ORDER NO. 20869
APPROVAL OF VARIANCE FROM PLATTING
REQUIREMENTS FOR PROPERTY AT
3211 MEDINA HIGHWAY
On this the 13th day of April 1992, upon motion made by
Commissioner Lackey, seconded by Commissioner Morgan, the
court unanimously approved by a vote o! 4-0-0, to grant a
variance from platting to obtain a sewerage system for
property at 3211 Medina Highway owned by Carl C. Heidel being
Tract # 3.
COMMISSIONERS' COURT AGENDA REQUEST
PEASE FURNISH ONE ORIGINAL AND FIVE COPIES OF THIS REQUEST AND
DOCUMENTS TO BE REVIEWED BY THE COURT
MADE BY: Olrc-,~`n~- ~~
OFFICE: Eily.',~~~.~'.-,rz;~ ~T~~'`~
MEETING DATE: y~/.i'-y ~Z
SUBJECT: (PLEASE BE SPECIFIC)
TIME PREFERRED:

EXECUTIVE SESSION REQUESTED: YES NO ~_
PLEASE STATE REASON
ESTIMATED LENGTH OF PRESENTATION:

PERSONNEL MATTER - NAME OF EMPLOYE:
NAME OF PERSON ADDRESSING THE COURT

Time for submitting this request for Court to assure that the matter is posted in accordance
with Article 6252-17 1s as follows:
* Meetings held on second Monday: 12:00 P.M. 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 if
adequate information has been prepared for the Court's formal consideration and action
at time of Court meetings. Your cooperation will be appreciated and contribute towards
your request being addressed at the earliest opportunity. See Agenda Request
Guidelines.
KERR COUNTY
' .~ ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DEPARTMENT
lol spur loo
°°~, °, °` Kerrville, Tezae 78028
15121896.5101
MEMORANDUM
To: Commissioners Cou~Irt
From: David Litke ,G" ~~
Date: April 6, 1992
Subject: Clarification of need to plat for property on Hwy. 16 south owned by
Carl C. Heidel
Mr. Heidel has applied for a permit to construct for 5.00 acres located at 3211
Medina Hwy.
Mr. Heidel has previously received an opinion from former county engineer, Gerald
Menefee, that platting is not required.
Enclosed is Mr. Menefee's letter, Texas Attorney General's opinion ~JM-1100, and
a survey of the property in question. Please determine if:
1. Mr. Menefee's decision is still valid?
2. Does the property have to be formally platted?
3. Do any variances need to be provided under Kerr County Subdivision
Regulations and/or the Rules of Kerr County for Private Sewage Facilities?
ejg
cc Franklin Johnston
County Engineer
~ R«.vuee v.w,
qn a~O~~
KERB COUNTY
ROAD AND BRIDGE DEPARTMENT
KERRVILLE, TEXAS 78028
(512) 257-2993
July 18, 1990
Mr. Carl C. Meidel
P. O. Box i09
Kerrville, Texas 78029
SUBJECT: Applicability of County Subdivision Regulations for 40
Acre Tract on Hwy 16 South Adjoining Deer Park Lane
Dear Mr. Heidel:
This letter is in response to you letter of June 25, 1990, wherein
you requested guidance concerning whether you were required to
submit a subdivision plat when selling off a portion on the above
referenced tract.
It is this office's belief that based upon a Texas Attorney
General's Opinion, No. JM-1100, dated September 22, 1989, a copy
of which I have already been provided, that you are not required
to plat your land prior to subdividing it.
You would have been required to plat the property only 1f "the
division is also to lay out streets, alleys, squares, parks, or
other parts of the tract intended for public use." (From opinion
JM-1100). Since your division of land does not provide for any
public areas, your division may be considered exempt from the Kerr
County Subdivision Regulations.
If you have any questions, please call me at 257-2993.
Sin/ce~reOl y,~ _ -/y~
Gerald W. Menefee, P.E.
County Engineer
ejg
C~
F•
4 ~
J
~.r~
TF3E ATTORNEY GENERAL ~FjCEIV~~
OF TEXAS
SEP 2 6 1989
JI?i ?fA'I'1.OOC
AT!`OR\6Y Ot~ER.~L
Honorable Pamela K.
County Attorney
County of Kendall
204 E. San Antonio
Suite 1
Boerne, Texas 78006
Dear Ms. McKay:
September 22, 1969
CUUNTYAUU~~urc
McKay Opinion No. JM-1100
Re: Under what circumstances
Street section 232.001 0! the Local
Government Code requires a
tract owner to prepare a plat
(Rq-2664)
You ask for our interpretation of the requirements of
section 232.002(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 232.001(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 Iay out suburban Lots or
building lots, ~ 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 subdivfsion or addition, g~ when the land is
divided into "suburban lots or building lots" in conjunction
with which "streets, alleys, squares, parks, or other
parts," as described in the subsection, are to be laid out.
~~~~ ~'? ~
,xsS _.. .~. _.
Honorable Pamela K. McKay - Page 2 (JM-1100)
Xou 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 -- ~ where "streets, alleys, squares, parks,
or ether 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 rend 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
-- ~ 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 zeading 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 whetY~er 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 `intended 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.A01, v.T.C.S. These provisions
were codified in 1987 as section 232.001. Acts 1987, 70th
Leg., ch. 1d9, 5 1, at 1003. '
Honorable Pamela K. McKay - Page 3
`intended for public use,
purchasers or owners.'2
(JM-1100)
~ the use of
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 Por the use of purchasers or
owners of lots fronting on or adjacent to the
streets, alleys, squares, parks, or other
parts
Local Gov't Code § 232.001(a).
You also express concern about the "legal definitions"
of the tezms "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 "subdivision," as
used in similar provisions, very broadly. ~g s,ity of Lucas
v. North Tex. Mun. Water Dist., 724 S.W.2d 811, 823 (Tex.
App. - Dallas•1986, Grit ref'd n.r.e.) (term "subdivision"
as used in former article 970a, section 4, V.T. C.S•., "may be
simply a division of a tract of land into smaller parts");
City of Weslaco v. Carpenter, 694 S.W.2d 601, 603 (Tex. App.
- Corpus Christi 1985, writ ref'd n.r.e.) (term as used in
former article 970a, section 4, V.T.C.S., "may refer simply
to the act of partition itself"); gge also Attorney General
2. As codified, the 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). ,~,g@ Local Gov't Code § 1.001 (no substantive
change intended•).
Honorable Pamela K. McKay - Page 4 (JM-1100)
Opinion JM-781 (1987). We do not think it necessary to
address here whether the term as used in the language
"subdivision of the tract, including an addition" in section
232.001(x) might mean more specifically a "planned develop-
ment." Whether given divisions constitute "subdivisions,"
or "additions," or the laying out 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(x) a division o! a tract o! 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,
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 thereto, as
provided in the subsection.
Very truly y s,
~K
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 Attorney General
JN.I'rJl I1.~! !'LP • ~0.~(.. ~l,"f. I~tt~~?' l/~` T ")~1, riti~''~I Inn'Tr 11J11, 1•It~~ ~rtT 7FCS, ~ ^I, I~LJ OI?I I/'
,TON1J ~ ~~lrTll~^. YT) ~llrit, `~ ~(). 1(1tT, 'tl~'~'I: ^~:~ `I ()• .'I)I{, „VI) ~n fCT.~S ~U~ ~!' rlRiUS" MTiO~i ' .
SINtBY K0. 1907, •r)c^n•Cr '!0. llr7, T'J I5'"q r,nn^!'?'y, '4':x^.;; ^ND PGI'fr OUT OF ^'J I'!t.91 ',
+C°.`: TR1C" nL' I "`IT' CO'NE•'?'U TO n'r;11`I"TP `. "rC;~' rr rI'+, c•n0lt CH'D F6oELL f3Y LT;EU
A'R' °::CC~fIJF.D I'! VCr! l~"E: 1!%0 .~.~ r'"t{'; G),7 0'r ';°F' I~''Ep ~'1'C('c^CS OF 'vFTt COIfNTY, 'rEY •`
~~ K
ER ~
'P ~
sgfo~Q.jrL~ ~~ ~
I q ~ $? ~
Ga'~S'~~ .. ~i
S ~4^ .~
. ~,_
~Qd~
v`~• ~Jv.O~ O nC~
" ~l
Al ~
rn

,o
w
N
r
z -Tt~ ti GT 3 ,,, ~ii,
`t e,
r n ~ ~` ~
~:
~/
I
:OUlJTY t^' 1~:nFi
	r,r i',.
j A~~'	)
1~ Y
	
	
	1` ,
	
-
"	
x
/ ~
Gi	

. ~\ -
,:1 - .	
	
~ ~~	
~, a
~' \~.	
9 '
-	~~~:.
	~o
'
~	\
	~
	\
N	~ ~•
' ~•
~	I 7-. ~
~~ -\
	I N~; i
•
~
	,,
'
.~,. ,
	~
	U,
4;
- J J. e'O. /'r R iC.^' 01.7":1 ~C r: ~ 1o e~t~e"CRfTi
~,_,__
f%~-(a~ . ~ ~~----
•`,
,, ~
7• ~.
`') ,
r' ~ l / ,
/~G ..It
ri
z, c
n V
,'
_ s~ ~ T ,
~. ~°
Tug ~~ ~
roo p~
_ ~. ry//
.~ l ,. .~
I~
. lat'
A~'
. /.
~f i~•f
~ i /,/~
,; o'/
/
*epresentat'on of t.l:r hroncr~.~• chorrn n•;~± cio°~ •ritxii
~aTeon na drterm,r.ed ',y .~ aurv~~; mac?e nr, t.}:n
'round llllder m~• diroc tl va nn~i 'P1nR TVl :?nrl, •'i: C:UT~t
:J avrvay uns r:adr. to ~rei•sa:,t•7 )N; ~`,t.Pnr. Survc~v
's_caj and that n:cl corn^ra %~ra~ .s shnu~i,
'hie our+ey •~nt ,arTonmd ;•~~;• i'r•~•fn'~'.d 'I'iir.k I'~; t•
onvey~nco of the proPcrl.y and !s frn' rxr.lursivn
~a by the p.nrtlPa !o r;n(d tr~r.anct.inn. ( :era nrrt,
eaponaihle t.o ~n:• c'.;:er ,>>~rt.;•a~, nnv:far. or
~J' ~~
`K.,~S;~ era

i
utcrc, fcr any	loss rns~sl,r.inp, ihnmirn~c.	:..,~
~	~~-
		~ t
1	' f
~tf Cl •h1 ~	.. ,~~ r• , r. . ~.	.
~1	r,
~ ~1
			
			
			
			
'r.t a'.c ;~~;{ ~~,. `	~. ,uric, 'in, 1.1:7	•i -~	',
			
			
ss
,,
t;
•~.
)
7~I`ACT4 ~~
Jr-Op~c. ?'
,~