From: To: Cc: Subject: Date: Cindy Barron Alejandra Flores; Lonny Stern; Hank Smith; Scott Boone; Betsy Greenberg; Ryan Puzycki; David Fouts; Christian Tschoepe; Luis Ostalugo; Taylor Major Sirwaitis, Sherri; Garcia, Ella Zoning Cases C14-2025-0032, C14-2008-0224(RCT), C14-2025-0060 all scheduled for public hearing August 19, 2025 Thursday, August 14, 2025 3:18:23 PM External Email - Exercise Caution C14-2025-0032 Processes for notification and signage were flawed. Posting of signage was placed on the wrong lot. Notices were not sent to all appropriate property owners. Procedures for identifying zoning designation for this lot were not consistent with how the rest of the legally platted residential lots in Acres West were treated. Designated zoning of I- RR for this lot should have been SF-2. Since I-RR is ‘interim” zoning, the neighborhood was not afforded the option to submit a valid petition. The applicant/owner/agent are aware of the Acres West Deed Restrictions and should understand SF-6 zoning does not adhere to the deed restrictions for that legally platted residential Acres West lot. The neighborhood requests the Commission to recommend SF-2 for permanent zoning for this Lot 20, Blk A, to be consistent with the rest of the Acres West residential lots. SF-6 zoning could be considered ‘spot zoning’ in this case. C14-2008-0224(RCT) Restrictive Covenant was violated by submission of a new site plan (SP- 2024-0215C) that did not comply with the landscaping plan attached to the RC. The agent for the owner originally explained the purchase of the residential lot (Lot 20, Blk A) was to allow them to not impose compatibility on themselves (their commercial development)…hence, the landscaping plan that varied in compromising the rules of compatibility. The landscaping plan and limiting hours of operation (7AM to 10PM) were negotiated with the neighborhood and now the applicant wants to go back on his promise to have those restrictions removed. The neighborhood would prefer those restrictions be considered as additional conditions (CO) to be included under the new zoning case (C14-2025-0060) and request the Commission to recommend that to Council. C14-2025-0060 Prohibited uses were approved by Council with zoning case from 2010. At that time, applicant/agent claimed they did not have time to do a TIA because they wanted to move forward with their development. ZAP questioned their promise to limit trips to 2000/day and wondered if additional uses were added back in as permitted, what would trigger a requirement for a TIA to be conducted? …
From: To: Cc: Subject: Date: Attachments: Importance: Tisha Ritta Janet Taborn; Cindy Barron; CarlosyNancy; Michael Stark; Gema Lane; Lori Humphrey; Marshall Allman; april.dykman; Charlotte Rotthoff; Peggy Shaw; Aragon Andres & Ligia; Austin Mitchell; Bill Allen; Carl Snow; Jim Santora; Joann & Angelo Baylon; Kerri Adams; L. M. "Mac" Holder III; Lynne & Dario David; Carolyn & Joe Pils; benhur; wes; maldonadov; Lan & Steve Nguyen; Joe Joseph; mrj; vicki.mccoy; Mahir Khan; Asher Khan Sirwaitis, Sherri Re: C14-2025-0032, C14-2025-0060, C14-2008-0224(RCT) Friday, August 15, 2025 6:06:47 PM Outlook-pu52lgjx.png Outlook-pr121zjy.png Outlook-f4fwpzm0.png Outlook-4dy2m3ag.png image.png image.png SPICEWOOD-LOT-SITE PLAN OPTION 1.pdf SPICEWOOD-LOT-SITE PLAN OPTION 2.pdf High External Email - Exercise Caution Hello Residents of Acres West, Thank you to those who have taken the time to share your thoughts regarding our three pending zoning applications. I have reviewed all letters and statements submitted to the City’s public portal and wanted to follow up with you ahead of our hearing next week. My goal is to acknowledge the concerns raised, share additional information that may not have been previously communicated, and invite you to meet with me for an open conversation. Since late June, I have provided details on each case, requested feedback, and attempted to coordinate a meeting with the neighborhood. Unfortunately, I did not receive any responses until last week. To ensure everyone is included moving forward, I’ve copied all residents so you may contact me directly if you wish. Below, I’ve included some clarification and details for each case for your review. I understand weekday schedules can be challenging, so please let me know if this Sunday or Monday would work better for a meeting. While we don’t have a conference room available, I’m happy to coordinate a location that’s convenient for everyone. I look forward to hearing your thoughts and receiving any feedback from the neighborhood. Acres West Lot 20 Rezone (C14-2025-0032) - Rezone from DR to SF6 Attached are two early layout ideas for the vacant lot at 13608 Caldwell Dr. Since the property doesn’t yet have a zoning designation, it wouldn’t make sense to invest in detailed plans just yet but zoning will be required before anything can move forward. Due to the lot’s unusual shape and its location next to a commercial property, we feel a small townhome or condominium development would be the most compatible and thoughtful use of the space. We understand the concerns raised about traffic, drainage, …
03 C14-2025-0054 - Rezoning of Lot 31 Block A - The Forest Section One at The Villages Of Spicewood; District 61 of 3 03 C14-2025-0054 - Rezoning of Lot 31 Block A - The Forest Section One at The Villages Of Spicewood; District 62 of 3 03 C14-2025-0054 - Rezoning of Lot 31 Block A - The Forest Section One at The Villages Of Spicewood; District 63 of 3
Ying He Sirwaitis, Sherri Rezoning Response Thursday, August 14, 2025 8:06:05 PM External Email - Exercise Caution From: To: Subject: Date: Y See attachment 05 C14-2025-0061 - 6105 Melrose Trail; District 61 of 2 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 "cybersecurity@austintexas.gov". 05 C14-2025-0061 - 6105 Melrose Trail; District 62 of 2
Extra Space Storage Self-Storage Facility City of Austin August 19, 2025 Karl Crawley Executive Director Texas Land Use Consultants Self-storage Locations Self-storage Self-storage Self-storage Self-storage Subject Property Self-storage Self-storage Vicinity Aerial Site Plan New Building Existing Retail ACCESS Renderings Building Elevations The proposed conditional overlay includes the following regulations: - Maximum Height shall not exceed 30 feet. - Within 40 feet of any residential district, the maximum building height shall be limited to 20 feet. Additionally, a list of prohibited uses had been agreed upon. Automotive Repair Services, Automotive Sales, Automotive Washing (of any type), Bail Bond Services, Club or Lodge, Commercial Blood Plasma Center, Commercial Off-Street Parking, Construction Sales and Services, Drop Off Recycling Collection Facility, Equipment Sales, Exterminating Services, Funeral Services, Hotel/Motel, Kennels, Limited Warehousing and Distribution, Monument Retail Sales, Off-Site Accessory Parking, Outdoor Entertainment, Outdoor Sports and Recreation, Pawn Shop Services, Service Station, Vehicle Storage, Veterinary Services, *Maintenance and Service Facilities Private, *Equipment Repair Services, *Indoor Equipment, *Indoor Sports and Recreation, *Pet Services, *Printing and Publishing Services, *Theater, *Congregate Living *Group Residential *Hospital Services Limited *Hospital Services – General *Religious Assembly *Residential Treatment *Transportational Housing *Transportation Terminal *Adult-Oriented Business *General Retail Sales - Convenience Extra Space Storage • Founded in 1977 • Largest operation of Self Storage facilities with over 4,000 locations in 42 states and the District of Columbia • Member of S&P (EXR) • Market cap of $30.2 Billion Why Storage? • Rise in personal consumption/People of Plenty • Renters of apartments by choice • Rise of HOA rules • Popularity of open floor plans & Remodels • No back of house for & shallow bay retail • Pandemic changes • “Empty Nesters” downsizing Extra Space Storage (EXR): $106 $150 $190 $99 $102 $97 $10
From: To: Cc: Subject: Date: Attachments: Importance: Tisha Ritta Janet Taborn; Cindy Barron; CarlosyNancy; Michael Stark; Gema Lane; Lori Humphrey; Marshall Allman; april.dykman; Charlotte Rotthoff; Peggy Shaw; Aragon Andres & Ligia; Austin Mitchell; Bill Allen; Carl Snow; Jim Santora; Joann & Angelo Baylon; Kerri Adams; L. M. "Mac" Holder III; Lynne & Dario David; Carolyn & Joe Pils; benhur; wes; maldonadov; Lan & Steve Nguyen; Joe Joseph; mrj; vicki.mccoy; Mahir Khan; Asher Khan Sirwaitis, Sherri Re: C14-2025-0032, C14-2025-0060, C14-2008-0224(RCT) Friday, August 15, 2025 6:06:47 PM Outlook-pu52lgjx.png Outlook-pr121zjy.png Outlook-f4fwpzm0.png Outlook-4dy2m3ag.png image.png image.png SPICEWOOD-LOT-SITE PLAN OPTION 1.pdf SPICEWOOD-LOT-SITE PLAN OPTION 2.pdf High External Email - Exercise Caution Hello Residents of Acres West, Thank you to those who have taken the time to share your thoughts regarding our three pending zoning applications. I have reviewed all letters and statements submitted to the City’s public portal and wanted to follow up with you ahead of our hearing next week. My goal is to acknowledge the concerns raised, share additional information that may not have been previously communicated, and invite you to meet with me for an open conversation. Since late June, I have provided details on each case, requested feedback, and attempted to coordinate a meeting with the neighborhood. Unfortunately, I did not receive any responses until last week. To ensure everyone is included moving forward, I’ve copied all residents so you may contact me directly if you wish. Below, I’ve included some clarification and details for each case for your review. I understand weekday schedules can be challenging, so please let me know if this Sunday or Monday would work better for a meeting. While we don’t have a conference room available, I’m happy to coordinate a location that’s convenient for everyone. I look forward to hearing your thoughts and receiving any feedback from the neighborhood. Acres West Lot 20 Rezone (C14-2025-0032) - Rezone from DR to SF6 Attached are two early layout ideas for the vacant lot at 13608 Caldwell Dr. Since the property doesn’t yet have a zoning designation, it wouldn’t make sense to invest in detailed plans just yet but zoning will be required before anything can move forward. Due to the lot’s unusual shape and its location next to a commercial property, we feel a small townhome or condominium development would be the most compatible and thoughtful use of the space. We understand the concerns raised about traffic, drainage, …
From: To: Cc: Subject: Date: Cindy Barron Alejandra Flores; Lonny Stern; Hank Smith; Scott Boone; Betsy Greenberg; Ryan Puzycki; David Fouts; Christian Tschoepe; Luis Ostalugo; Taylor Major Sirwaitis, Sherri; Garcia, Ella Zoning Cases C14-2025-0032, C14-2008-0224(RCT), C14-2025-0060 all scheduled for public hearing August 19, 2025 Thursday, August 14, 2025 3:18:23 PM External Email - Exercise Caution C14-2025-0032 Processes for notification and signage were flawed. Posting of signage was placed on the wrong lot. Notices were not sent to all appropriate property owners. Procedures for identifying zoning designation for this lot were not consistent with how the rest of the legally platted residential lots in Acres West were treated. Designated zoning of I- RR for this lot should have been SF-2. Since I-RR is ‘interim” zoning, the neighborhood was not afforded the option to submit a valid petition. The applicant/owner/agent are aware of the Acres West Deed Restrictions and should understand SF-6 zoning does not adhere to the deed restrictions for that legally platted residential Acres West lot. The neighborhood requests the Commission to recommend SF-2 for permanent zoning for this Lot 20, Blk A, to be consistent with the rest of the Acres West residential lots. SF-6 zoning could be considered ‘spot zoning’ in this case. C14-2008-0224(RCT) Restrictive Covenant was violated by submission of a new site plan (SP- 2024-0215C) that did not comply with the landscaping plan attached to the RC. The agent for the owner originally explained the purchase of the residential lot (Lot 20, Blk A) was to allow them to not impose compatibility on themselves (their commercial development)…hence, the landscaping plan that varied in compromising the rules of compatibility. The landscaping plan and limiting hours of operation (7AM to 10PM) were negotiated with the neighborhood and now the applicant wants to go back on his promise to have those restrictions removed. The neighborhood would prefer those restrictions be considered as additional conditions (CO) to be included under the new zoning case (C14-2025-0060) and request the Commission to recommend that to Council. C14-2025-0060 Prohibited uses were approved by Council with zoning case from 2010. At that time, applicant/agent claimed they did not have time to do a TIA because they wanted to move forward with their development. ZAP questioned their promise to limit trips to 2000/day and wondered if additional uses were added back in as permitted, what would trigger a requirement for a TIA to be conducted? …
From: To: Cc: Subject: Date: Attachments: Importance: Tisha Ritta Janet Taborn; Cindy Barron; CarlosyNancy; Michael Stark; Gema Lane; Lori Humphrey; Marshall Allman; april.dykman; Charlotte Rotthoff; Peggy Shaw; Aragon Andres & Ligia; Austin Mitchell; Bill Allen; Carl Snow; Jim Santora; Joann & Angelo Baylon; Kerri Adams; L. M. "Mac" Holder III; Lynne & Dario David; Carolyn & Joe Pils; benhur; wes; maldonadov; Lan & Steve Nguyen; Joe Joseph; mrj; vicki.mccoy; Mahir Khan; Asher Khan Sirwaitis, Sherri Re: C14-2025-0032, C14-2025-0060, C14-2008-0224(RCT) Friday, August 15, 2025 6:06:47 PM Outlook-pu52lgjx.png Outlook-pr121zjy.png Outlook-f4fwpzm0.png Outlook-4dy2m3ag.png image.png image.png SPICEWOOD-LOT-SITE PLAN OPTION 1.pdf SPICEWOOD-LOT-SITE PLAN OPTION 2.pdf High External Email - Exercise Caution Hello Residents of Acres West, Thank you to those who have taken the time to share your thoughts regarding our three pending zoning applications. I have reviewed all letters and statements submitted to the City’s public portal and wanted to follow up with you ahead of our hearing next week. My goal is to acknowledge the concerns raised, share additional information that may not have been previously communicated, and invite you to meet with me for an open conversation. Since late June, I have provided details on each case, requested feedback, and attempted to coordinate a meeting with the neighborhood. Unfortunately, I did not receive any responses until last week. To ensure everyone is included moving forward, I’ve copied all residents so you may contact me directly if you wish. Below, I’ve included some clarification and details for each case for your review. I understand weekday schedules can be challenging, so please let me know if this Sunday or Monday would work better for a meeting. While we don’t have a conference room available, I’m happy to coordinate a location that’s convenient for everyone. I look forward to hearing your thoughts and receiving any feedback from the neighborhood. Acres West Lot 20 Rezone (C14-2025-0032) - Rezone from DR to SF6 Attached are two early layout ideas for the vacant lot at 13608 Caldwell Dr. Since the property doesn’t yet have a zoning designation, it wouldn’t make sense to invest in detailed plans just yet but zoning will be required before anything can move forward. Due to the lot’s unusual shape and its location next to a commercial property, we feel a small townhome or condominium development would be the most compatible and thoughtful use of the space. We understand the concerns raised about traffic, drainage, …
ZONING & PLANNING COMMISSION PRESENTATION ACRES WEST LOT 20 REZONE (C14-2025-0032) Applicant: Tisha Ritta 2 PROPERTY/PROJECT DETAILS Property Address:13608 Caldwell Dr Legal Description: Acres West, Block A, Lot 20 Lot Size: .407 acres Existing Zoning: I-RR Proposed Zoning: SF-6 Purchased: 2010 ZONING REQUEST 3 The property is a .407 acre undeveloped lot that fronts Caldwell Dr. We are seeking to rezone the property from its existing designation of Residential Rural (I-RR) to Townhouse & Condominium Residence (SF-6) to allow for single-family and townhome/condominium development. Rezoning to SF-6 will provide permanent zoning for the property while contributing to the city’s housing supply by utilizing this vacant lot, which is positioned between established residential and commercial developments. The property is not located within a designated neighborhood plan. There is no floodplain within or adjacent to the property. ZONING MAP 5 CONSISTENT WITH THE PURPOSE STATEMENT & COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING 1. The proposed zoning should be consistent with the purpose statement of the district sought. 2. The proposed zoning should promote consistency and orderly planning. 3. Zoning should allow for reasonable use of the property. The proposed zoning fits the intent of the district since the property fronts a residential collector street, which is appropriate for moderate-density housing like townhomes and condominiums. This zoning also creates a natural transition, stepping down from the office uses to the north and east down to single-family homes along Caldwell Dr to the south and is compatible with the existing condominiums to the west. SF-6 zoning will establish zoning designation for an undeveloped lot that will provide residential uses near commercial and civic services. Imagine Austin Guidelines Connectivity, Goods & Services, Employment: The site is within 0.5 miles of goods, services, and employment opportunities. Connectivity & Health: A variety of medical services and a dentist office are within 0.2 miles, providing nearby health services. Housing Choice: This zoning expands housing options with unit types that meet a variety of household sizes, incomes, and lifestyles. Such as townhomes, small- scale multifamily, and other infill housing. This directly supports Imagine Austin and the Strategic Housing Blueprint goals. Site Zoning Uses North GO-CO Medical Offices South SF-2 Single-Family Residences East I-RR, LO Medical Offices West GO-CO Condominiums (The Cottages at Lake Creek) EXISTING ZONING & LAND USES 7 COMMUNITY CONCERNS Public Concerns: Traffic congestion from the single access point on Caldwell Drive, drainage and flooding risks, environmental sensitivity of the Edwards …
Amanda Swor direct dial: (512) 807-2904 aswor@drennergroup.com August 19, 2025 Ms. Lauren Middleton-Pratt Planning Department City of Austin 6310 Wilhelmina Delco Dr. Austin, TX 78752 Via Electronic Delivery Re: 12940 North U.S. 183 Highway – Postponement request for the Rezoning Application, case number C14-2025-0056, for the 5.0034-acre piece of property located at 12940 North U.S. 183 Highway in the City of Austin, Travis County, Texas (the “Property”). Dear Ms. Middleton-Pratt: As representatives of the owners of the Property, we would like to respectfully request a postponement of the upcoming Zoning and Platting Commission public hearing for the rezoning application on the Property, currently scheduled for Tuesday, August 19, 2025. We are requesting a postponement to the October 7, 2025 Zoning and Platting Commission meeting date. This is the applicant’s first request for a postponement. Please let me know if you or your team members require additional information or have any questions. Thank you for your time and attention to this project. Very truly yours, Amanda Swor CC: Joi Harden, Planning Department (via electronic delivery) Sherri Sirwaitis, Planning Department (via electronic delivery) 04 C14-2025-0056 - 12940 North U.S. 183; District 61 of 1
4501 Ranch Road 620 N C14-2025-0071 August 19, 2025 Zoning and Platting Commission Property Details • Acreage: Approx. 12.3 acres • Current Zoning: “DR” – Development Reserve District • Proposed Zoning: “P” – Public District Subject Property Mansfield Dam Ranch Road 620 N Subject Property Ranch Road 620 N Subject Property Subject Property Project Summary • Redevelopment and Expansion of Travis County West Service Center • New Fleet Services Building (52,000 SF) and Equipment Storage Buildings • Future additions and renovations to address the Administrative Building, Fuel Service, Vehicle Wash Facilities, Warehouse Building, and other campus needs Fleet Services Building Conceptual Renderings Fleet Services Building Conceptual Renderings Existing Conditions Proposed Concept New Fleet Services Building Questions?
ZONING & PLANNING COMMISSION PRESENTATION AE MEDICAL & RETAIL REZONE (C14-2025-0060) Applicant: Tisha Ritta 2 PROPERTY/PROJECT DETAILS Property Address:13642 Research Blvd Legal Description: CATHYVILLE SUB, Lot 1, Lot Size: 4.363 acres Zoning (Tract One): GR-CO Zoning (Tract Two): GO-CO Land Uses: Medical, Office, Retail, Restaurant and Personal Improvement ZONING REQUEST We are requesting a modification to prohibited uses outlined in the existing Conditional Overlay (Ordinance No. 20100624-107) associated with zoning case C14-2008-0224. 3 Full rezoning (GO-CO → GR-CO) not supported, focused request keeps current base zoning. Restrictions from 15+ years ago limit leasing opportunities and no longer reflect market needs. Updates will expand allowable uses, attract tenants, and align with today’s standards. City staff and Law Department advised that uses like Group Homes, Residential Treatment, and Guidance Services should not be prohibited under Fair Housing Act protections. PROPOSED MODIFICATION TO PROHIBITED USES 4 Tract One (GR-CO Zoning) Indoor Sports & Recreation Indoor Entertainment Private Secondary Educational Facilities Private Primary Educational Facilities Restaurant (General) Group Home* Tract Two (GO-CO Zoning) Private Secondary Educational Facilities Private Primary Educational Facilities Group Home* Guidance Services* Residential Treatment* Guidance Services* The following uses are currently prohibited, and will remain unchanged with this zoning request: Tract One (GR-CO Zoning) Automotive rentals Automotive sales Bail bond services Communications services Exterminating services Pawn shop services Theater Residential treatment Funeral services Restaurant (general) Automotive repair services Automotive washing (of any type) Commercial off-street parking Drop-off recycling collection facility Outdoor sports & recreation Service station Consumer convenience services Hotel-motel Drive-in services use is prohibited as an accessory use to a commercial use on Tract One. Tract Two (GO-CO Zoning) Communications services Hospital services (general) Hospital services (limited) ZONING MAP 6 CONSISTENCY WITH PURPOSE & PLANNING 1. The proposed zoning should be consistent with the purpose statement of the district sought. 2. The proposed zoning should promote consistency and orderly planning. 3. Zoning should allow for reasonable use of the property. Community Commercial (GR): Supports office/commercial uses serving neighborhood & community needs; suited for major corridors. General Office (GO): Intended for office and select commercial uses with community/city-wide reach. Proposed Rezoning: Allows additional commercial and civic uses along a transit corridor to serve community needs. Transition: GR-CO (Tract 1) and GO-CO (Tract 2) create an appropriate step between surrounding zoning and land uses. Imagine Austin Guidelines Growth Concept Map: Within 0.41 miles of Lakeline Station Regional Center. Mobility: Existing bike lane …
August 18, 2025 Dear Members of the Planning Commission, I am writing as Principal of Stepping Stone School Lakeline to express strong opposition to zoning case C14-2025-0060 and the proposed termination of the public restrictive covenant under C14-2008-0224 (RCT). Stepping Stone School has proudly served families in Austin for 45 years, and our presence in this neighborhood for more than 35 years has been central to our mission of providing a safe, stable, and nurturing environment for young children. I urge the City of Austin and the Planning Commission to deny these requests. Our school located on Hymeadow educates and cares for children daily, and our families depend on the surrounding neighborhood to support that mission. The proposed changes raise serious concerns: • Effort to void a legally binding agreement: The restrictive covenant in question was created through a negotiated agreement with the city and community stakeholders. Allowing it to be voided would weaken the reliability of such legal protections and suggest that even formally established covenants can be disregarded for convenience, setting a concerning precedent for future developments. • Removal of existing zoning safeguards: This would allow disruptive commercial uses, such as 24-hour operations, group homes, indoor entertainment venues, and general restaurants, next to our schools and homes of families we serve. These businesses are incompatible with the environment necessary for young children to thrive. • Elimination of the protective green buffer: The buffer is a vital safeguard, providing a physical and visual shield from noise, traffic, and other disruptions. Children play outside daily and walk to and from school with their families, and removing this protection would expose them to unnecessary risks and distractions. • Introduction of uses like group homes and residential treatment facilities: These could increase transient activity near our schools, raising serious safety concerns for children and families who trust us to provide a secure environment. The neighborhood already faces challenges—including increased incidents of people working on vehicles in residential areas—that impact safety, noise, and traffic. Approving these zoning changes would only exacerbate these issues, disrupting the calm, family- friendly environment essential for early childhood development. 08 C14-2025-0060 - AE Medical & Retail Rezone; District 61 of 3 These zoning protections were established through meaningful community engagement to safeguard the neighborhood’s character and safety. There is no compelling reason to reverse them now. As a principal who cares deeply for the children, families, and staff …
ZONING & PLANNING COMMISSION PRESENTATION AE MEDICAL & RETAIL ZONING AMENDMENT (C14-2008-0224 (RCT)) Applicant: Tisha Ritta 2 PROPERTY/PROJECT DETAILS Property Address:13642 Research Blvd Legal Description: CATHYVILLE SUB, Lot 1, Lot Size: 4.363 acres Zoning: GR-CO (Tract One) GO-Co (Tract Two) Land Uses: Medical, Office, Retail, Restaurant and Personal Improvement ZONING REQUEST 3 Request to terminate restrictive covenant adopted in 2010. The current restrictive covenant places two main limitations on the property: • Business hours limited to 7 a.m. – 10 p.m. • Landscaped buffers along residential property lines. Business Hours Restriction Current covenant limits operations to 7 a.m.–10 p.m. Restricts businesses such as: Private tutoring centers Sleep clinics Coffee shops Many viable tenants turned away due to hours restriction. Request: Remove limitation to allow flexible hours that fit with the center’s character and community needs. 5 Landscaped Buffers • Covenant requires vegetative buffers along residential edges. • Phase 1 construction: buffers installed for 11 residential lots (northeast). • Updated plan: approved for southwest side (includes only 1 residential property, under same ownership). • Owner intends to maintain buffers to protect and add value for Lot 20 (13608 Caldwell Dr). • City may carry this requirement into updated zoning ordinance (Case C14-2025-0060). • Buffers also enforced during site plan process. Summary & Commitment • Request removes outdated restrictions that limit viable tenants. • Buffers will remain in place through zoning ordinance and site plan enforcement. • Goal: Attract quality tenants that provide valuable services to the community. • Maintain compatibility with neighborhood while ensuring site remains successful long-term. NEIGHBORHOOD BUFFER 7 8 CLOSING STATEMENT Our goal is to update outdated restrictions while maintaining neighborhood protections. • Flexible hours → broaden tenant options. • Buffers → preserved and enforced. • Supports long-term growth of the center and community. Thank you for your time and consideration. THANK YOU Tisha Titta 512-937-0073 Tisha@permitpartnerstx.com
August 18, 2025 Dear Members of the Planning Commission, I am writing as Principal of Stepping Stone School Lakeline to express strong opposition to zoning case C14-2025-0060 and the proposed termination of the public restrictive covenant under C14-2008-0224 (RCT). Stepping Stone School has proudly served families in Austin for 45 years, and our presence in this neighborhood for more than 35 years has been central to our mission of providing a safe, stable, and nurturing environment for young children. I urge the City of Austin and the Planning Commission to deny these requests. Our school located on Hymeadow educates and cares for children daily, and our families depend on the surrounding neighborhood to support that mission. The proposed changes raise serious concerns: • Effort to void a legally binding agreement: The restrictive covenant in question was created through a negotiated agreement with the city and community stakeholders. Allowing it to be voided would weaken the reliability of such legal protections and suggest that even formally established covenants can be disregarded for convenience, setting a concerning precedent for future developments. • Removal of existing zoning safeguards: This would allow disruptive commercial uses, such as 24-hour operations, group homes, indoor entertainment venues, and general restaurants, next to our schools and homes of families we serve. These businesses are incompatible with the environment necessary for young children to thrive. • Elimination of the protective green buffer: The buffer is a vital safeguard, providing a physical and visual shield from noise, traffic, and other disruptions. Children play outside daily and walk to and from school with their families, and removing this protection would expose them to unnecessary risks and distractions. • Introduction of uses like group homes and residential treatment facilities: These could increase transient activity near our schools, raising serious safety concerns for children and families who trust us to provide a secure environment. The neighborhood already faces challenges—including increased incidents of people working on vehicles in residential areas—that impact safety, noise, and traffic. Approving these zoning changes would only exacerbate these issues, disrupting the calm, family- friendly environment essential for early childhood development. 09 C14-2008-0224(RCT) - AE Medical & Retail Amendment; District 61 of 3 These zoning protections were established through meaningful community engagement to safeguard the neighborhood’s character and safety. There is no compelling reason to reverse them now. As a principal who cares deeply for the children, families, and staff …
From: To: Subject: Date: Attachments: Annalynn Cox Sirwaitis, Sherri; Carl Swanson Re: Zoning Commission - Case number: C14-2025-0054 Tuesday, August 19, 2025 2:15:02 PM image001.png External Email - Exercise Caution Sure, Ms Sirwaitis, this is what I submitted on that page: Case number: C14-2025-0054 -- I strongly oppose any rezoning or change to this property beyond its current designation. Many of the surrounding homes are in a neighborhood known as The Forest. Most of these homes were built around 1999, and a large majority still have their original owners. This stability is a testament to the neighborhood’s appeal, character, and community ties. Rezoning would negatively affect the overall neighborhood. It would alter the established look and feel, potentially encouraging incompatible uses and developments. Such changes risk eroding the character that residents have valued for decades. A zoning change could also increase traffic, strain parking availability, and overburden existing roads. Several neighbors have expressed particular concern about the sewer and stormwater systems. Heavy rains already push these systems to their limits, with drains backing up and flooding cul-de-sacs and roads. Any additional development, especially with more impervious surfaces, would likely worsen runoff and flooding risks. Environmental impacts are also a serious concern. Additional construction would mean a loss of green space, mature trees, and natural shade. These changes could contribute to increased heat, reduced biodiversity, and further stormwater issues. Rezoning could reduce nearby property values by introducing denser housing and creating a perception of overdevelopment. This may make the neighborhood less attractive to prospective buyers. Furthermore, approving this request could set a precedent for similar rezoning applications, leading to further erosion of the area’s character. For these reasons, I respectfully request that this rezoning proposal be denied. 03 C14-2025-0054 - Rezoning of Lot 31 Block A - The Forest Section One at The Villages of Spicewood; District 61 of 2 Annalynn Cox 11509 Herb Cove, Austin, TX, 78750 512-762-7455 -- 03 C14-2025-0054 - Rezoning of Lot 31 Block A - The Forest Section One at The Villages of Spicewood; District 62 of 2
View results Respondent 425 Anonymous 14:15 Time to complete 03 C14-2025-0054 - Rezoning of Lot 31 Block A - The Forest Section One at The Villages of Spicewood; District 61 of 50 1. What is the Zoning/Rezoning Case Number? * Only Zoning/Rezoning Cases open for public comment at this time are available in this list. Not all cases may be scheduled on the PC/ZAP agendas at this time, but here are helpful links to those agendas. You can find Zoning and Platting Commission Agendas here: http://austintexas.gov/cityclerk/boards_commissions/meetings/54_1.htm You can find Planning Commission Agendas here: http://austintexas.gov/cityclerk/boards_commissions/meetings/40_1.htm C14-2024-0006 (Greater Walnut Area Centralized Odor Control Project - Loyola Facility) C814-04-0187.03.SH (Goodnight Ranch PUD Amendment #3) C814-2008-0165 (East Riverside PUD Amendment C814-2021-0175 (614 S. 1st Street/Timbercreek PUD) C814-2023-0057 (200 E. Riverside PUD) C14-2024-0015 (Montopolis-Fairway Mixed Use) C14-2024-0036 (7005 & 7007 Guadalupe St.) C14-2024-0051 (Rawson Saunders - Tarrytown Christian Church Improvements) C14-2024-0092 (Allred & Riddle) C14-2024-0099 (Saxon 2) C14-2024-0179 (6th & Lamar) C14-2024-0181 (Far West Multifamily) C14-2024-0182 (5706 Nancy Dr.) C14-2024-0183 (1120 West Howard Lane) C14-2025-0002 (Cooper Apartments) C14-2025-0003 (6th & Walsh) C14-2025-0004 (Strandtman Cove) C14-2025-0005 (Shady Lane) C14-2025-0006 (34th and West - Tract 1) C14-2025-0007 (34th and West - Tract 2) C14-2025-0008 (34th and West - Tract 3) C14-2025-0009 (34th and West - Tract 4) C14-2025-0011 (11525 Menchaca Rd.) C14-2025-0024 (Little Lion) 03 C14-2025-0054 - Rezoning of Lot 31 Block A - The Forest Section One at The Villages of Spicewood; District 62 of 50 C14-2025-0025 (5705 Nancy Dr) C14-2025-0027 (821 Woodward) C14-2025-0028.SH (The Bloom at Lamar Square) C14-2025-0029 (Airport 38 Rezone) C14-2025-0030 (1201 East 11th Street) C14-2025-0032 (Acres West Lot 20 Rezone) C14-2025-0034.SH (Waverly North) C14-2025-0035 (Crosstown Tunnel Centralized Odor Control Facility) C14-2025-0036 (2000 E. 6th Street) C14-2025-0038 (Oak Hill Apartments) C14-2025-0039 (1305 W Oltorf Street) C14-2025-0040 (4811 SOCO) C14-2025-0041 (Olaffson Rezone) C14-2025-0042 (9117 Northgate Rezone) C14-2025-0043 (608 Blanco) C14-2025-0044 (1700 South Congress) C14-2025-0045 (8234 Ferguson Cutoff) C14-2025-0046 (1904 San Gabriel) C14-2025-0047 (Wildridge Assisted Living) C14-2025-0048 (West Mockingbird Ln) C14-2025-0049 (1169 Hargrave Street) C14-2025-0050 (North Loop Community Commercial) C14-2025-0051 (Woodward Mixed Use Flats) C14-2025-0052 (9400 Metric Boulevard) C14-2025-0053 (Duval-Harris Residential) C14-2025-0054 (Rezoning Lot 31 Block A - Forest Section One at The Villages of Spicewood) C14-2025-0055 (6512 Mc Neil ESS) C14-2025-0056 (12940 North U.S. 183) 03 C14-2025-0054 - Rezoning of Lot 31 Block A - The Forest Section One at The Villages of Spicewood; District 63 of 50 C14-2025-0057 (1430 Collier Street) C14-2025-0058 (1600 …
