The Attorney General of Texas
November 12, 1980
MARK WHITE
Attorney General
Honorable Bill Stubblefield Opinion No. w-269
Williamson County Attorney
Georgetown, Texas 78626 Re: Whether conveyance of a strip
of land requires vacating of an
original plat and replatting under
article 974a, V.T.C.S.
Dear Mr. Stubblefield:
You inquire about the application of article 974a, V.T.C.S:, to the
conveyance of a strip of land not effected for the purpose of laying out a
subdivision or s&urban lots. You infofm us that the original purchasers of a
house and lot in the stidivision discovered that the house bed been
inadvertently situated approximately one foot from a lot line, in violation of
local setback ordinances. The developer owns the adjacent lot and has
offered to convey a strip of land along the lot line wide enough to satisfy
setback requirements. This conveyance would leave the unsold lot of
adequate size for residential construction.
You ask the following questions:
L Is there a violation of article 974a, V.T.C.S., if
the developer conveys the strip of land by metes and
bounds?
m Main Plaza.suite 4w 2. May sn amendment to the plat be filed to
SanA”10”10.
TX~78205 reflect the conveyance, and, if so, sbject to what
512,225.4191 procedure?
AnEq”alOpPOrf”“~ly/ A recorded s&division plat may not be amended except in con-
A,,irmsti”e Employer formsnce with section 5 of article 974a, V.T.C.S. Priolo v. City of Dallas,
Action
257 S.W. 2d 947 (Tex. Civ. App. - Dallas 1953, writ reCd n.r.e.); McGraw v.
Cit of Dallas, 420 S.W. 2d 793 ‘(Tex. Civ. App. - Dallas 1967, writ rePd
iizhmr e v. City of Graham, 287 S.W. 2d 527 (Tex. Civ. App. - Fort
Worth 1956, writ rePd n.r.e.). Section 5 of article 974a requires, in cases
where lots in a s&division have been sold, that a stidivision plat be vacated,
in whole or in part, before an amendment such as you propose can become
effective. After a vacation, a conveyance by metes and bounds could be
made and a new plat could be filed. Under the circumstances that you
Honorable Bill Stubblefield - Page Two (MW-269)
describe, a vacation of the part of the plat showing the two affected lots would require
the approval of all of the owners of lots in the subdivision.
It would seem that a more practical solution to the problem of the violation of
the local setback crdinance would be to apply for a variance to the setback
requirement. If the variance was granted, there would no longer be a violation.
SUMMARY
Although a land owner may convey a strip of land by metes
and bounds, the plat of the subdivision cannot be amended to
reflect that conveyance. It must be vacated and mplatted
pursuant to article 974a, V.T.C.S.
$f-gg7
Attorney General of Texas
JOHN W. FAINTER, JR.
First Assistant Attorney General
RICHARD E. GRAY III
Executive Assistant Attorney General
Prepared by Susan Garrison
Assistant Attorney General
APPROVED:
OPINION COMMD’TEE
Susan Garrison, Acting Chairman
Ralph Aldave
Jon Bible
Rick Gilpin
Bruce Youngblood
p. 856