ZONING CHANGE REVIEW SHEET CASE: C14-2025-0060 (AE Medical & Retail Rezone) DISTRICT: 6 ADDRESS: 13642 North US 183 Highway NB/ Research Boulevard ZONING FROM: Tract 1: GR-CO, Tract 2: GO-CO TO: Tract 1: GR-CO, Tract 2: GO-CO* * The applicant is requesting a rezoning to modify the list of prohibited uses outlined in the existing conditional overlay established by Ordinance No. 20100624-107, associated with zoning case C14-2008-0224. SITE AREA: Tract 1: 1.82 acres Tract 2: 2.55 acres 4.365 acres PROPERTY OWNER: Austintatious Enterprises, LLC (David Jeng) APPLICANT/AGENT: Central Texas Permit Partners (Tisha Ritta) CASE MANAGER: Sherri Sirwaitis (512-974-3057, sherri.sirwaitis@austintexas.gov) STAFF RECOMMEDATION: Staff recommends GR-CO, Community Commercial-Conditional Overlay Combining District zoning for Tract 1 and GO-CO, General Office-Conditional Overlay Combining District zoning for Tract 2, to change a condition of zoning. The rezoning will add back to following uses as permitted uses on the property: 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 08 C14-2025-0060 - AE Medical & Retail Rezone; District 61 of 42 The following conditions will be maintained from Ordinance No. 20100624-107 on the property: 1) A site plan or building permit for the Property may not be approved, released, or issued, if the completed development or uses of the Property, considered cumulatively with all existing or previously authorized development and uses, generate traffic that exceeds 2,000 trips per day. 2) All vehicular access to the Property shall be from Highway 183 (Research Boulevard). Vehicular access from the Property through any abutting public street is prohibited. 3) The following uses are prohibited uses on the property for: 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 AND PLATTING COMMISSION ACTION / RECOMMENDATION: July 15, 2025: Granted neighborhood postponement request to August 19, 2025 by consent (7-0, A. Flores, L. Osta-Lugo and L. Stern-absent); D. …
ZONING CHANGE REVIEW SHEET CASE: C14-2008-0224(RCT) – AE Medical & Retail RCT DISTRICT: 6 ADDRESS: 13642 North US 183 Highway Service Road South Bound OWNER/APPLICANT: Austintatious Enterprises, LLC AGENT: Central Texas Permit Partners, LLC (Tisha Ritta) ZONING: GR-CO, GO-CO AREA: 4.365 acres REQUEST: The applicant is requesting the termination of the public restrictive covenant recorded under Document No. 2010045795 that imposes restrictions on the property that limit the operational hours to between 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. and requires the installation of landscaped vegetative buffers along interior property lines adjacent to residential development. CASE MANAGER: Sherri Sirwaitis (512-974-3057, sherri.sirwaitis@austintexas.gov) STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the proposed public restrictive covenant termination. ZONING AND PLATTING COMMISSION ACTION / RECOMMENDATION: July 15, 2025: Granted neighborhood postponement request to August 19, 2025 by consent (7-0, A. Flores, L. Osta-Lugo and L. Stern-absent); D. Fouts-1st, B. Greenberg-2nd. August 19, 2025 CITY COUNCIL ACTION: 09 C14-2008-0224(RCT) - AE Medical & Retail Amendment; District 61 of 36 DEPARTMENT COMMENTS: In this case, the applicant is requesting to terminate a public restrictive covenant that was recorded in 2010 in association with zoning case C14-2008-0224. The applicant is asking to delete this restrictive covenant to remove restrictions on the property that limit the operational hours to between 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. and require the installation of landscaped vegetative buffers along interior property lines adjacent to residential development (please see Applicant’s Request Letter - Exhibit C and Original Restrictive Covenant – Exhibit D). The staff recommends the applicant’s request to remove the conditions of this public restrictive covenant because the property in question is currently developed with an office/retail center that fronts onto and takes access to U.S. Highway 183. The Law Department has advised that city no longer recommends limiting the hours of operation of businesses and implementing landscape buffers through public restrictive covenants. The applicant agrees with the staff’s recommendation. EXISTING ZONING AND LAND USES: ZONING Site GR-CO, GO-CO North I-SF-2, LO LAND USES Retail Center (Spicewood Centre: Spicewood Dermatology, Capital Therapy Group, Edward Jones, STA, Inc., Cure Bakery Coffee, Six Blades, Jiu-Jitsu) Personal Services (Artist’s Hair Studio), Personal Improvement Services (Iron Ankles Fitness) South I-RR, SF-2, GR-CO Undeveloped, Detention Pond, Medical Office (Firehouse Animal Health Center, Austin Dentistry, Austin Children’s Dentistry, Austin Family Orthodontics) U. S. Highway 183/Research Boulevard Single-Family Residences East West ROW I-SF-2 AREA STUDY: N/A WATERSHED: Lake Creek CAPITOL VIEW CORRIDOR: N/A HILL COUNTRY …
************************************************************************ MEMORANDUM TO: Hank Smith, Chair Zoning and Platting Commission Members FROM: Nancy Estrada Planning Department DATE: August 14, 2025 RE: C814-04-0187.03.SH – Goodnight Ranch PUD Amendment #3 Postponement Request by Staff ************************************************************************ Staff requests a postponement of the above referenced case from the August 19, 2025, Zoning and Platting Commission hearing to September 2, 2025. Staff and partner departments need to evaluate additional information that has been provided by other City of Austin reviewing departments. 10 C814-04-0187.03.SH - Goodnight Ranch PUD Amendment #3; District 21 of 1
PLANNING COMMISSION SITE PLAN CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REVIEW SHEET CASE NUMBER: PROJECT NAME: SPC-2025-0087C Stoney Ridge Highlands Amenity Center ZAP DATE: August 19, 2025 ADDRESS: COUNCIL DISTRICT: NEIGBORHOOD PLAN: N/A 13101 Burmakany Drive, Austin, TX. 78617 2 OWNER: AGENT: KB Home Lonestar, INC. 10800 Pecan Park Blvd. Ste. 200 Austin, TX 78750 COMPANY, Bill Couch 5501 W. William Cannon Drive Austin, TX 78749 (512) 280-5160 CASE MANAGER: Alyse Ramirez alyse.ramirez@austintexas.gov (512) 978-1750 PROJECT INFORMATION: AREA: 82,372 sq. ft. EXISTING ZONING: SF-4A WATERSHED: Dry Creek East WATERSHED ORDINANCE: Comprehensive Watershed Ordinance T.I.A.: N/A CAPITOL VIEW: N/A PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT: The applicant is requesting approval of a conditional use permit site plan for a Community Recreation (Private) use in SF-4A zoning. The proposed site will consist of a 1,594-sf pool house with a 4,169-sf pool with the associated pool deck and play yard areas, surface parking, drives, and associated utility and drainage improvements. Zoning and Platting Commission approval is required because the site is zoned SF-4A. The LDC Section 25-2-584(F)(2) states: “(F) The Land Use Commission may approve, in accordance with the applicable provisions of Chapter 25-5, Article 3 (Land Use Commission Approved Site Plans), the following modifications to the site development regulations: a Community Recreation (Private) use. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the conditional use permit. The site plan will comply with all requirements of the Land Development Code requirements prior to site plan release. SUMMARY COMMENTS ON SITE PLAN: 11 SPC-2025-0087C - Stoney Ridge Highlands Amenity Center; District 21 of 6 SPC-2024-0113A 2 Land Use: The proposed site is zoned SF-4A (Single-family residence small lot) and is located along the intersection of Burmakany Drive and Mosey Run. Since the proposed land use is Community Recreation (Private) in an SF-4A zoning, this site must be approved by a Land Use Commission. The current land use is vacant. Staff recommends approval of the conditional use permit request. Environmental: The site is located in the Dry Creek East Watershed and subject to the Suburban Watershed regulations. There were no Environmental review comments. Transportation: Parking spaces are located on-site. All Transportation comments have been cleared. Access to the site will be from Burmakany Drive and Mosey Run. OVERALL SITE PROJECT INFORMATION SITE AREA EXISTING ZONING PROPOSED ACCESS FLOOR-AREA RATIO BUILDING COVERAGE IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE 1.891 AC SF-4A Mosey Run and Burmakany Drive Existing 00:1 0% 0.00% Proposed 0.013:1 1.271% 38.5% NEIGHBORHOOD ORGNIZATIONS: Del Valle Community …
ZONING AND PLATTING COMMISSION CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SITE PLAN REVIEW SHEET CASE NUMBER: SPC-2024-0456C MEETING DATE: August 19, 2025 PROJECT NAME: FSD - Northeast Service Center ADDRESS: 8301 Johnny Morris Rd DISTRICT: 1 WATERSHED: Decker Creek (Suburban Watershed) AREA: 131.79 acres limits of construction APPLICANT: AGENT: Andrew Moore, Project Manager City of Austin, Financial Services 6800 Burleson Rd, Bldg 312, Ste 200 Austin, TX 78744 512-974-7604 Hollis Scheffler, PE Westwood 8701 N. Mopac Expy Suite 320 Austin, TX 78759 (512) 485-0831 CASE MANAGER: Meg Greenfield, (512) 978-4663, meg.greenfield@austintexas.gov EXISTING ZONING: (P) Public PROPOSED USE: The applicant is proposing a service center for the City of Austin Resource Recovery and Fleet Services. The site is currently undeveloped and owned by the City of Austin. This site plan includes associated utilities, drainage, grading, paving, and stormwater infrastructure needed to service the development. COMMISSION REQUEST: This site is zoned P (Public) and is greater than one acre in size; therefore, a Conditional Use Permit is required, according to the Land Development Code (Section 25-2-625). WAIVER REQUESTS: 1. An administrative environmental variance has been granted in accordance with LDC 25-8- 42(b)(6), to allow a cut or fill of not more than eight feet. 2. An administrative driveway variance has been granted to allow for a driveway width greater than 25 feet. TCM section 7.5.1.2. SUMMARY STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of this site plan. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOT 2A BLK A INDUSTRIAL GROUP 30.0 & 86.36 ACRE TRACTS BEING A REPLAT OF LOT 2A OF THE AMENDED PLAT OF LOTS 1 & 2, 12 SPC-2024-0456C - FSD - NE Service Center; District 11 of 40 BLOCK "A" OF INDUSTRIAL GROUP 30.00 & 86.36 ACRE TRACTS AND A PORTION OF THAT CERTAIN 65.79 ACRE TRACT DESCRIBED IN A DEED TO THE CITY OF AUSTIN, DATED DECEMBER 26, 2013, RECORDED IN DOCUMENT NO. 2013227429, O.P.R.T.C.T. PROJECT INFORMATION: AREA: 131.79 acres site EXIST. ZONING: P (Public) PROPOSED BLDG. CVRG: 15.10% PROPOSED IMPERVIOUS CVRG: 44.10% PROVIDED PARKING: 1,465 PROPOSED ACCESS: Johnny Morris Road PROPOSED OPEN SPACE: 55.90% ZONING OVERLAYS: Hazardous Pipelines Overlay: KOCH Wildland Urban Interface: Proximity Class - undefined SUMMARY COMMENTS ON SITE PLAN: This site plan completed its third round of formal review on August 4, 2025. The U3 comment report is attached. A meeting was held on August 6, 2025 with the applicant and reviewers to discuss outstanding comments. A final update is expected to clear …
AWRR6 – Current Status: Cleared. U1: Cross connection AMOC. Per applicant, no alternative method is proposed on this project for cross contamination procedures. Land Development Engineering – William Bennett william.bennett@austintexas.gov LDE1: Encroachment Agreement: It appears that items (sidewalk) will be permanently placed within the Right of Way (ROW) or Easement. Therefore, an encroachment agreement is needed. City Code Chapter 14-11 Please contact landmanagementrow@austintexas.gov. LDE2: Callout driveway Types for each driveway and design accordingly within regulations and waiver agreements. LDE3: Provide all document recording numbers on plan set once approved. LDE4: Verify all easements are shown on the plantings and irrigation sheets and that no conflicts exist. 12 SPC-2024-0456C - FSD - NE Service Center; District 139 of 40 END OF MASTER COMMENT REPORT Comment Resolution Process: You can submit a Comment Resolution Request if: 1. You have identified two or more comments in your Master Comment Report that conflict with each other; and 2. You do not believe that the comments can be satisfied. Comment Resolution Requests can only be submitted and resolved between review cycles. They cannot be submitted while the site plan is in review. Use the Comment Resolution Request Web Form to submit your request. Questions or Concerns? Contact Us: If you have any questions or concerns or if you require more information about this report, please do not hesitate to contact your Case Manager at the email address listed at the top of this report or by writing to the City of Austin, Development Services Department, P.O. Box 1088, Austin, Texas 78767. 12 SPC-2024-0456C - FSD - NE Service Center; District 140 of 40
ZONING AND PLATTING COMMISSION CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT & HILL COUNTRY ROADWAY SITE PLAN REVIEW SHEET CASE NUMBER: SP-88-0052CX(R4) MEETING DATE: August 19, 2025 PROJECT NAME: LISD ES No. 19 Grandview Hills Ancillary Building Project ADDRESS: 12024 Vista Parke Drive DISTRICT: 10 WATERSHED: Lake Travis (Water Supply Rural) AREA: 3.26 acres limits of construction APPLICANT: Leander Independent School District PO BOX 218 Leander, TX 78646 Jeremy Trimble, 512-974-7604 AGENT: Micaela Riggs, EIT AtkinsRéalis (512) 342-3212 CASE MANAGER: Meg Greenfield, (512) 978-4663, meg.greenfield@austintexas.gov EXISTING ZONING: (P) Public & R&D-PDA PROPOSED USE: The Grandview Hills Elementary School site is 40.275 acres owned by Leander Independent School District (LISD). The existing site currently has an elementary school, agricultural barn, and ancillary buildings that enable access for students across the district. The proposed development is 3.26 acres of staff and bus parking and a fuel system. Additional improvements include installing a new storm drain network, upsizing the existing onsite storm drain network downstream of the new connection, and expanding the detention, sedimentation and filtration basins. Note on the R&D-PDA: Per 25-2-602 uses permitted in a research and development (R&D) district are established by the zoning ordinance establishing the district. Not seeing any use limitations in the ordinance or ‘zoning site plan’ in the zoning files, the educational facilities use is acceptable. Related Cases: C14R-87-159(HC), C14-00-2055. Leander ISD purchased this parcel from Vista Chemical Company in 2006. COMMISSION REQUEST: This site is zoned P (Public) and is greater than one acre in size; therefore, a Conditional Use Permit is required, according to the Land Development Code (Section 25-2-625). The site is located within the Moderate Intensity Zone of the RM 620 Hill Country Roadway Corridor, and must be presented to the Zoning and Platting Commission for approval, a Hill Country Roadway Ordinance requirement. The proposed site plan is in compliance with 25-2, Subchapter C, Article 11. 13 SP-88-0052CX(R4) - LISD ES No. 19 Grandview Hills Ancillary Building Project; District 101 of 43 SUMMARY STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of this site plan. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOT 1 BLK D THE PARKE PHASE B PROJECT INFORMATION: AREA: 40.28 acres site EXIST. ZONING: P (Public) & R&D-PDA PROPOSED BLDG. CVRG: 13.11% PROPOSED IMPERVIOUS CVRG: 30.67% PROVIDED PARKING: 114 ZONING OVERLAYS: Hill Country Roadways Overlay: RM 620/MODERATE INTENSITY Wildland Urban Interface: Proximity Class – undefined SUMMARY COMMENTS ON SITE PLAN: A final update is expected to clear outstanding comments. The …
SUBDIVISION REVIEW SHEET CASE NO.: C8J-03-0041.0A(VAC) COMMISSION DATE: August 19, 2025 SUBDIVISION NAME: Town and Country Park Addition Total Plat Vacation ADDRESS: 13300 Morris Road APPLICANT: The Optimist Club of Town and Country Round Rock Texas AGENT: Thrower Design (Ron Thrower) ZONING: GR-CO – Community Commercial AREA: 88.298 acres (3,846,260.88 sf) LOT: 1 COUNTY: Williamson DISTRICT: 6 WATERSHED: Lake Creek JURISDICTION: Full Purpose VARIANCES: none DEPARTMENT COMMENTS: The request is for the approval of Town and Country Park Addition Total Plat Vacation to remove one lot from the recorded plat, with the property comprised of 88.298 acres. The applicant is proposing the total plat vacation to remove a note restricting uses. The property will have uses allowed by Ordinance 20240404-054 and Zoning Case C14-2023-0100. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the total subdivision vacation, the application meets City of Austin code requirements. CASE MANAGER: Cesar Zavala E-mail: cesar.zavala@austintexas.gov ATTACHMENTS Exhibit A: Vicinity map Exhibit B: Recorded plat to be vacated PHONE: 512-974-3404 14 C8J-03-0041.0A(VAC) - Town & Country Park Addition; District 61 of 8 14 C8J-03-0041.0A(VAC) - Town & Country Park Addition; District 62 of 8 14 C8J-03-0041.0A(VAC) - Town & Country Park Addition; District 63 of 8 14 C8J-03-0041.0A(VAC) - Town & Country Park Addition; District 64 of 8 14 C8J-03-0041.0A(VAC) - Town & Country Park Addition; District 65 of 8 14 C8J-03-0041.0A(VAC) - Town & Country Park Addition; District 66 of 8 14 C8J-03-0041.0A(VAC) - Town & Country Park Addition; District 67 of 8 14 C8J-03-0041.0A(VAC) - Town & Country Park Addition; District 68 of 8
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: Rob Crawley Sirwaitis, Sherri clem DePalma; cswanson2@gmail.com Opposition to Zoning Change Case C14-2025-0054 Hearing Date: Aug 19th 6PM Friday, August 15, 2025 11:54:44 AM External Email - Exercise Caution Dear Sherri Sirwaitis, Re: Zoning Change Case C14-2025-0054 -- Hearing Date: Aug 19th 6PM I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed zoning change for Case C14-2025-0054 at 11700 Flower Scent Court. The current SF-1 zoning, which supports low-density single-family residences on lots of 10,000 square feet or more, is well-suited to the area’s character and environmental considerations. Changing it to SF-2, allowing moderate- density development with lots as small as 5,750 square feet, could lead to overcrowding, increased traffic, and strain on local infrastructure. Additionally, the sloping terrain and environmental limitations noted in the SF-1 designation suggest that maintaining the current zoning is more appropriate to preserve the neighborhood's integrity and natural landscape. I urge the Zoning and Platting Commission to reject this rezoning application. Also, I would point out - Spot Zoning concerns: Changing this single lot's zoning to SF-2 while surrounding properties remain SF-1 would constitute unfair zoning practices. Indeed, the lot requesting the change appears to be one of maybe two properties that might be able to gain this change, out of a subdivision of 70-odd homes. Thank you for considering my input. I am available to discuss this further if needed. Sincerely, Robert J. Crawley 03 C14-2025-0054 - Rezoning of Lot 31 Block A - The Forest Section One at The Villages Of Spicewood; District 61 of 4 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". 03 C14-2025-0054 - Rezoning of Lot 31 Block A - The Forest Section One at The Villages Of Spicewood; District 62 of 4 From: To: Subject: Date: Carl Swanson Sirwaitis, Sherri Zoning Commission - Case number: C14-2025-0054 Thursday, August 14, 2025 9:27:13 PM External Email - Exercise Caution Ms Sirwaitis, RE Case Number: C14-2025-0054 I submitted the below as an official submission regarding this case on the web site submission form. -- Submission on Behalf of The Forest Homeowners Association I am submitting this entry on behalf of The Forest Homeowners Association, of which this …
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 4 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 4 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 …
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: 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? …
