02 C14-2025-0089 - 1120 and 1122 S Capital of Texas Highway; District 8 - Public Comment

Zoning and Platting Commission – April 7, 2026

02 C14-2025-0089 - 1120 and 1122 S Capital of Texas Highway; District 8 - Public Comment — original pdf

Backup

Thumbnail of the first page of the PDF — Page 1 of 48 pages

Villela, Beverly From: Sent: To: Subject: Friday, April 3, 2026 4:36 PM Villela, Beverly Case C14-2025-0089-Conditional Overlay Request You don't often get email from Learn why this is important External Email - Exercise Caution Hello Ms. Villela, I live in Lost Creek on Wilson Heights Dr. I am very concerned about the rezoning and development plans for City View Case C14-2025-0089. This will nega(cid:44)vely impact me and my neighbors if approved. This site is in one of the most environmentally protected areas of Aus(cid:44)n. The rezoning ignores nearly every applicable protec(cid:44)on. Where is the up-to-date Traﬃc Analysis (NTA)? There should be a Traﬃc Analysis before this massive project is approved. This is going to make Lost Creek Blvd and 360 even more dangerous. Also, we have only 1 entrance and exit on my street. This will massive traﬃc conges(cid:44)on and safety concerns with wildﬁre evacua(cid:44)ons and emergency delays. Many people in the oﬃce complex already make illegal U-Turns in front of the entrance to my street. I am asking for a Safety and Traﬃc Study and a Condi(cid:44)onal Overlay with these requirements: 1. Height Cap: Max 50 feet (3 residen(cid:44)al ﬂoors over commercial) 2. Unit Cap: Limit to 400 units, or the max supported by a real evacua(cid:44)on study. 3. No Neighborhood Access: No vehicular access to or from Lost Creek Blvd 4. Traﬃc Calming: Developer-funded crossings and sidewalks 5. Dark Sky Ligh(cid:44)ng: Low-intensity, shielded ligh(cid:44)ng to preserve neighborhood character. Thank you for your considera(cid:44)on. Regards, Susan Tipton 1304 Wilson Heights Dr. Aus(cid:44)n, TX 78746 CAUTION: This is an EXTERNAL email. Please use caution when clicking links or opening attachments. If you believe this to be a malicious or phishing email, please report it using the "Report Message" button in Outlook. For any additional questions or concerns, contact CSIRT at " ". 1 02 C14-2025-0089 - 1120 and 1122 S Capital of Texas Highway; District 81 of 48Villela, Beverly From: Sent: To: Cc: James Chatfield Friday, April 3, 2026 2:00 PM Villela, Beverly Subject: Attachments: Request for Neighborhood Traffic Analysis — Case C14-2025-0089 Request traffic analysis and overlay.docx You don't often get email from . Learn why this is important External Email - Exercise Caution Dear Ms. Villela and Members of the Zoning and Platting Commission, The residents of Lost Creek are formally requesting that the Planning Department conduct a Neighborhood Traffic Analysis (NTA) for Case C14-2025-0089. We require this professional analysis to be completed now so that the zoning case may be approved with the necessary Conditional Overlays to ensure public safety. Our request is based on the clear precedent set in Case C14-2025-0094 (Rosedale Multifamily), where the City performed a rigorous technical analysis for a project of similar density. A comparative audit of the two cases reveals significant deviations that must be addressed: 1. Discrepancy in ITE Trip Generation Methodology in the TIA Worksheet ● How are we to reconcile the use of ITE Code 222 (High-Rise) for a mid-rise project? The Rosedale project (75–90 feet) correctly utilized ITE Code 221 (Midrise Multifamily). ● What is the basis for bypassing the 2,000-trip threshold? Applying the Rosedale standard of 4.54 trips per unit to our 475 units results in 2,157 unadjusted daily trips. ● Per the Transportation Criteria Manual (TCM), exceeding 2,000 trips triggers a mandatory Transportation Assessment and TDM plan. Using Code 222 artificially defers these requirements. 2. Verification of Existing Traffic Credits in TIA Worksheet ● What was the methodology for a 3,000-trip credit for vacant facilities? Office buildings that are substantially vacant, our field counts show only 113 actual vehicle trips. How does this align with the Rosedale precedent? City verified only 489 trips in an actively occupied area. 2 02 C14-2025-0089 - 1120 and 1122 S Capital of Texas Highway; District 82 of 48 3. Critical Life-Safety and Evacuation Constraints ● How does the current waiver account for the unique constraints of a WUI Zone? Lost Creek Boulevard is the sole ingress and egress for over 1,200 households in a designated Wildfire Urban Interface (WUI) Zone A/B. ● What is the City’s plan for ensuring evacuation safety? No field traffic data has been collected for Lost Creek, despite a fatal crash at our primary access point on April 6, 2025. Our Request To ensure the equitable application of City standards and the protection of public safety, we respectfully ask the Planning Department to do a Neighborhood Traffic Analysis : 1. Correct the ITE Code to 221 (Midrise) to ensure mathematical consistency with the Rosedale project and the TCM. This will demonstrate the need for NTA, with a Wildfire Evacuation Analysis as a formal component of the NTA. We look forward to your guidance on aligning the City View analysis with the professional standards demonstrated in the Rosedale case. This analysis is an essential prerequisite for zoning approval with the correct overlays to protect the long-term livability and safety of the Lost Creek community. Thank you for your consideration. Dear Ms. Villela and Members of the Zoning and Platting Commission, I am a Lost Creek resident writing about Case C14-2025-0089. This site is in one of the most environmentally protected areas of Austin, and the proposed rezoning ignores nearly every applicable protection. Why I care: _EXTREME TRAFFIC CONGESTION, DANGEROUS WILDFIRE/EMERGENCY EVACUATION, BARTON CREEK WATERSHED POLLUTION, TXDOT LOOP 360 FUTURE CONSTRUCTION ISSUES, OBVIOUS VIOLATION OF SEVERAL ORDINANCES ______________________________________________________________________ 3 02 C14-2025-0089 - 1120 and 1122 S Capital of Texas Highway; District 83 of 48 The Save Our Springs Alliance has formally opposed this rezoning, calling it “inconsistent with the Imagine Austin Comprehensive Plan” and “car-dependent sprawl.” The site is in the Eanes Creek Watershed — a Water Supply Suburban Watershed in the Drinking Water Protection Zone. The Hill Country Roadway Corridor limits height to 28–40 feet and requires 40% natural state. The City’s reviewer said DB90 relief “does not appear to apply.” The 90-foot request is 225% of the code limit. This is a scenic roadway, protected watershed, dark skies community, and wildfire zone. OUR ASK — LO-V-DB90 with Conditional Overlay: ● Height cap: 50 feet (commercial ground floor + 3 residential stories) ● Unit cap: 400, or the number supported by the TIA and Evacuation Study, whichever is less ● No vehicular access from Lost Creek Blvd — no driveways or connections, current or future ● Full TIA & Evacuation Study required before site plan ● Family-sized units — minimum 30% must be 2-bedroom or larger ● Stepped massing — no structure above 40 ft within 100 ft of residential ● Dark sky lighting — below 3000K, fully shielded Why are these conditions reasonable? The developer told our community “maximum 400 units” at “52–53 feet, four stories.” The application says 475 units at 90 feet. We’re asking the Commission to hold them to their own words. The unit cap of 400 — or the number supported by the TIA and Evacuation Study, whichever is less — ensures density is based on real infrastructure capacity.. The Hill Country Roadway Corridor limits height to 28–40 feet. The City’s own reviewer said DB90 relief “does not appear to apply” to these standards. 50 feet is generous relative to the 40-foot code limit. Staff claimed 3,000 daily trips from vacant buildings. We counted 113 cars. The corrected number is 4,300+ net new trips on a 32-foot street with no sidewalks, no transit (nearest stop: 2.6 miles), and no alternative route for 1,200 families. I support housing with affordable units and neighborhood retail. I am requesting an NTA so we can add the appropriate Conditional Overlay that protects our safety and aligns with the developer’s own promises. Thank you for your consideration. Respectfully, Name: JAMES R CHATFIELD____________________________________________________________________ Address: ___1204 WILSON HEIGHTS DR 78746 4 02 C14-2025-0089 - 1120 and 1122 S Capital of Texas Highway; District 84 of 48 Villela, Beverly From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Martha Gimbut Friday, April 3, 2026 12:37 PM Villela, Beverly Case C14-2025-0089 conditional overlay request Follow Up Flag: Flag Status: Follow up Flagged You don't often get email from . Learn why this is important External Email - Exercise Caution Dear Ms. Villela and Members of the Zoning and Platting Commission, I am a Lost Creek resident writing about Case C14-2025-0089. This site is in one of the most environmentally protected areas of Austin, and the proposed rezoning ignores nearly every applicable protection. Why I care: Lost Creek sits above Barton Creek and the Barton Creek Green Belt. This development could have a big negative impact on this area. The Save Our Springs Alliance has formally opposed this rezoning, calling it “inconsistent with the Imagine Austin Comprehensive Plan” and “car-dependent sprawl.” The site is in the Eanes Creek Watershed — a Water Supply Suburban Watershed in the Drinking Water Protection Zone. The Hill Country Roadway Corridor limits height to 28– 40 feet and requires 40% natural state. The City’s reviewer said DB90 relief “does not appear to apply.” The 90-foot request is 225% of the code limit. This is a scenic roadway, protected watershed, dark skies community, and wildfire zone. OUR ASK — LO-V-DB90 with Conditional Overlay: • Height cap: 50 feet (commercial ground floor + 3 residential stories) • Unit cap: 400, or the number supported by the TIA and Evacuation Study, whichever is less • No vehicular access from Lost Creek Blvd — no driveways or connections, current or future • Full TIA & Evacuation Study required before site plan • Family-sized units — minimum 30% must be 2-bedroom or larger • Stepped massing — no structure above 40 ft within 100 ft of residential • Dark sky lighting — below 3000K, fully shielded Why are these conditions reasonable? The developer told our community “maximum 400 units” at “52–53 feet, four stories.” The application says 475 units at 90 feet. We’re asking the Commission to hold them to their own words. The unit cap of 400 — or the number supported by the TIA and Evacuation Study, whichever is less — ensures density is based on real infrastructure capacity.. The Hill Country Roadway Corridor limits height to 28–40 feet. The City’s own reviewer said DB90 relief “does not appear to apply” to these standards. 50 feet is generous relative to the 40-foot code limit. 6 02 C14-2025-0089 - 1120 and 1122 S Capital of Texas Highway; District 85 of 48 Staff claimed 3,000 daily trips from vacant buildings. We counted 113 cars. The corrected number is 4,300+ net new trips on a 32-foot street with no sidewalks, no transit (nearest stop: 2.6 miles), and no alternative route for 1,200 families. I support housing with affordable units and neighborhood retail. I am requesting an NTA so we can add the appropriate Conditional Overlay that protects our safety and aligns with the developer’s own promises. Thank you for your consideration Sincerely, Martha L. Gimbut CAUTION: This is an EXTERNAL email. Please use caution when clicking links or opening attachments. If you believe this to be a malicious or phishing email, please report it using the "Report Message" button in Outlook. For any additional questions or concerns, contact CSIRT at " ". 7 02 C14-2025-0089 - 1120 and 1122 S Capital of Texas Highway; District 86 of 48 Villela, Beverly From: Sent: To: Subject: Liang Z Friday, April 3, 2026 8:33 AM Villela, Beverly Request for Traffic Impact Analysis – Zoning Case C14-2025-0089 (CityView / Loop 360) You don't often get email from . Learn why this is important External Email - Exercise Caution Dear Zoning and Platting Commission Members and Planning Staff, My name is Liang Zou, and I am a resident of the Lost Creek neighborhood at 1142 Lost Creek Blvd. I am writing regarding Zoning Case C14-2025-0089, the proposed rezoning of the CityView property near the intersection of Lost Creek Boulevard and Loop 360. While I understand that redevelopment of this property is being considered, I respectfully ask the Commission and staff to require a full Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) before any zoning decision is made. The current traffic worksheet appears to rely on assumptions that do not reflect real-world conditions at the site today. The existing office buildings within the CityView complex are largely unoccupied, meaning the baseline traffic used in the worksheet significantly overstates current traffic volumes. As a result, the analysis may incorrectly assume that a large amount of existing traffic already occurs at the site. If the property is redeveloped with approximately 475 residential units, residents estimate that the project could generate well over 2,000 additional daily trips, which would represent a substantial increase in traffic through the Lost Creek Boulevard corridor. Lost Creek Boulevard already serves ~8000 – 10,000 daily trips and functions as the primary ingress and egress route for roughly 1,200 homes in the Lost Creek neighborhood. Given the existing traffic patterns, the constrained roadway geometry, and the lack of alternative neighborhood access points, a development of this scale warrants a comprehensive and updated traffic study so that the City and the public can understand: • • • The true baseline traffic conditions at the largely vacant CityView office site • • • • • The net new traffic generated by the proposed residential development • • 8 02 C14-2025-0089 - 1120 and 1122 S Capital of Texas Highway; District 87 of 48 • • The impact on Lost Creek Boulevard and the Loop 360 intersection • • • • Any necessary roadway improvements or mitigation measures to ensure safety and mobility • • A Traffic Impact Analysis would allow the City to make an informed decision based on accurate data rather than outdated or theoretical assumptions. I respectfully request that the Commission require a full Traffic Impact Analysis prior to advancing this rezoning request. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Liang Zou 1142 Lost Creek Blvd CAUTION: This is an EXTERNAL email. Please use caution when clicking links or opening attachments. If you believe this to be a malicious or phishing email, please report it using the "Report Message" button in Outlook. For any additional questions or concerns, contact CSIRT at " . 9 02 C14-2025-0089 - 1120 and 1122 S Capital of Texas Highway; District 88 of 48 Villela, Beverly From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Thursday, April 2, 2026 4:04 PM Villela, Beverly Case C14-2025-0089 - Conditional overlay request Follow Up Flag: Flag Status: Follow up Flagged You don't often get email from . Learn why this is important External Email - Exercise Caution Dear Ms. Villela and Members of the Zoning and Platting Commission, I am a Lost Creek resident writing about Case C14-2025-0089. This site is in one of the most environmentally protected areas of Austin, and the proposed rezoning ignores nearly every applicable protection. Why I care: Lost Creek sits above Barton Creek and the Barton Creek Green Belt. This development could have a big negative impact on this area. The Save Our Springs Alliance has formally opposed this rezoning, calling it “inconsistent with the Imagine Austin Comprehensive Plan” and “car-dependent sprawl.” The site is in the Eanes Creek Watershed — a Water Supply Suburban Watershed in the Drinking Water Protection Zone. The Hill Country Roadway Corridor limits height to 28– 40 feet and requires 40% natural state. The City’s reviewer said DB90 relief “does not appear to apply.” The 90-foot request is 225% of the code limit. This is a scenic roadway, protected watershed, dark skies community, and wildfire zone. OUR ASK — LO-V-DB90 with Conditional Overlay: • Height cap: 50 feet (commercial ground floor + 3 residential stories) • Unit cap: 400, or the number supported by the TIA and Evacuation Study, whichever is less • No vehicular access from Lost Creek Blvd — no driveways or connections, current or future • Full TIA & Evacuation Study required before site plan • Family-sized units — minimum 30% must be 2-bedroom or larger • Stepped massing — no structure above 40 ft within 100 ft of residential • Dark sky lighting — below 3000K, fully shielded Why are these conditions reasonable? The developer told our community “maximum 400 units” at “52–53 feet, four stories.” The application says 475 units at 90 feet. We’re asking the Commission to hold them to their own words. The unit cap of 400 — or the number supported by the TIA and Evacuation Study, whichever is less — ensures density is based on real infrastructure capacity.. The Hill Country Roadway Corridor limits height to 28–40 feet. The City’s own reviewer said DB90 relief “does not appear to apply” to these standards. 50 feet is generous relative to the 40-foot code limit. Staff claimed 3,000 daily trips from vacant buildings. We counted 113 cars. The corrected number is 4,300+ net new trips on a 32-foot street with no sidewalks, no transit (nearest stop: 2.6 miles), and no alternative route for 1,200 families. I support housing with affordable units and neighborhood retail. I am requesting an NTA so we can add the appropriate Conditional Overlay that protects our safety and aligns with the developer’s own promises. Thank you for your consideration. David and Amy Rapozo 10 02 C14-2025-0089 - 1120 and 1122 S Capital of Texas Highway; District 89 of 48 1304 Canoe Brook Dr Austin TX 78746 Lost Creek neighborhood resident CAUTION: This is an EXTERNAL email. Please use caution when clicking links or opening attachments. If you believe this to be a malicious or phishing email, please report it using the "Report Message" button in Outlook. For any additional questions or concerns, contact CSIRT at " ". 11 02 C14-2025-0089 - 1120 and 1122 S Capital of Texas Highway; District 810 of 48 Villela, Beverly From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Kevin Wright Thursday, April 2, 2026 3:49 PM Villela, Beverly Case C14-2025-0089 — Conditional Overlay Request Follow Up Flag: Flag Status: Follow up Flagged You don't often get email from . Learn why this is important External Email - Exercise Caution Dear Ms. Villela and Members of the Zoning and Platting Commission, I am a Lost Creek resident writing about Case C14-2025-0089. This site is in one of the most environmentally protected areas of Austin, and the proposed rezoning ignores nearly every applicable protection. Why I care: Lost Creek sits above Barton Creek and the Barton Creek Green Belt. This development could have a big negative impact on this area. The Save Our Springs Alliance has formally opposed this rezoning, calling it “inconsistent with the Imagine Austin Comprehensive Plan” and “car-dependent sprawl.” The site is in the Eanes Creek Watershed — a Water Supply Suburban Watershed in the Drinking Water Protection Zone. The Hill Country Roadway Corridor limits height to 28– 40 feet and requires 40% natural state. The City’s reviewer said DB90 relief “does not appear to apply.” The 90-foot request is 225% of the code limit. This is a scenic roadway, protected watershed, dark skies community, and wildfire zone. OUR ASK — LO-V-DB90 with Conditional Overlay: (commercial ground floor + 3 residential stories) • • • Height cap: 50 feet • • • • • Unit cap: 400, or the number supported by the TIA and Evacuation Study, • • • • • No vehicular access from Lost Creek Blvd • • • — no driveways or connections, current or future whichever is less 12 02 C14-2025-0089 - 1120 and 1122 S Capital of Texas Highway; District 811 of 48 • • Full TIA & Evacuation Study • required before site plan • • • • Family-sized units • • • • • Stepped massing • • • • • Dark sky lighting • • — below 3000K, fully shielded — minimum 30% must be 2-bedroom or larger — no structure above 40 ft within 100 ft of residential Why are these conditions reasonable? The developer told our community “maximum 400 units” at “52–53 feet, four stories.” The application says 475 units at 90 feet. We’re asking the Commission to hold them to their own words. The unit cap of 400 — or the number supported by the TIA and Evacuation Study, whichever is less — ensures density is based on real infrastructure capacity.. The Hill Country Roadway Corridor limits height to 28–40 feet. The City’s own reviewer said DB90 relief “does not appear to apply” to these standards. 50 feet is generous relative to the 40-foot code limit. Staff claimed 3,000 daily trips from vacant buildings. We counted 113 cars. The corrected number is 4,300+ net new trips on a 32-foot street with no sidewalks, no transit (nearest stop: 2.6 miles), and no alternative route for 1,200 families. I support housing with affordable units and neighborhood retail. I am requesting an NTA so we can add the appropriate Conditional Overlay that protects our safety and aligns with the developer’s own promises. Thank you for your consideration. Kevin Wright 6301 Plum Hollow Overlook, Austin, Texas 78746 Lost Creek neighborhood resident of over 14 years. CAUTION: This is an EXTERNAL email. Please use caution when clicking links or opening attachments. If you believe this to be a malicious or phishing email, please report it using the "Report Message" button in Outlook. For any additional questions or concerns, contact CSIRT at " ". 13 02 C14-2025-0089 - 1120 and 1122 S Capital of Texas Highway; District 812 of 48 Villela, Beverly From: Sent: To: Subject: Nicole Barragan Fabiano Thursday, April 2, 2026 2:43 PM Villela, Beverly Traffic Impact Analysis Request – Zoning Case C14-2025-0089 (CityView / Loop 360) Follow Up Flag: Flag Status: Follow up Flagged You don't often get email from Learn why this is important External Email - Exercise Caution Dear Zoning and Platting Commission Members and Planning Staff, My name is Nicole Fabiano, and I have lived in the Lost Creek neighborhood since 2015. I am writing to share my concerns regarding Zoning Case C14-2025-0089, involving the proposed rezoning of the CityView property located near Lost Creek Boulevard and Loop 360. While I recognize the potential for redevelopment at this site, I respectfully urge the Commission and staff to mandate a comprehensive Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) before moving forward with any zoning changes. The traffic worksheet currently on file seems to be based on assumptions that do not align with the current reality of the site. Because the existing office buildings at CityView are largely vacant, the baseline traffic figures used in the worksheet are significantly inflated. This results in an analysis that likely overestimates current usage, creating a misleading starting point for evaluating the project's impact. If this site is transformed into approximately 475 residential units, neighbors estimate the project could add more than 2,000 daily trips. This would be a massive increase for the Lost Creek Boulevard corridor, which already handles between 8,000 and 10,000 daily trips as the primary access point for roughly 1,200 homes. Considering our limited neighborhood access and the specifics of our roads, a development of this magnitude requires a transparent, updated study to clarify: • The true baseline traffic conditions at the largely vacant CityView office site • The net new traffic generated by the proposed residential development • The impact on Lost Creek Boulevard and the Loop 360 intersection • Any necessary roadway improvements or mitigation measures to ensure safety and mobility 14 02 C14-2025-0089 - 1120 and 1122 S Capital of Texas Highway; District 813 of 48 A formal TIA is essential for the City to make a decision rooted in factual, real-world data rather than theoretical projections. I respectfully request that you require this analysis prior to any further advancement of the rezoning request. Thank you for your time and for your dedication to our community’s safety. Sincerely, Nicole Fabiano Lost Creek Resident CAUTION: This is an EXTERNAL email. Please use caution when clicking links or opening attachments. If you believe this to be a malicious or phishing email, please report it using the "Report Message" button in Outlook. For any additional questions or concerns, contact CSIRT at " ". 15 02 C14-2025-0089 - 1120 and 1122 S Capital of Texas Highway; District 814 of 48 Villela, Beverly From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Debbie Bick Thursday, April 2, 2026 1:50 PM Villela, Beverly Case C14-2025-0089 — Conditional Overlay Request Follow Up Flag: Flag Status: Follow up Flagged You don't often get email from . Learn why this is important External Email - Exercise Caution Dear Ms. Villela and Members of the Zoning and Platting Commission, We are Lost Creek residents writing about Case C14-2025-0089. This site is in one of the most environmentally protected areas of Austin, and the proposed rezoning ignores nearly every applicable protection. Why I care: Lost Creek sits above Barton Creek and the Barton Creek Greenbelt. This development could have a big negative impact on this area. The Save Our Springs Alliance has formally opposed this rezoning, calling it “inconsistent with the Imagine Austin Comprehensive Plan” and “car-dependent sprawl.” The site is in the Eanes Creek Watershed — a Water Supply Suburban Watershed in the Drinking Water Protection Zone. The Hill Country Roadway Corridor limits height to 28– 40 feet and requires 40% natural state. The City’s reviewer said DB90 relief “does not appear to apply.” The 90-foot request is 225% of the code limit. This is a scenic roadway, protected watershed, dark skies community, and wildfire zone. OUR ASK — LO-V-DB90 with Conditional Overlay: (commercial ground floor + 3 residential stories) • • • Height cap: 50 feet • • • • • Unit cap: 400, or the number supported by the TIA and Evacuation Study, • • • • • No vehicular access from Lost Creek Blvd • • • • — no driveways or connections, current or future whichever is less 16 02 C14-2025-0089 - 1120 and 1122 S Capital of Texas Highway; District 815 of 48 • Full TIA & Evacuation Study • required before site plan • • • • Family-sized units • • • • • Stepped massing • • • • • Dark sky lighting • • — below 3000K, fully shielded — minimum 30% must be 2-bedroom or larger — no structure above 40 ft within 100 ft of residential Why are these conditions reasonable? The developer told our community “maximum 400 units” at “52–53 feet, four stories.” The application says 475 units at 90 feet. We’re asking the Commission to hold them to their own words. The unit cap of 400 — or the number supported by the TIA and Evacuation Study, whichever is less — ensures density is based on real infrastructure capacity.. The Hill Country Roadway Corridor limits height to 28–40 feet. The City’s own reviewer said DB90 relief “does not appear to apply” to these standards. 50 feet is generous relative to the 40-foot code limit. Staff claimed 3,000 daily trips from vacant buildings. We counted 113 cars. The corrected number is 4,300+ net new trips on a 32-foot street with no sidewalks, no transit (nearest stop: 2.6 miles), and no alternative route for 1,200 families. We support housing with affordable units and neighborhood retail. We are requesting an NTA so we can add the appropriate Conditional Overlay that protects our safety and aligns with the developer’s own promises. Thank you for your consideration. Respectfully submitted, Debbie Bick & Frank Raffaeli 1402 Quaker Ridge Dr Austin, TX 78746 CAUTION: This is an EXTERNAL email. Please use caution when clicking links or opening attachments. If you believe this to be a malicious or phishing email, please report it using the "Report Message" button in Outlook. For any additional questions or concerns, contact CSIRT at " ". 17 02 C14-2025-0089 - 1120 and 1122 S Capital of Texas Highway; District 816 of 48 Villela, Beverly From: Sent: To: Subject: Jill Gaskins Thursday, April 2, 2026 1:48 PM Villela, Beverly Request for Traffic Impact Analysis – Zoning Case C14-2025-0089 (CityView / Loop 360) Follow Up Flag: Flag Status: Follow up Flagged You don't often get email from . Learn why this is important External Email - Exercise Caution Dear Zoning and Platting Commission Members and Planning Staff, My name is Megan Gaskins, and I am a resident of the Lost Creek neighborhood. I am writing regarding Zoning Case C14-2025-0089, the proposed rezoning of the CityView property near the intersection of Lost Creek Boulevard and Loop 360. While I understand that redevelopment of this property is being considered, I respectfully ask the Commission and staff to require a full Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) before any zoning decision is made. The current traffic worksheet appears to rely on assumptions that do not reflect real-world conditions at the site today. The existing office buildings within the CityView complex are largely unoccupied, meaning the baseline traffic used in the worksheet significantly overstates current traffic volumes. As a result, the analysis may incorrectly assume that a large amount of existing traffic already occurs at the site. If the property is redeveloped with approximately 475 residential units, residents estimate that the project could generate well over 2,000 additional daily trips, which would represent a substantial increase in traffic through the Lost Creek Boulevard corridor. Lost Creek Boulevard already serves ~8000 – 10,000 daily trips and functions as the primary ingress and egress route for roughly 1,200 homes in the Lost Creek neighborhood. Given the existing traffic patterns, the constrained roadway geometry, and the lack of alternative neighborhood access points, a development of this scale warrants a comprehensive and updated traffic study so that the City and the public can understand: • • • The true baseline traffic conditions at the largely vacant CityView office site • • • • 18 02 C14-2025-0089 - 1120 and 1122 S Capital of Texas Highway; District 817 of 48 • The net new traffic generated by the proposed residential development • • • • The impact on Lost Creek Boulevard and the Loop 360 intersection • • • • Any necessary roadway improvements or mitigation measures to ensure safety and mobility • • A Traffic Impact Analysis would allow the City to make an informed decision based on accurate data rather than outdated or theoretical assumptions. I respectfully request that the Commission require a full Traffic Impact Analysis prior to advancing this rezoning request. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Megan Gaskins Falcon Ledge Drive Austin, TX 78746 CAUTION: This is an EXTERNAL email. Please use caution when clicking links or opening attachments. If you believe this to be a malicious or phishing email, please report it using the "Report Message" button in Outlook. For any additional questions or concerns, contact CSIRT at " ". 19 02 C14-2025-0089 - 1120 and 1122 S Capital of Texas Highway; District 818 of 48 Villela, Beverly From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Debbie Andries Thursday, April 2, 2026 11:33 AM Villela, Beverly Case C14-2025-0089 — Conditional Overlay Request Follow Up Flag: Flag Status: Follow up Flagged You don't often get email from . Learn why this is important External Email - Exercise Caution EMAIL TO: CC: SUBJECT: Request for Neighborhood Tra(cid:67)ic Analysis — Case C14-2025-0089 -Rosedale? ; Dear Ms. Villela, The residents of Lost Creek are formally requesting that the Planning Department conduct a Neighborhood Tra(cid:38)ic Analysis (NTA) for Case C14-2025-0089. We require this professional analysis to be completed now so that the zoning case may be approved with the necessary Conditional Overlays to ensure public safety. Our request is based on the clear precedent set in Case C14-2025-0094 (Rosedale Multifamily), where the City performed a rigorous technical analysis for a project of similar density. A comparative audit of the two cases reveals signiﬁcant deviations that must be addressed: 1. Discrepancy in ITE Trip Generation Methodology in the TIA Worksheet ● How are we to reconcile the use of ITE Code 222 (High-Rise) for a mid-rise project? The Rosedale project (75–90 feet) correctly utilized ITE Code 221 (Midrise Multifamily). ● What is the basis for bypassing the 2,000-trip threshold? Applying the Rosedale standard of 4.54 trips per unit to our 475 units results in 2,157 unadjusted daily trips. ● Per the Transportation Criteria Manual (TCM), exceeding 2,000 trips triggers a mandatory Transportation Assessment and TDM plan. Using Code 222 artiﬁcially defers these requirements. 2. Veriﬁcation of Existing Tra(cid:38)ic Credits in TIA Worksheet ● What was the methodology for a 3,000-trip credit for vacant facilities? O(cid:67)ice buildings that are substantially vacant, our ﬁeld counts show only 113 actual vehicle trips. How does this align with the Rosedale precedent? City veriﬁed only 489 trips in an actively occupied area. 3. Critical Life-Safety and Evacuation Constraints ● How does the current waiver account for the unique constraints of a WUI Zone? Lost Creek Boulevard is the sole ingress and egress for over 1,200 households in a designated Wildﬁre Urban Interface (WUI) Zone A/B. ● What is the City’s plan for ensuring evacuation safety? No ﬁeld tra(cid:67)ic data has been collected for Lost Creek, despite a fatal crash at our primary access point on April 6, 2025. Our Request To ensure the equitable application of City standards and the protection of public safety, we respectfully ask the Planning Department to do a Neighborhood Tra(cid:67)ic Analysis : 20 02 C14-2025-0089 - 1120 and 1122 S Capital of Texas Highway; District 819 of 48 1. Correct the ITE Code to 221 (Midrise) to ensure mathematical consistency with the Rosedale project and the TCM. This will demonstrate the need for NTA, with a Wildﬁre Evacuation Analysis as a formal component of the NTA. We look forward to your guidance on aligning the City View analysis with the professional standards demonstrated in the Rosedale case. This analysis is an essential prerequisite for zoning approval with the correct overlays to protect the long-term livability and safety of the Lost Creek community. Thank you for your consideration. EMAIL TO: CC: SUBJECT: Case C14-2025-0089 — Conditional Overlay Request Dear Ms. Villela and Members of the Zoning and Platting Commission, I am a Lost Creek resident writing about Case C14-2025-0089. This site is in one of the most environmentally protected areas of Austin, and the proposed rezoning ignores nearly every applicable protection. Why I care: __this development is being pushed through too quickly by developers with no concern for the Lost Creek neighborhood, only money _________________________________________ The Save Our Springs Alliance has formally opposed this rezoning, calling it “inconsistent with the Imagine Austin Comprehensive Plan” and “car-dependent sprawl.” The site is in the Eanes Creek Watershed — a Water Supply Suburban Watershed in the Drinking Water Protection Zone. The Hill Country Roadway Corridor limits height to 28– 40 feet and requires 40% natural state. The City’s reviewer said DB90 relief “does not appear to apply.” The 90-foot request is 225% of the code limit. This is a scenic roadway, protected watershed, dark skies community, and wildﬁre zone. OUR ASK — LO-V-DB90 with Conditional Overlay: ● Height cap: 50 feet (commercial ground ﬂoor + 3 residential stories) ● Unit cap: 400, or the number supported by the TIA and Evacuation Study, whichever is less ● No vehicular access from Lost Creek Blvd — no driveways or connections, current or future ● Full TIA & Evacuation Study required before site plan ● Family-sized units — minimum 30% must be 2-bedroom or larger ● Stepped massing — no structure above 40 ft within 100 ft of residential ● Dark sky lighting — below 3000K, fully shielded Why are these conditions reasonable? The developer told our community “maximum 400 units” at “52–53 feet, four stories.” The application says 475 units at 90 feet. We’re asking the Commission to hold them to their own words. The unit cap of 400 — or the number supported by the TIA and Evacuation Study, whichever is less — ensures density is based on real infrastructure capacity.. The Hill Country Roadway Corridor limits height to 28–40 feet. The City’s own reviewer said DB90 relief “does not appear to apply” to these standards. 50 feet is generous relative to the 40-foot code limit. Sta(cid:67) claimed 3,000 daily trips from vacant buildings. We counted 113 cars. The corrected number is 4,300+ net new trips on a 32-foot street with no sidewalks, no transit (nearest stop: 2.6 miles), and no alternative route for 1,200 families. I support housing with a(cid:67)ordable units and neighborhood retail. I am requesting an NTA so we can add the appropriate Conditional Overlay that protects our safety and aligns with the developer’s own promises. Thank you for your consideration. Respectfully, 21 02 C14-2025-0089 - 1120 and 1122 S Capital of Texas Highway; District 820 of 48 Name: ____________Debbie Andries____________________________________________________________ Address: _6004 Diamond Head Drive, Austin, TX 78746__________________________________________ CAUTION: This is an EXTERNAL email. Please use caution when clicking links or opening attachments. If you believe this to be a malicious or phishing email, please report it using the "Report Message" button in Outlook. For any additional questions or concerns, contact CSIRT at " ". 22 02 C14-2025-0089 - 1120 and 1122 S Capital of Texas Highway; District 821 of 48 Villela, Beverly From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Marvin Hecker < Thursday, April 2, 2026 9:53 AM Villela, Beverly > Request for Neighborhood Traffic Analysis ? Case C14-2025-0089 You don't often get email from Learn why this is important External Email - Exercise Caution Dear Ms. Villela, As a resident of Lost Creek, I am formally requesting that the Planning Department conduct a Neighborhood Traffic Analysis (NTA) for Case C14-2025-0089. We require this professional analysis to be completed now so that the zoning case may be approved with the necessary Conditional Overlays to ensure public safety. Our request is based on the clear precedent set in Case C14-2025-0094 (Rosedale Multifamily), where the City performed a rigorous technical analysis for a project of similar density. A comparative audit of the two cases reveals significant deviations that must be addressed: 1. Discrepancy in ITE Trip Generation Methodology in the TIA Worksheet ● How are we to reconcile the use of ITE Code 222 (High-Rise) for a mid-rise project? The Rosedale project (75–90 feet) correctly utilized ITE Code 221 (Midrise Multifamily). ● What is the basis for bypassing the 2,000-trip threshold? Applying the Rosedale standard of 4.54 trips per unit to our 475 units results in 2,157 unadjusted daily trips. ● Per the Transportation Criteria Manual (TCM), exceeding 2,000 trips triggers a mandatory Transportation Assessment and TDM plan. Using Code 222 artificially defers these requirements. 2. Verification of Existing Traffic Credits in TIA Worksheet ● What was the methodology for a 3,000-trip credit for vacant facilities? Office buildings that are substantially vacant, our field counts show only 113 actual vehicle trips. How does this align with the Rosedale precedent? City verified only 489 trips in an actively occupied area. 3. Critical Life-Safety and Evacuation Constraints 23 02 C14-2025-0089 - 1120 and 1122 S Capital of Texas Highway; District 822 of 48 ● How does the current waiver account for the unique constraints of a WUI Zone? Lost Creek Boulevard is the sole ingress and egress for over 1,200 households in a designated Wildfire Urban Interface (WUI) Zone A/B. ● What is the City’s plan for ensuring evacuation safety? No field traffic data has been collected for Lost Creek, despite a fatal crash at our primary access point on April 6, 2025. Our Request – To ensure the equitable application of City standards and the protection of public safety, we respectfully ask the Planning Department to do a Neighborhood Traffic Analysis : Correct the ITE Code to 221 (Midrise) to ensure mathematical consistency with the Rosedale project and the TCM. This will demonstrate the need for NTA, with a Wildfire Evacuation Analysis as a formal component of the NTA. We look forward to your guidance on aligning the City View analysis with the professional standards demonstrated in the Rosedale case. This analysis is an essential prerequisite for zoning approval with the correct overlays to protect the long-term livability and safety of the Lost Creek community. Respectfully, Marvin Hecker 1319 Wilson Heights Drive Austin, Texas 78746 512-217-3162 CAUTION: This is an EXTERNAL email. Please use caution when clicking links or opening attachments. If you believe this to be a malicious or phishing email, please report it using the "Report Message" button in Outlook. For any additional questions or concerns, contact CSIRT at " ". 24 02 C14-2025-0089 - 1120 and 1122 S Capital of Texas Highway; District 823 of 48 Villela, Beverly From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Randy Denbow Thursday, April 2, 2026 9:25 AM Villela, Beverly Case C14-2025-0089 — Conditional Overlay Request Follow Up Flag: Flag Status: Follow up Flagged You don't often get email from . Learn why this is important External Email - Exercise Caution Dear Ms. Villela and Members of the Zoning and Platting Commission, I am a Lost Creek resident writing about Case C14-2025-0089. This site is in one of the most environmentally protected areas of Austin, and the proposed rezoning ignores nearly every applicable protection. Why I care: Lost Creek sits above Barton Creek and the Barton Creek Green Belt. This development could have a big negative impact on this area. The Save Our Springs Alliance has formally opposed this rezoning, calling it “inconsistent with the Imagine Austin Comprehensive Plan” and “car-dependent sprawl.” The site is in the Eanes Creek Watershed — a Water Supply Suburban Watershed in the Drinking Water Protection Zone. The Hill Country Roadway Corridor limits height to 28– 40 feet and requires 40% natural state. The City’s reviewer said DB90 relief “does not appear to apply.” The 90-foot request is 225% of the code limit. This is a scenic roadway, protected watershed, dark skies community, and wildfire zone. OUR ASK — LO-V-DB90 with Conditional Overlay: (commercial ground floor + 3 residential stories) • • • Height cap: 50 feet • • • • • Unit cap: 400, or the number supported by the TIA and Evacuation Study, • • • • • No vehicular access from Lost Creek Blvd • • • • — no driveways or connections, current or future whichever is less 25 02 C14-2025-0089 - 1120 and 1122 S Capital of Texas Highway; District 824 of 48 • Full TIA & Evacuation Study • required before site plan • • • • Family-sized units • • • • • Stepped massing • • • • • Dark sky lighting • • — below 3000K, fully shielded — minimum 30% must be 2-bedroom or larger — no structure above 40 ft within 100 ft of residential Why are these conditions reasonable? The developer told our community “maximum 400 units” at “52–53 feet, four stories.” The application says 475 units at 90 feet. We’re asking the Commission to hold them to their own words. The unit cap of 400 — or the number supported by the TIA and Evacuation Study, whichever is less — ensures density is based on real infrastructure capacity.. The Hill Country Roadway Corridor limits height to 28–40 feet. The City’s own reviewer said DB90 relief “does not appear to apply” to these standards. 50 feet is generous relative to the 40-foot code limit. Staff claimed 3,000 daily trips from vacant buildings. We counted 113 cars. The corrected number is 4,300+ net new trips on a 32-foot street with no sidewalks, no transit (nearest stop: 2.6 miles), and no alternative route for 1,200 families. I support housing with affordable units and neighborhood retail. I am requesting an NTA so we can add the appropriate Conditional Overlay that protects our safety and aligns with the developer’s own promises. Thank you for your consideration. Respectfully, Randy and Virginia Denbow 1906 Georgia Landing Cove Austin, TX 78746 CAUTION: This is an EXTERNAL email. Please use caution when clicking links or opening attachments. If you believe this to be a malicious or phishing email, please report it using the "Report Message" button in Outlook. For any additional questions or concerns, contact CSIRT at " ". 26 02 C14-2025-0089 - 1120 and 1122 S Capital of Texas Highway; District 825 of 48 Villela, Beverly From: Sent: To: Subject: BUDISELICH & ASSOC. Thursday, April 2, 2026 6:57 AM Villela, Beverly Re: Zoning Re: Lost Creek resident writing about Case C14-2025-0089 Follow Up Flag: Flag Status: Follow up Flagged You don't often get email from . Learn why this is important External Email - Exercise Caution Ivan Budiselich Tel. 562-230-9505 baainvestigations.com Dear Ms. Villela/Zoning and Platting Commission, I am a Lost Creek resident writing about Case C14-2025-0089. This site and the proposed rezoning ignores nearly every applicable protection. Lost Creek sits above Barton Creek and the Barton Creek Green Belt, and this development will have a negative impact on this area. The site is in the Eanes Creek Watershed and the Hill Country Roadway Corridor, which limits height to 28–40 feet and requires 40% natural state - the 90-foot request is 225% of the code limit. This is a scenic roadway, protected watershed, dark skies community, and wildfire zone. The developer told our community “maximum 400 units” at “52–53 feet, four stories.” The application says 475 units at 90 feet. We’re asking the Commission to hold them to their own words. The unit cap of 400 — or the number supported by the TIA and Evacuation Study, whichever is less — ensures density is based on real infrastructure capacity. Staff claimed 3,000 daily trips from vacant buildings. We counted 113 cars. The corrected number is 4,300+ net new trips on a 32-foot street with no sidewalks, no transit (nearest stop: 2.6 miles), and no alternative route for 1,200 families. I support housing with affordable units and neighborhood retail. I am requesting an NTA so we can add the appropriate Conditional Overlay that protects our safety and aligns with the developer’s own promises. Thank you for your consideration. Respectfully, Ivan Budiselich 6803 Saint Andrews Way Austin, TX 78746 27 02 C14-2025-0089 - 1120 and 1122 S Capital of Texas Highway; District 826 of 48 Villela, Beverly From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Philomena Blees Wednesday, April 1, 2026 8:06 PM Villela, Beverly Zoning Re: Lost Creek resident writing about Case C14-2025-0089 Follow Up Flag: Flag Status: Follow up Flagged You don't often get email from . Learn why this is important External Email - Exercise Caution Dear Ms. Villela and Members of the Zoning and Platting Commission, I am a Lost Creek resident writing about Case C14-2025-0089. This site is in one of the most environmentally protected areas of Austin, and the proposed rezoning ignores nearly every applicable protection. Why I care: Lost Creek sits above Barton Creek and the Barton Creek Green Belt. This development could have a big negative impact on this area. The Save Our Springs Alliance has formally opposed this rezoning, calling it “inconsistent with the Imagine Austin Comprehensive Plan” and “car-dependent sprawl.” The site is in the Eanes Creek Watershed — a Water Supply Suburban Watershed in the Drinking Water Protection Zone. The Hill Country Roadway Corridor limits height to 28– 40 feet and requires 40% natural state. The City’s reviewer said DB90 relief “does not appear to apply.” The 90-foot request is 225% of the code limit. This is a scenic roadway, protected watershed, dark skies community, and wildfire zone. OUR ASK — LO-V-DB90 with Conditional Overlay: • Height cap: 50 feet (commercial ground floor + 3 residential stories) • Unit cap: 400, or the number supported by the TIA and Evacuation Study, whichever is less • No vehicular access from Lost Creek Blvd — no driveways or connections, current or future • Full TIA & Evacuation Study required before site plan • Family-sized units — minimum 30% must be 2-bedroom or larger • Stepped massing — no structure above 40 ft within 100 ft of residential • Dark sky lighting — below 3000K, fully shielded Why are these conditions reasonable? The developer told our community “maximum 400 units” at “52–53 feet, four stories.” The application says 475 units at 90 feet. We’re asking the Commission to hold them to their own words. The unit cap of 400 — or the number supported by the TIA and Evacuation Study, whichever is less — ensures density is based on real infrastructure capacity. The Hill Country Roadway Corridor limits height to 28–40 feet. The City’s own reviewer said DB90 relief “does not appear to apply” to these standards. 50 feet is generous relative to the 40-foot code limit. 29 02 C14-2025-0089 - 1120 and 1122 S Capital of Texas Highway; District 827 of 48 Staff claimed 3,000 daily trips from vacant buildings. We counted 113 cars. The corrected number is 4,300+ net new trips on a 32-foot street with no sidewalks, no transit (nearest stop: 2.6 miles), and no alternative route for 1,200 families. I support housing with affordable units and neighborhood retail. I am requesting an NTA so we can add the appropriate Conditional Overlay that protects our safety and aligns with the developer’s own promises. Thank you for your consideration. Respectfully, Philomena T. Blees 1510 Falcon Ledge Dr. Austin, TX 78746 CAUTION: This is an EXTERNAL email. Please use caution when clicking links or opening attachments. If you believe this to be a malicious or phishing email, please report it using the "Report Message" button in Outlook. For any additional questions or concerns, contact CSIRT at " . 30 02 C14-2025-0089 - 1120 and 1122 S Capital of Texas Highway; District 828 of 48 Villela, Beverly From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Hall, Evan Wednesday, April 1, 2026 4:53 PM Villela, Beverly Case C14-2025-0089 — Conditional Overlay Request You don't often get email from . Learn why this is important External Email - Exercise Caution Dear Ms. Villela and Members of the Zoning and Platting Commission: I am a Lost Creek resident writing about Case C14-2025-0089. This site is in one of the most environmentally protected areas of Austin, and the proposed rezoning ignores nearly every applicable protection. There is absolutely no reason for you to approve a rezoning request like this that essentially provides a real estate developer with a complete “blank check” that will materially adversely a(cid:67)ect the daily lives of thousands of Lost Creek residents. This proposed rezoning request is beyond the pale in many respects, and should not be approved without reasonable and appropriate guardrails to ensure that the developer does not take actions or engage in activities that materially harm existing residents. Why I care: Lost Creek sits above Barton Creek and the Barton Creek Green Belt. This development could have a big negative impact on this area. The Save Our Springs Alliance has formally opposed this rezoning, calling it “inconsistent with the Imagine Austin Comprehensive Plan” and “car-dependent sprawl.” The site is in the Eanes Creek Watershed — a Water Supply Suburban Watershed in the Drinking Water Protection Zone. The Hill Country Roadway Corridor limits height to 28–40 feet and requires 40% natural state. The City’s reviewer said DB90 relief “does not appear to apply.” The 90-foot request is 225% of the code limit. This is a scenic roadway, protected watershed, dark skies community, and wildﬁre zone. OUR ASK — LO-V-DB90 with Conditional Overlay: • Height cap: 50 feet (commercial ground ﬂoor + 3 residential stories) • Unit cap: 400, or the number supported by the TIA and Evacuation Study, whichever is less • No vehicular access from Lost Creek Blvd — no driveways or connections, current or future • Full TIA & Evacuation Study required before site plan • Family-sized units — minimum 30% must be 2-bedroom or larger • Stepped massing — no structure above 40 ft within 100 ft of residential • Dark sky lighting — below 3000K, fully shielded Why are these conditions reasonable? 31 02 C14-2025-0089 - 1120 and 1122 S Capital of Texas Highway; District 829 of 48 The developer told our community “maximum 400 units” at “52–53 feet, four stories.” The application says 475 units at 90 feet. We’re asking the Commission to hold them to their own words. The unit cap of 400 — or the number supported by the TIA and Evacuation Study, whichever is less — ensures density is based on real infrastructure capacity. The Hill Country Roadway Corridor limits height to 28–40 feet. The City’s own reviewer said DB90 relief “does not appear to apply” to these standards. 50 feet is generous relative to the 40-foot code limit. Sta(cid:67) claimed 3,000 daily trips from vacant buildings. We counted 113 cars. The corrected number is 4,300+ net new trips on a 32-foot street with no sidewalks, no transit (nearest stop: 2.6 miles), and no alternative route for 1,200 families. I am requesting an NTA so we can add the appropriate Conditional Overlay that protects our safety and aligns with the developer’s own promises (which they are unlikely to live up to without the City holding their feet to the ﬁre). Thank you for your consideration. Respectfully, Kate and Evan Hall 1801 Georgia Landing Cv Austin, TX 78746 Evan Hall He/Him/His Partner Haynes and Boone, LLP 98 San Jacinto Boulevard Suite 1500 Austin, TX 78701 (t) +1 214.651.5831 (f) +1 214.200.0456 vCard | Bio | Website CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This electronic mail transmission is confidential, may be privileged and should be read or retained only by the intended recipient. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately notify the sender and delete it from your system. CAUTION: This is an EXTERNAL email. Please use caution when clicking links or opening attachments. If you believe this to be a malicious or phishing email, please report it using the "Report Message" button in Outlook. For any additional questions or concerns, contact CSIRT at " ". 32 02 C14-2025-0089 - 1120 and 1122 S Capital of Texas Highway; District 830 of 48 Villela, Beverly From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Christian Casey Wednesday, April 1, 2026 12:31 PM Villela, Beverly Case C14-2025-0089 — Conditional Overlay Request You don't often get email from . Learn why this is important External Email - Exercise Caution Dear Ms. Villela and Members of the Zoning and Platting Commission, I am a Lost Creek resident writing about Case C14-2025-0089. This site is in one of the most environmentally protected areas of Austin, and the proposed rezoning ignores nearly every applicable protection. Why I care: Lost Creek sits above Barton Creek and the Barton Creek Green Belt. This development could have a big negative impact on this area. The Save Our Springs Alliance has formally opposed this rezoning, calling it “inconsistent with the Imagine Austin Comprehensive Plan” and “car-dependent sprawl.” The site is in the Eanes Creek Watershed — a Water Supply Suburban Watershed in the Drinking Water Protection Zone. The Hill Country Roadway Corridor limits height to 28– 40 feet and requires 40% natural state. The City’s reviewer said DB90 relief “does not appear to apply.” The 90-foot request is 225% of the code limit. This is a scenic roadway, protected watershed, dark skies community, and wildfire zone. OUR ASK — LO-V-DB90 with Conditional Overlay: • • • Height • • • • • • Unit • • • • • No • cap: 50 feet (commercial ground floor + 3 residential stories) vehicular access from Lost Creek Blvd 33 cap: 400, or the number supported by the TIA and Evacuation Study, whichever is less 02 C14-2025-0089 - 1120 and 1122 S Capital of Texas Highway; District 831 of 48 — no driveways or connections, current or future TIA & Evacuation Study required before site plan units — minimum 30% must be 2-bedroom or larger • • • • • Full • • • • • • Family-sized • • • • • • Stepped • massing • — no structure above 40 ft within 100 ft of residential • • • • Dark • • • sky lighting — below 3000K, fully shielded Why are these conditions reasonable? The developer told our community “maximum 400 units” at “52–53 feet, four stories.” The application says 475 units at 90 feet. We’re asking the Commission to hold them to their own words. The unit cap of 400 — or the number supported by the TIA and Evacuation Study, whichever is less — ensures density is based on real infrastructure capacity.. The Hill Country Roadway Corridor limits height to 28–40 feet. The City’s own reviewer said DB90 relief “does not appear to apply” to these standards. 50 feet is generous relative to the 40-foot code limit. Staff claimed 3,000 daily trips from vacant buildings. We counted 113 cars. The corrected number is 4,300+ net new trips on a 32-foot street with no sidewalks, no transit (nearest stop: 2.6 miles), and no alternative route for 1,200 families. I support housing with affordable units and neighborhood retail. I am requesting an NTA so we can add the appropriate Conditional Overlay that protects our safety and aligns with the developer’s own promises. Thank you for your consideration. Christian Casey 5911 Front Royal Drive Austin, Tx 78746 512-497-7052 34 02 C14-2025-0089 - 1120 and 1122 S Capital of Texas Highway; District 832 of 48 Villela, Beverly From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Angela D'Andrea Wednesday, April 1, 2026 12:11 PM Villela, Beverly Case C14-2025-0089 — Conditional Overlay Request You don't often get email from Learn why this is important External Email - Exercise Caution Dear Ms. Villela and Members of the Zoning and Platting Commission, I am a Lost Creek resident writing about Case C14-2025-0089. This site is in one of the most environmentally protected areas of Austin, and the proposed rezoning ignores nearly every applicable protection. Why I care: Lost Creek sits above Barton Creek and the Barton Creek Green Belt. This development could have a big negative impact on this area. The Save Our Springs Alliance has formally opposed this rezoning, calling it “inconsistent with the Imagine Austin Comprehensive Plan” and “car-dependent sprawl.” The site is in the Eanes Creek Watershed — a Water Supply Suburban Watershed in the Drinking Water Protection Zone. The Hill Country Roadway Corridor limits height to 28– 40 feet and requires 40% natural state. The City’s reviewer said DB90 relief “does not appear to apply.” The 90-foot request is 225% of the code limit. This is a scenic roadway, protected watershed, dark skies community, and wildfire zone. OUR ASK — LO-V-DB90 with Conditional Overlay: • Height cap: 50 feet (commercial ground floor + 3 residential stories) • Unit cap: 400, or the number supported by the TIA and Evacuation Study, whichever is less • No vehicular access from Lost Creek Blvd — no driveways or connections, current or future • Full TIA & Evacuation Study required before site plan • Family-sized units — minimum 30% must be 2-bedroom or larger • Stepped massing — no structure above 40 ft within 100 ft of residential • Dark sky lighting — below 3000K, fully shielded Why are these conditions reasonable? The developer told our community “maximum 400 units” at “52–53 feet, four stories.” The application says 475 units at 90 feet. We’re asking the Commission to hold them to their own words. The unit cap of 400 — or the number supported by the TIA and Evacuation Study, whichever is less — ensures density is based on real infrastructure capacity.. The Hill Country Roadway Corridor limits height to 28–40 feet. The City’s own reviewer said DB90 relief “does not appear to apply” to these standards. 50 feet is generous relative to the 40-foot code limit. Staff claimed 3,000 daily trips from vacant buildings. We counted 113 cars. The corrected number is 4,300+ net new trips on a 32-foot street with no sidewalks, no transit (nearest stop: 2.6 miles), and no alternative route for 1,200 families. I support housing with affordable units and neighborhood retail. I am requesting an NTA so we can add the appropriate Conditional Overlay that protects our safety and aligns with the developer’s own promises. Thank you for your consideration. Respectfully, Angela and Al D'Andrea 2106 Key West Cv. Austin, TX 78746 36 02 C14-2025-0089 - 1120 and 1122 S Capital of Texas Highway; District 833 of 48 Villela, Beverly From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Brent Baker Wednesday, April 1, 2026 11:47 AM Villela, Beverly; Alison Baker Case C14-2025-0089 — Conditional Overlay Request Follow Up Flag: Flag Status: Follow up Flagged You don't often get email from Learn why this is important External Email - Exercise Caution Dear Ms. Villela and Members of the Zoning and Platting Commission, We are Lost Creek residents writing about Case C14-2025-0089. This site is in one of the most environmentally protected areas of Austin, and the proposed rezoning ignores nearly every applicable protection. Why I care: Lost Creek sits above Barton Creek and the Barton Creek Green Belt. This development could have a big negative impact on this area. The Save Our Springs Alliance has formally opposed this rezoning, calling it “inconsistent with the Imagine Austin Comprehensive Plan” and “car-dependent sprawl.” The site is in the Eanes Creek Watershed — a Water Supply Suburban Watershed in the Drinking Water Protection Zone. The Hill Country Roadway Corridor limits height to 28–40 feet and requires 40% natural state. The City’s reviewer said DB90 relief “does not appear to apply.” The 90-foot request is 225% of the code limit. This is a scenic roadway, protected watershed, dark skies community, and wildfire zone. OUR ASK — LO-V-DB90 with Conditional Overlay: • Height cap: 50 feet (commercial ground floor + 3 residential stories) • Unit cap: 400, or the number supported by the TIA and Evacuation Study, whichever is less • No vehicular access from Lost Creek Blvd — no driveways or connections, current or future • Full TIA & Evacuation Study required before site plan • Family-sized units — minimum 30% must be 2-bedroom or larger • Stepped massing — no structure above 40 ft within 100 ft of residential • Dark sky lighting — below 3000K, fully shielded Why are these conditions reasonable? 38 02 C14-2025-0089 - 1120 and 1122 S Capital of Texas Highway; District 834 of 48 The developer told our community “maximum 400 units” at “52–53 feet, four stories.” The application says 475 units at 90 feet. We’re asking the Commission to hold them to their own words. The unit cap of 400 — or the number supported by the TIA and Evacuation Study, whichever is less — ensures density is based on real infrastructure capacity. The Hill Country Roadway Corridor limits height to 28–40 feet. The City’s own reviewer said DB90 relief “does not appear to apply” to these standards. 50 feet is generous relative to the 40-foot code limit. Staff claimed 3,000 daily trips from vacant buildings. We counted 113 cars. The corrected number is 4,300+ net new trips on a 32-foot street with no sidewalks, no transit (nearest stop: 2.6 miles), and no alternative route for 1,200 families. We support housing with affordable units and neighborhood retail. We are requesting an NTA so we can add the appropriate Conditional Overlay that protects our safety and aligns with the developer’s own promises. Thank you for your consideration. Respectfully, Alison and Brent Baker 1206 Wilson Heights Drive CAUTION: This is an EXTERNAL email. Please use caution when clicking links or opening attachments. If you believe this to be a malicious or phishing email, please report it using the "Report Message" button in Outlook. For any additional questions or concerns, contact CSIRT at " ". 39 02 C14-2025-0089 - 1120 and 1122 S Capital of Texas Highway; District 835 of 48 Villela, Beverly From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Chris Lickteig Wednesday, April 1, 2026 11:40 AM Villela, Beverly Case C14-2025-0089 — Conditional Overlay Request You don't often get email from . Learn why this is important External Email - Exercise Caution Dear Ms. Villela and Members of the Zoning and Platting Commission, I am a Lost Creek resident writing about Case C14-2025-0089. This site is in one of the most environmentally protected areas of Austin, and the proposed rezoning ignores nearly every applicable protection. Why I care: Lost Creek sits above Barton Creek and the Barton Creek Green Belt. This development could have a big negative impact on this area. The Save Our Springs Alliance has formally opposed this rezoning, calling it “inconsistent with the Imagine Austin Comprehensive Plan” and “car-dependent sprawl.” The site is in the Eanes Creek Watershed — a Water Supply Suburban Watershed in the Drinking Water Protection Zone. The Hill Country Roadway Corridor limits height to 28– 40 feet and requires 40% natural state. The City’s reviewer said DB90 relief “does not appear to apply.” The 90-foot request is 225% of the code limit. This is a scenic roadway, protected watershed, dark skies community, and wildfire zone. OUR ASK — LO-V-DB90 with Conditional Overlay: • • • Height • • • • • • Unit • • • • • No • cap: 50 feet (commercial ground floor + 3 residential stories) vehicular access from Lost Creek Blvd 40 cap: 400, or the number supported by the TIA and Evacuation Study, whichever is less 02 C14-2025-0089 - 1120 and 1122 S Capital of Texas Highway; District 836 of 48 — no driveways or connections, current or future TIA & Evacuation Study required before site plan • • • • • Full • • • • • • Family-sized • units — • minimum 30% must be 2-bedroom or larger • • • • Stepped • massing • — no structure above 40 ft within 100 ft of residential • • • • Dark • • • sky lighting — below 3000K, fully shielded Why are these conditions reasonable? The developer told our community “maximum 400 units” at “52–53 feet, four stories.” The application says 475 units at 90 feet. We’re asking the Commission to hold them to their own words. The unit cap of 400 — or the number supported by the TIA and Evacuation Study, whichever is less — ensures density is based on real infrastructure capacity. The Hill Country Roadway Corridor limits height to 28–40 feet. The City’s own reviewer said DB90 relief “does not appear to apply” to these standards. 50 feet is generous relative to the 40-foot code limit. Staff claimed 3,000 daily trips from vacant buildings. We counted 113 cars. The corrected number is 4,300+ net new trips on a 32-foot street with no sidewalks, no transit (nearest stop: 2.6 miles), and no alternative route for 1,200 families. I support housing with affordable units and neighborhood retail. I am requesting an NTA so we can add the appropriate Conditional Overlay that protects our safety and aligns with the developer’s own promises. Thank you for your consideration. Respectfully, Amy and Chris Lickteig 1349 Lost Creek Blvd. Austin, TX 78746 41 02 C14-2025-0089 - 1120 and 1122 S Capital of Texas Highway; District 837 of 48 Villela, Beverly From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Beverly and Ella, Doug Keenan Tuesday, April 7, 2026 8:46 AM Villela, Beverly; LandUseLiaison Rosa Yupari; Scott Smith URGENT: Formal Record of Technical Opposition – Case C14-2025-0089 (April 7 Hearing) External Email - Exercise Caution Regarding tonight’s Zoning and Platting Commission hearing for Case C14-2025-0089 (1120 and 1122 S. Capital of Texas Hwy), I am writing to ensure my technical opposition is fully represented in the official record. While I understand from our previous correspondence that I am unable to donate my 3 minutes of speaking time to Rosa Yupari or Scott Smith while attending virtually, I want to ensure the Commission is aware of the specific technical data I have submitted. I request that the following be explicitly noted for the Commissioners today: 1. Written Opposition: My wife and I maintain our formal opposition to this rezoning. 2. Technical Data: Please ensure that all previous correspondences regarding my technical "Reality Check" and traffic impact analysis for this specific site are included in the backup materials provided to the Commissioners. 3. Representative Testimony: As I cannot donate time virtually, I have coordinated with Rosa Yupari and Scott Smith to ensure our neighborhood’s technical concerns are voiced during her allotted time. Thank you for ensuring these materials are part of the permanent case file and are available for the Commission’s review prior to any action. Sincerely, Douglas P. Keenan 2001 Port Royal Dr. CAUTION: This is an EXTERNAL email. Please use caution when clicking links or opening attachments. If you believe this to be a malicious or phishing email, please report it using the "Report Message" button in Outlook. For any additional questions or concerns, contact CSIRT at " ". 1 02 C14-2025-0089 - 1120 and 1122 S Capital of Texas Highway; District 838 of 48 Villela, Beverly From: Sent: To: Subject: Katie Mayo Sunday, April 5, 2026 9:25 AM Villela, Beverly Request for Traffic Impact Analysis – Zoning Case C14-2025-0089 (CityView / Loop 360) You don't often get email from Learn why this is important External Email - Exercise Caution Dear Zoning and Platting Commission Members and Planning Staff, My name is Katie Mayo, and I am a resident of the Lost Creek neighborhood. My husband and I have lived at 1603 Mill Springs Dr since 2015. I am writing regarding Zoning Case C14-2025-0089, the proposed rezoning of the CityView property near the intersection of Lost Creek Boulevard and Loop 360. I respectfully ask the Commission and staff to require a full Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) before any zoning decision is made. The current traffic worksheet appears to rely on assumptions that do not reflect real-world conditions at the site today. The existing office buildings within the CityView complex are largely unoccupied, meaning the baseline traffic used in the worksheet significantly overstates current traffic volumes. As a result, the analysis may incorrectly assume that a large amount of existing traffic already occurs at the site. Even in this largely unoccupied state, the intersection already has confusing and dangerous traffic patterns for cars that are trying to turn into the CityView office complex. Cars whip around the intersection and try to quickly merge across several lanes of traffic on 360. At the same time, there is a lane of traffic turning right on red that frequently merges with the traffic turning into CityView. There is also not a way to exit CityView going into Lost Creek, which results in many unexpected and dangerous U-Turns on Lost Creek Blvd. I have personally been rear-ended at this intersection and had a baby in the car at the time of the accident. If the property is redeveloped with approximately 475 residential units, residents estimate that the project could generate well over 2,000 additional daily trips, which would represent a substantial increase in traffic through the Lost Creek Boulevard corridor. Lost Creek Boulevard already serves ~8000 – 10,000 daily trips and functions as the primary ingress and egress route for roughly 1,200 homes in the Lost Creek neighborhood. Given the existing traffic patterns, the constrained roadway geometry, and the lack of alternative neighborhood access points, a development of this scale warrants a comprehensive and updated traffic study so that the City and the public can understand: • • • The true baseline traffic conditions 2 02 C14-2025-0089 - 1120 and 1122 S Capital of Texas Highway; District 839 of 48 at the largely vacant CityView office site • • • • • The net new traffic generated by the proposed residential development • • • • • The impact on Lost Creek Boulevard and the Loop 360 intersection • • • • • Any necessary roadway improvements or mitigation measures to ensure safety and mobility • • A Traffic Impact Analysis would allow the City to make an informed decision based on accurate data rather than outdated or theoretical assumptions. I respectfully request that the Commission require a full Traffic Impact Analysis prior to advancing this rezoning request. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Katie Wolters Mayo Lost Creek Resident - 1603 Mill Springs Dr Austin, TX CAUTION: This is an EXTERNAL email. Please use caution when clicking links or opening attachments. If you believe this to be a malicious or phishing email, please report it using the "Report Message" button in Outlook. For any additional questions or concerns, contact CSIRT at " ". 3 02 C14-2025-0089 - 1120 and 1122 S Capital of Texas Highway; District 840 of 48 Villela, Beverly From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Carla Doyne Saturday, April 4, 2026 11:54 PM Villela, Beverly Case C14-2025-0089 — Conditional Overlay Request You don't often get email from . Learn why this is important External Email - Exercise Caution Dear Ms. Villela and Members of the Zoning and Platting Commission, I am a Lost Creek resident writing about Case C14-2025-0089. This site is in one of the most environmentally protected areas of Austin, and the proposed rezoning ignores nearly every applicable protection. I care because, among other reasons, Lost Creek sits above Barton Creek and the Barton Creek Green Belt. This proposed development could have a significant negative effect on this area. The Save Our Springs Alliance has formally opposed this rezoning, calling it “inconsistent with the Imagine Austin Comprehensive Plan” and “car-dependent sprawl.” The site is in the Eanes Creek Watershed — a Water Supply Suburban Watershed in the Drinking Water Protection Zone. The Hill Country Roadway Corridor limits height to 28–40 feet and requires 40% natural state. The City’s reviewer said DB90 relief “does not appear to apply.” The 90-foot request is 225% of the code limit. This is a scenic roadway, protected watershed, dark skies community, and - perhaps most importantly - wildfire zone. I join the request of the Lost Creek Neighborhood Association and individual Lost Creek residents for LO-V-DB90 with Conditional Overlay: • Height cap: 50 feet (commercial ground floor + 3 residential stories) • Unit cap: 400, or the number supported by the TIA and Evacuation Study, whichever is less • No vehicular access from Lost Creek Blvd — no driveways or connections, current or future 4 02 C14-2025-0089 - 1120 and 1122 S Capital of Texas Highway; District 841 of 48 • Full TIA & Evacuation Study required before site plan • Family-sized units — minimum 30% must be 2-bedroom or larger • Stepped massing — no structure above 40 ft within 100 ft of residential • Dark Sky lighting — below 3000K, fully shielded All of these conditions are reasonable because: • The developer told our community “maximum 400 units” at “52–53 feet, four stories.” The application says 475 units at 90 feet. The Commission should hold the developer to its own words. The unit cap of 400 — or the number supported by the TIA and Evacuation Study, whichever is less — ensures density is based on real infrastructure capacity.. • The Hill Country Roadway Corridor limits height to 28–40 feet. The City’s own reviewer said DB90 relief “does not appear to apply” to these standards. 50 feet is generous relative to the 40-foot code limit. • Staff claimed 3,000 daily trips from vacant buildings. Lost Creek representatives counted 113 cars. The corrected number is 4,300+ net new trips on a 32-foot street with no or limited sidewalks, no transit (nearest stop: 2.6 miles), and no alternative route for approximately 1,200 families. Although I would prefer that this proposed redevelopment not occur at all, given the wide range of negative effects, I understand the City’s interest in providing housing and encourage the City to proceed in a responsible manner that promotes safety, aligns with the developer's own promises, and protects the overall public interest. Respectfully submitted, Carla Doyne 1313 Thaddeus Cove Austin, Texas 78746 Lost Creek neighborhood resident for over 40 years 5 02 C14-2025-0089 - 1120 and 1122 S Capital of Texas Highway; District 842 of 48 Villela, Beverly From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Damon Williams Saturday, April 4, 2026 4:28 PM Office of the Mayor; Ellis, Paige; Pool, Leslie; ; Alter, Alison; Villela, Beverly Opposition to C14 2025 0089 (1120 & 1122 S. Capital of Texas Hwy) – Request for LO V DB90 Zoning Some people who received this message don't often get email from . Learn why this is important External Email - Exercise Caution Dear Mayor, and Council Members, I am writing to respectfully oppose the rezoning request in Case C14-2025-0089 for 1120 ½, 1120, 1122, and 1220 S. Capital of Texas Highway from LO and LR to LO-V-DB90. While I support adding housing and affordability in appropriate locations, this proposal raises serious concerns regarding traffic and safety, school capacity, compatibility, environmental impacts, and the adequacy of the proposed affordability benefits. 1. Affordability benefits are modest and do not justify the scale of the up-zoning The applicant seeks significant entitlements under DB90, including height up to 70 feet and relaxed development standards, in exchange for an “affordable component.” However, DB90 typically results in: • A small percentage of units at shallow affordability levels (60–80% MFI) • Primarily studio and 1-bedroom units, not family-sized units • Time-limited affordability, while the impacts of height, traffic, and intensity are permanent For a project of this size in a sensitive corridor, the public benefit is not proportional to the entitlements requested. 2. Traffic and ASMP concerns on a high-speed, car-dependent corridor Loop 360 is designated a Level 5 corridor under the Austin Strategic Mobility Plan — a high-speed, high-volume regional roadway with limited multimodal options. Adding ~475 units plus commercial space will: Increase vehicle trips and turning movements on and off 360 • • Heighten crash risk on an already dangerous corridor • Encourage cut-through traffic through Lost Creek and nearby neighborhoods • Undermine ASMP goals to reduce car dependence and vehicle miles traveled 7 02 C14-2025-0089 - 1120 and 1122 S Capital of Texas Highway; District 843 of 48 Without a robust, enforceable transportation mitigation plan, the burden will fall on existing residents and the traveling public. 3. Incompatibility with adjacent neighborhoods and the scenic Loop 360 corridor The proposed 70-foot height is incompatible with the surrounding context of single-family homes, townhomes, and low-rise offices. The project would: • Alter the scenic hill country views that define the Loop 360 corridor • • Set a precedent for similar DB90 up-zonings along 360, transforming a scenic gateway into a Introduce late-night lighting, noise, and commercial activity mid-rise corridor without a comprehensive plan This is a dramatic and premature intensification of a sensitive area. 4. Environmental, wildfire, and infrastructure concerns The 15.5-acre site sits in a Hill Country environment with steep terrain and sensitive drainage patterns. Intensifying development here raises concerns about: Increased impervious cover, runoff, and erosion • • Wildfire evacuation challenges on a limited-access corridor • Additional strain on utilities, emergency services, and public infrastructure These issues require deeper analysis before granting such entitlements. 5. Significant and unmitigated impacts on Eanes ISD schools This site lies within Eanes ISD, one of the most capacity-constrained districts in Texas. Valley View Elementary has already been closed Valley View Elementary — directly across Loop 360 — was closed beginning in the 2025–26 school year due to declining enrollment (down to 275 students) and facility limitations. Its closure reduced the number of elementary campuses serving this area. Forest Trail Elementary is already growing Forest Trail is projected to grow from 501 → 550 students next year — nearly a 10% increase — even before accounting for new development. Districtwide enrollment declines do not equal available capacity Eanes ISD’s total enrollment is projected to drop from 7,598 → 7,295, but this is due to graduating classes being twice the size of incoming kindergarten cohorts (728 vs. 350). This does not create usable capacity in the Forest Trail attendance zone. Eanes ISD cannot expand capacity The district has: 8 02 C14-2025-0089 - 1120 and 1122 S Capital of Texas Highway; District 844 of 48• No land for new schools • Severe topographic and environmental constraints • Limited road access • Political and financial barriers to new construction Eanes are closing schools, not opening them. Rezoning decisions in Austin directly impact a district with no zoning authority Eanes ISD has no vote in Austin’s zoning decisions yet must absorb the consequences. 6. School-related traffic and safety impacts Adding hundreds of units near Forest Trail Elementary will worsen: Drop-off/pick-up congestion • Loop 360 is not designed for school-zone traffic patterns. • Backups already occur during peak times. • Additional residents will increase delays and unsafe maneuvers. Pedestrian and student safety • There are no continuous sidewalks or safe crossings. • Students cannot safely walk or bike to school. • More cars = more risk. Neighborhood cut-through traffic • Lost Creek Blvd will see increased traffic diversion from parents and residents avoiding 360 congestions. Emergency response delays • Congestion during school peaks can slow emergency vehicles — a serious safety concern. 7. A more appropriate path forward I am not arguing that the site should remain frozen in time. A rezoning here should be more modest, better aligned with the corridor’s constraints, and tied to: • Deeper, more durable affordability • Specific transportation and safety improvements • Environmental and wildfire mitigation • A school capacity analysis and mitigation plan Until these issues are addressed, I urge you to deny the requested LO-V-DB90 zoning for Case C14-2025-0089 or significantly scale back the entitlements. Thank you for your consideration and for your service to our community. 9 02 C14-2025-0089 - 1120 and 1122 S Capital of Texas Highway; District 845 of 48Sincerely, Damon Williams 2006 Port Royal Drive, Austin, Texas 78746 Lost Creek CAUTION: This is an EXTERNAL email. Please use caution when clicking links or opening attachments. If you believe this to be a malicious or phishing email, please report it using the "Report Message" button in Outlook. For any additional questions or concerns, contact CSIRT at " ". 10 02 C14-2025-0089 - 1120 and 1122 S Capital of Texas Highway; District 846 of 48 Villela, Beverly From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Marsha Spears < Saturday, April 4, 2026 8:38 AM Villela, Beverly > Case C14-2025-0089 — Conditional Overlay Request You don't often get email from . Learn why this is important External Email - Exercise Caution Dear Ms. Villela and Members of the Zoning and Platting Commission, I am a Lost Creek resident writing about Case C14-2025-0089. This site is in one of the most environmentally protected areas of Austin, and the proposed rezoning ignores nearly every applicable protection. Why I care: Lost Creek sits above Barton Creek and the Barton Creek Green Belt. This development could have a big negative impact on this area. The Save Our Springs Alliance has formally opposed this rezoning, calling it “inconsistent with the Imagine Austin Comprehensive Plan” and “car-dependent sprawl.” The site is in the Eanes Creek Watershed — a Water Supply Suburban Watershed in the Drinking Water Protection Zone. The Hill Country Roadway Corridor limits height to 28– 40 feet and requires 40% natural state. The City’s reviewer said DB90 relief “does not appear to apply.” The 90-foot request is 225% of the code limit. This is a scenic roadway, protected watershed, dark skies community, and wildfire zone. OUR ASK — LO-V-DB90 with Conditional Overlay: whichever is less (commercial ground floor + 3 residential stories) • • • Height cap: 50 feet • • • • • Unit cap: 400, or the number supported by the TIA and Evacuation Study, • • • • • No vehicular access from Lost Creek Blvd • • • • • Full TIA & Evacuation Study • required before site plan • — no driveways or connections, current or future 11 02 C14-2025-0089 - 1120 and 1122 S Capital of Texas Highway; District 847 of 48 — minimum 30% must be 2-bedroom or larger • • • Family-sized units • • • • • Stepped massing • • • • • Dark sky lighting • • — below 3000K, fully shielded — no structure above 40 ft within 100 ft of residential Why are these conditions reasonable? The developer told our community “maximum 400 units” at “52–53 feet, four stories.” The application says 475 units at 90 feet. We’re asking the Commission to hold them to their own words. The unit cap of 400 — or the number supported by the TIA and Evacuation Study, whichever is less — ensures density is based on real infrastructure capacity.. The Hill Country Roadway Corridor limits height to 28–40 feet. The City’s own reviewer said DB90 relief “does not appear to apply” to these standards. 50 feet is generous relative to the 40-foot code limit. Staff claimed 3,000 daily trips from vacant buildings. We counted 113 cars. The corrected number is 4,300+ net new trips on a 32-foot street with no sidewalks, no transit (nearest stop: 2.6 miles), and no alternative route for 1,200 families. I support housing with affordable units and neighborhood retail. I am requesting an NTA so we can add the appropriate Conditional Overlay that protects our safety and aligns with the developer’s own promises. Thank you for your consideration. Marsha Spears 6405 Indian Canyon Dr. Austin, Texas 78746 Lost Creek neighborhood resident of over 30 years. CAUTION: This is an EXTERNAL email. Please use caution when clicking links or opening attachments. If you believe this to be a malicious or phishing email, please report it using the "Report Message" button in Outlook. For any additional questions or concerns, contact CSIRT at " ". 12 02 C14-2025-0089 - 1120 and 1122 S Capital of Texas Highway; District 848 of 48