j~c. 'v i J / ` ~ ~ o~ o, 4'. y0 ~` 4V., 9 ~~~ m i ~ Q` ~~ N i i 'V ~6~z yv„ ~ ~'~ ~\?Q l~ > c~,ho 4:6 \~ ~. ~~ .? ~D~f V i ~\~ i ~' Q^ ~ L 20 /~ /~~ ~' ~~ i ~2~~8 3 ado 4c :~ i ~S U \V ~~\ g~ r~ ~: ,•~~' ,Y i - w~ .'7.54 ` ~~ ~.~,,., p~~ y ~~ N R ~o I,y, r ~/~ \~~•' '- $ U F- 1 9- 9 1 T H U 1 4 7 4 2 M C G U LNT+n ~•~,,.,,,a ~•~~~~ :•.:'tr~~mr.~rw ••••~n.. ~,....... .....nr, ~~ ` yJ {. 7 /~ ~~'1 The Attorney General of Texas JtM MAnax .inns 11, 1984 • Attorney t3enersl ~~~' ~/ 6varemtCoutttlundUp~ gonozable Dale Hanna a, o eoa +xs+e • Johnnc+n Count Attorne • Auaun,?x 1'e7,+• 7s+a Y Y a+7rNS75a+ lot il.oor, County Causthouse 'r ~ Tate. s+oro7~~+ae7 Clebut,:re. Texas 76031 teteeep+er ~+7t~75~Oxaa Dear Nt. Hannai '~ 7u JiCis.a7~+soe The Attorney General's Office attempts to answer some inquitie 2t++7+7eQ+. with an informal letter of this sort if it appears that the answer i attaightfosward and the iasuae are not complicated. Tha time ar +e?a A+berta Are. AuN+ 160 *YPeose in preparing, reviewing, and approving a fonaal opinic , s+feeo.Tx i>avosx7ae Rimply makes it impractical to go this route for every request. 7 !rs)saaxase for soma season you Head a more official oplnlon, please let ua knoF ]f a fasaal opinion request ie eatebliehed on this quaetioo, it voul in all likelihood ba aeaigned to we in any avant. +enr Te»e, Fm+e 700 Mou e+an, Tx. 77007~~t1+ 7+srxxs ~er•s yaw have asked whether or not a tract of land e~acent to t - -- ~~ w o ~ ~l~ I er,iating, couney~ road maY a au _ ivide ith ut nom yang with tt ~rt t e ~ ~~l-~et a~pxoval se uirements if there will be no sosda within the lar ~ oa o~ooa.+^r, 13ui+e +x ++hic i is su Sv_ de 7 e eu iv s on plat approval tequ tamer Lubboc:- rx.rv.o+~3ato nerves twa ur dace: khe identification of land p P parcels foz r eoar>+7s7ss valorem tax puzpoaes and the regulation by the county of propose read construction. The fact that no roads within a subdivision at +JOA N to n+h. Lune a proposed is obviously irrelevant to the need to identify parcels + rncrn•n.7x ratio+•taes land. The case of iravaltas v. Schaefer. 179 S.N.2d 765 (Tex. 1944; s+xraex~s.r discuasca the need tb proper y identify load !or ad valorem U ~ purpasee. The answer to your question is foand in the newly anact~ zoo M.in p,at.. sure ecro property coda which consolidated existing statutes. Article 6626 sen antonro, Tr,. 7exo! 7707 Which vas both amended and repealed in 1983, partaina to the eountq a+xrx7s•e+At avthoritq to establish and enforce road construction strndesds. refer you to the new county Road and Aridge Atte article 67012 vhi ~nEoue~bnpa wnnrr eimplq reenaceed article 6626e without its current amendments. Al+rrm sfiv• Ac+VOn EmptVy er other words, the law is not consletent. govevare section 12.002 the Property Code is very plain and provides that a subdivision pl mnty not be recorded unless approved by the county os city ae the ea a+,y be. if she eubdiviaion plat complies with any applicable cnun regulations which mr+y be a moos question if there era no roads with the eubdivlaion, the commissioners court is under a miniateria>, du ~ ca approve the plat if the lots era puffieiencly daacribed fo t rurpoeaa. Y reiar you to Cottnniesloners Couzt v. Fzenk Jest 1 Devalo rn~ent C~om~.an~. 199 S.w.2 1 a ( ax. Civ. App. - Daliaa ~ vtlt tCi'A .n,r.f.j. ~/i r' P S U P- 1 9~,~ 9 1 -P {i U 1 4 ~4 3 M C G U STJ~NE S~,rS ^_6~_. A S S O C I A T EIS TP 0 3 *„ June 21. 1984 Pale Two 1 bellcve your construction of article 6626a !s correct in that a eubdivl~er is rt wed to file a Dlat only if he is iaYinD,out oortioce of eha xo rt~oads or ub is uee. Vnder section ~2.OOZ of the Property Coda ovever. he may not fie any plat unless approved by the county, Thus. he would have to Bell the land by metes and bounds. 7o conclude otherviee would requite the owner of a~~ro+~erty who 6ella a_portion of a s ngle tract to prepare a p at for commissioners court approval. Yety truly yovsa.~ .• J~(,. avid D. 3rooks Aasietaat Attornaq General DS/er ~l r ~ r ,~ ~~~~ If Johnson Cooney needs a more official opinion on Chia queetlon. ve can of course render one. Hovev¢r, by simple constraint of resources ve try eo ana4•er some questions with informal letters or phone calls. If we do not hear from you further, ve will assume that this letter ha^ satisfied your seeds. NE1 i, ti~~~ f4 F• ~ .~ Ti:%TS~ ~(qqM TIII: A.TTORNEX ~iENEI2AL ~EyS/`~' OF TE.l"A8 SEP 2 6 1989 Ji.~[ ~fA'I'TO\ A7'2'0R\SY OS\SRAL Honorable Pamela K. County Attorney County of Kendall 204 E. San Antonio Suite 1 Boerne, Texas 78006 Dear Ms. McKay: September 22, 1989 CUUIVTY AUui ~ ur McKay Opinion No. JM-1100 Re: Under what circumstances Street section 232.001 of the Local Government Code requires a tract owner to prepare a plat (RQ-1664) You ask for our interpretation of the requirements of section 232.001(a) of the Local Government Code in regard to the preparation of a plat by a landowner who divides a tract of land outside the limits of a municipality into two or more parts. Section 232.o01(a) provides: The owner of a tract of land located !outside the limits of a municipality who .divides the tract into two or more parts' to lay out a subdivision of the tract, including `an addition, or to lay out suburban lots or ~uilding lots, and to lay out streets, alleys, squares, parks, or other parts of the tract .intended to be dedicated to public use or for the use of purchasers or owners of lots fronting on or adjacent to the streets, alleys, squares, parks, or other parts must have a plat of the subdivision prepared. (Emphasis added.) You say that the section can be read in two ways. Under one reading, you say, the language "and to lay out streets, alleys, squares, parks, or other parts," etc., could be taken to apply only where the division is "to lay out suburban lots or building lots." Under such construc- tion, you say, a plat would be required under the subsection either when the tract is divided into two or more parts to lay out a subdivision or addition, or when the land is divided into "suburban lots or building lots" in conjunction with which "streets, alleys, squares, parks, or othei parts," as described in the subsection, are to be laid out. ~~, ~ ~ p. 5763 Honorable Pamela K. McKay - Page 2 (JM-1100) You say that the provisions can also be read to provide that the platting requirement under the subsection is triggered only where there is a division of the tract -- whether to lay out a subdivision, addition, or building or suburban lots -- and where "streets, alleys, squares, parks, or other parts" are to be laid out. Under this reading, as you say, a "division of a tract not involving streets, alleys, etc., would not require platting" under the sub- section. Though we concede that the language in question is somewhat convoluted, we think that this language on its face -- particularly the "and" in question -- indicates that the provisions must be read as in your second suggested reading. The platting requirement under the subsection is not triggered unless there is a division of the tract -- be it for a subdivision, an addition, or suburban or building lots -- and the division also involves the laying out of "streets, alleys, squares, parks, or other parts" as described in the statute. Attorney General Opinion JM-781 (1987) implicitly sup- ports this reading of section 232.001(a). That opinion addressed whether certain divisions of tracts were subject to the platting requirement under the provisions in question prior to their codification as section 232.001(a).1 No distinctions were made in the questions presented or in the responses as to whether the divisions in question were to lay out subdivisions, additions, or building or suburban lots. The opinion addressed whether the absence of any dedication of parts of the division for public use relieved the owner who divided the tract of the platting requirement and concluded that the absence of dedication for public use, standing alone, did not settle the issue. [The statute refers] to land `i.ntended for public use,' not to land `dedicated to public use.' Additionally, [it refers) to land 1. The opinion addressed inter alia the provisions of article 6702-1, section 2.401, V.T.C.S. These provisions were codified in 1987 as section 232.001. Acts 1987, 70th Leg., ch. 149, § 1, at 1003. ~~~ ~ p. 5764 Honorable _amela K. McKay - Page 3 ~ -i-1100) `intended for public use, or the use of purchasers or owners.`2 Clearly implicit in this discussion, we think, is that the platting requirement is not triggered unless the division of the tract -- be it for a subdivision, addition, or suburban or building lots -- also involves the laying out of streets, alleys, squares, parks, or other parts of the tract intended to be dedicated to public use or for the use of purchasers or owners of lots fronting on or adjacent Co the streets, alleys, squares, parks, or other parts . Local Gov't Code § 232.001(aj. You also express concern about the "legal definitions" of the terms "subdivision," "suburban lots," and "building lots" as used in section 232.001(a). For example, you ask: "how small may a rural tract be without becoming a `suburban lot,' which requires platting if roads or streets are involved[?]" We do note that courts have defined used in similar provisions, very broadly.. v. North Tex. Mun. Water Dist., 724 S.W App. - Dallas 1986, writ ref'd as used in former article 970a, simply a division of a tract of City of Weslaco v. Carventer, 69 - Corpus Christi 1985, writ ref former article 970a, section 4, to the act of partition itself") "subdivision," as See City of Lucas 2d 811, 823 (Tex. n.r.e.) (term "subdivision" section 4, V.T.C.S~., "may be land into smaller parts"); 4 S.W.2d 601, 603 (TeX. App. 'd n.r.e.) (term as used in V.T.C.s., "may refer simply see also Attorney General 2. As codified, t)ie language of section 232.001(a) now reads "intended to be dedicated to public use," rather than "intended for public use" as did the predecessor provisions of article 6702-1, section 2.401. This slight variation in the language in the codified version from that addressed in the opinion does not, we think, make the discussion in Attorney General opinion JM-781 of article 6702-1, section 2.401, less apposite to our analysis here of section 232.001(a). See Local Gov't Code § 1.001 (no substantive change intended). ~~~ J p. 5765 Honorable _amela K. McKay - Page 4 i.,M-1100) opinion JM-781 (1987). We do not think it necessary to address here whether the term as used in the language "subdivision of ttre tract, including an addition" in section 232.0o1(a) might mean more specifically a "planned develop- ment." Whether given divisions constitute "subdivisions," or "additions," or the laying aut of "suburban" or "building" lots would probably involve questions of fact such that the issue would have to be approached on a case-by-case basis. Under Local Government Code section 232.001(a) a division of a tract of land outside the limits of a municipality into two or more parts -- whether the division be to lay out a subdivision, addition, or suburban or building lots -- is subject to the platting requirements of the subsection only if the division is also to lay out streets, alleyss squares, parks, or other parts of the tract intended to be dedicated to public use or for the use of purchasers or owners of lots fronting on or adjacent thereto, as provided in the subsection. Very truly y s, ~~ J I M M A T T O X Attorney General of Texas MARY KELLER First Assistant Attorney General LOU MCCREARY Executive Assistant Attorney General JUDGE ZOLLIE STEAKLEY Special Assistant Attorney General RICK GILPIN Chairman, Opinion Committee Prepared by William Walker Assistant nttorney General / G(~C'- ~`~ p. 570,6 KERRVILLE SOUTSS II VCL7257 i~AGL 735 P.O. Box 1589 RESTRICTIONS AND COVENANTS In order to carry out a general plan of development and preserve . the character and natural beauty of this land, this agreement 1s subject to Ute covenants hereby made by Sellers, and made and accepted subject to the restrictions and conditions upon the premises hereby contracted for as follows, to-wit: 1. That these Covenants are to run witfi the land and shall be binding on t}ie Purchaser and all persons claiming under him until January 1, 1994, at which time sai~1 covenants :.Mall be automatically extended for successive periods of ten years, unless a vote of the then owners of the majority of the land in this ranch, it is agreed to change said covenants in whole or in part. 2. That the above said property herein shall not be used for commercial hunting, nor business purposes of any character nor have any commercial or manufacturing purpose. 3. That no automobile, truck, trailer, or other vehicle shall be abandoned on this property nor shall there by any dumping or placing of unsightly objects of any kind on the property. 4. No tent or shack shall be placed, erected, or permitted to remain on this property, nor shall any structure of a temporary character, including travel trailers, be used as a residence thereon. 5. Mobile homes of not less than 550 square feet shall be permitted to be placed on the property provided it is not more than five years old and in good repair. 6. That any sewerage disposal system constructed shall be built in full compliance with regulations and specifications of governmental units having jurisdiction in such matters. - 7. That no disposal of any kind shall be allowed that would pollute any stream or body of water or which would be unsightly, offensive, or otherwise adversely affect the natural beauty and value of the property. 8. That no swine shall be allowed. 9. That an ease+ment of. ten (10) feet in width shall be reserved along the perimeter of each tract in this development for purposes of installation and maintenance of poles, wires, down guys and fixtures for electric and telephone lines and to trim any trees which at any time may interfere or threaten to interfere with maintenance of such 'lines, with right of ingress to and egress from and across said premises to employees of utilities owning such lines 10. t7o tract may he subdivided into less than 2 1/2 acres without permission of the developers in ~:rriting. ,_,_ ~^ too water may be removed from any stream of water located on Kerrville South IZ for any purpose. 12. Since public road maintenance in this development Ss of lmportanee to all property owners, Grantee hereby authorizes Grantor to maintain such roads fur the common good and to charge each property owner a fee of SA.00 Qer acre per year. Such charge shall not be more than 550.00 per tract per year and only for such a period of time until roads are accepted for maintenance by the County. Such charge shall be made by direct billing to the property owners. Zt is understood and agreed that this road maintenance charye (if not paid within 60 days of billing date) shall become a bock fide Lien against the above described tract. Road maintenance charges do not apply to tracts fronting only on state or county maintained roads. ~ ~/ EXIIIIIIT A RULES ANI) RBCIULATiONa VOL: 291 PAGE 332 ' Regulating the Fiiing for Record of Subdivision Plsts and Establishing Construction Standards snd Other Requirements Pertinent thereto -[or aR Subdlvtsiona Situated Outside the .iurlad(ct[on at an incorporated Town or City In Kerr Cowty, Texas, and SubJect to the ~urlsdicUon of the Commissioner Court o[ Kerr County. Texas. TN6 STATE OP TEXAS COUNTY OF KERR it Is ordered by the Commissioners Court of Kerr County, Texas, on this 19th day of Oeeember, t983 that effective .lanuery 1, 199A, the following Rules end Regulations be adopted listing requirements precedent to the acceptance of plats of subdivisions for tiling for record to Kerc County, Taxes. Section ! The owner or owner of any tract of lend situated in Kerr County outside the corporate limits or extraterrilorielJurisdlction of any incorporated city, who may herentter divide the same, sxcluding lend toe agricultural use, in two (21 or more parts for the purpose of laying out any subdivision of any such tract of land, or foe laying out suburban lots or building lots, streets, alleys, parks, or other portions Intended for public use, for the use of purchasers or owners of lots in any such tract of land, must comply with the following rules and regulations. Condominium Pro)ects oP more then four (~) units shall bo platted and filed and otherwise comply with the provisions of V.A.T.S. Art. 1301 s. Section i! PURPOSE OF REGULATION The purpose of this Regulation Is to provide for the orderly, safe and healthful growth of the undeveloped areas within the County and to promote the health, solely. morals end general welfare of the community. Section Ill OEFtNITIONS For the purposes of this Regulation, the following terms, phreaes, words and their derivations shall havo the meaning eacribed to them !n this section: 3.Ot Alley: A minor public rightrof-way not intended to provide the primary manna of the access to abutting lots, which is used for vehieuisr service access to the beck or sides of properties otherwise abutting on a street, -1- ~ ~~. WND USE RECULATTON - § 232.009 71t1e t .. § 232,006. Exceptions for Countlea Wlth Population of Morc Then ZS MIIIion or ConHguow Courtin (Set main volume jor text oj(a)] (bl If a county elects to operate under this section, Section 232.005 does not apply to the county. The sections of this chapter preceding Section 232.005 do apply to the county in the same manner that they apply to other counties except that (I) Ney apply only to tracts o[ land located outside municipalities and the extraterrt. torial jurisdiction of municipalities, as determined under Chapter 42; (2) the commissioners court of the county, instead of having the powers granted by Sections 232.003(2) and (3), may: (A) require arightof-way on a stmt or road that does not [unction as a main artery in the subdivision of not leas than 40 feet or more than 50 feet; and (B) require that the street cut on a main artery within the rightof-way be not less than 30 feet or more than 45 feet, and that the street cut on any other street or mad within the rightof-way be not less than 25 feet or more than 35 feet: and (3) Section 232.004(SNB) does not apply to the county. Amended by Acu 1989, 71st Leg., ch. 624, § 3.08, eft. Sept 1, 1989. Historical and Statutory Notes 1999 Lesbletion Acts 198T, 70th 1vg., ch. 91T, 4 2_ (see ita& cised note in main volume) was rapes by Aets 1999, Ttst Leg., ch. 1, § 54(8), eft Aag. ~, 1939. § 232.008. Caneelletion of 9ubdlrision Notes of Deefeloto Taxation 5 S. Tatatlon If taxpayer would preserve hie or her right N ronteat aeseeament of his or har property m The 1989 amendm