## Facts

- A nonprofit church owned a 2.5-acre tract in Corpus Christi and sought a building permit to improve an existing building for church use.
- A city employee informed the church that, under the city charter, a building permit would not issue unless the property was platted and the plat approved and filed.
- The church submitted a plat showing boundaries and utility easements to the city planning commission.
- The planning commission conditionally approved the plat only if the church dedicated an approximately 25-foot by 630-foot strip to complete the remaining half of an adjacent “half-street” easement (Kay Street) for widening/extension.
- The church appealed to the city council, which upheld the dedication requirement after a hearing.
- The church sued for (1) declaratory relief that the city lacked authority to require platting as a condition of a building permit and (2) mandamus compelling approval of the plat without the dedication.
- After a bench trial, the district court issued mandamus ordering the city to approve the plat as submitted (without dedication) but denied the broader declaration that the city could not require any plat.
- The city appealed the mandamus order; the church cross-appealed the denial of broader declaratory relief.

## Issues

1. Whether the city had authority under state law, its charter, and ordinances to require submission and approval of a plat as a prerequisite to issuing a building permit for the tract.
2. Whether the city could lawfully condition plat approval on the church’s dedication of a strip of land to complete and widen an adjoining half-street easement for street extension purposes.
3. Whether mandamus was an appropriate remedy to compel approval of the plat without the dedication condition.

## Decision

- The court held the city had authority to require platting as a condition precedent to a building permit.
- The court held the city lacked authority, on these facts, to require the demanded street dedication as a condition of plat approval.
- The court affirmed mandamus compelling the city to approve the plat as submitted, without the dedication.
- The court also left undisturbed the trial court’s denial of declaratory relief that would have eliminated the city’s power to require any plat.

## Legal Principles

- A municipality may, pursuant to statute, charter, and ordinance, require an owner seeking development approval to submit and obtain approval of a plat before a building permit issues.
- Municipal platting regulation does not authorize unlimited land exactions; a dedication condition must be within delegated authority and reasonably related to the subdivision or development at issue.
- A city may not use plat approval to compel dedication for general street-widening or extension purposes when the required dedication is not justified by the owner’s proposed development in the manner contemplated by applicable platting authority.
- Mandamus may issue to compel approval where the public body’s duty becomes ministerial once an unlawful approval condition is removed and the submitted plat otherwise complies with governing requirements.

## Conclusion

The court affirmed that Corpus Christi could require a plat as a prerequisite to a building permit, but it could not condition plat approval on the church’s dedication of a substantial strip for completion and extension of an adjacent half-street where the exaction exceeded the city’s lawful platting authority in the circumstances; mandamus properly compelled approval of the plat without the dedication.


City of Corpus Christi v. Unitarian Church of Corpus Christi, 436 S.W.2d 923 (Tex. Civ. App.—Corpus Christi 1968)