[{"_1":2,"_111":-5,"_112":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87,99],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6645872,"mediaKeyId","3533869-1cca22587ae570b3f375caeaa1704216","parentId",3533869,"title","Planning commission postpones Crow Lane rezoning after neighbors raise safety and code concerns","audioSeconds",4018,"startMs",217000,"endMs",4235000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3533869-1cca22587ae570b3f375caeaa1704216&start=217&end=4235","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3533869-1cca22587ae570b3f375caeaa1704216/thumbnail_217000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6645872/Austin/Travis-County/Texas/Planning-commission-postpones-Crow-Lane-rezoning-after-neighbors-raise-safety-and-code-concerns","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6645872-ee7d5e16ffca692733db0e9a1493a615/orig.mp4?Expires=1771139830&Signature=cyNptLeqAL5Nt90f8mIt4zOMaGGLpU14ChzDQPyqRG3oeFt2YTMXJe7Cl3yNaT2XJKHl-kUU6KukRuOgTKuaf03Hk-CRKZ2tq9y5bj~9f9ZziWpgSHwvgDIPDx-grPzprZrnfkuXwDAAopy7VULuRy~Vis7jIsRvodqhM1zEs6HRHzGkXbvDAbxDp43mYDdKTzrP48QQwr7pQ8nIrqQVf98pJAsmRdXcjIXsUwIVN8iHmDbmpVopArWBCKglHLgDOtVHk1lcWGE-WDl06FStHhryUYNjyV~OyTMPCdHt6QlrH5HmN0FZhO6PnQZXzGUlFpj1h46c1iKetmTfSz7byg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Austin","date","2025-05-27T00:00:00Z","article","The Austin Planning Commission on May 27 postponed action on two related items for 6201 Crow Lane — a plan amendment (NPA‑2024‑0020.016201) and a rezoning (C14‑2024‑01686201) — after neighbors described a history of code complaints and at least one reported animal death tied to the dog‑care business on the site.

The cases would have changed the property’s future‑land‑use designation and rezoned the parcel to permit pet‑service uses under a conditional overlay. Planning staff recommended a neighborhood‑mixed‑use land‑use designation and rezoning aligned with surrounding uses; the applicant agreed with staff’s recommended conditional limits. Commissioners voted to postpone the items to the commission’s June 10 meeting to allow more time for follow‑up on outstanding code enforcement issues and neighborhood concerns.

Why it matters: Residents near the Crow Lane site said the business has operated as a large dog‑boarding/daycare without the zoning or operational controls neighbors expected. Speakers, including several pet owners and neighborhood representatives, described multiple land‑use complaints and one owner’s account that a boarded dog died after being reported missing. Commissioners and staff said a postponement would give time to confirm the status of code enforcement and allow the applicant and community more time to agree on limiting conditions.

Staff presentation and proposal: Marie Meredith and Beverly Veil of the Planning Department briefed the commission that staff’s alternate recommendation for the plan amendment is neighborhood mixed use and that the rezoning request included a conditional overlay to limit higher‑intensity uses. Veil said staff and the applicant agreed to limit certain uses because the site has constrained street access and adjacent residential context. Veil also noted that code compliance had conducted multiple inspections and that at least one land‑use violation remained active and would not be closed until land‑use issues were resolved.

Neighborhood opposition and allegations: Several residents and neighborhood advocates spoke in opposition. James Yoshida said, “I believe the owners’ lack of ethical standards led to the death of our family dog,” and described a prolonged search and later confirmation that the dog was found deceased. Olivia Alvarado told commissioners the facility is “the only business that would bring regular traffic to this otherwise quiet neighborhood,” and urged denial based on safety, nuisance and neighborhood‑plan considerations. Other speakers — David Miller, Michelle Gamboa, Ryan Thomas and others — described repeated 3‑1‑1 and code complaints and said enforcement had been slow to act.

Applicant and applicant representative: Catherine Nicely of Metcalfe Stewart & Williams, representing the property owner, said the site has been commercially zoned historically, described meetings with neighbors, and said the owner’s intent is to allow pet services (not outdoor kennels). Nicely told the commission the facility now limits outdoor activity to scheduled walks and that code compliance helped establish an initial limit “of 20 pets max” during inspections. Nicely also said fence improvements and other mitigation are in progress in coordination with the adjacent HOA.

Operational clarifications: In Q&A, Nicely and the applicant representatives said the current operational schedule includes supervised walks roughly 7–8 a.m. and in the evening; the operation reported a 1‑supervisor‑to‑3‑dogs ratio for walks. Staff noted the Land Development Code definition of “pet services” does not prescribe exact outdoor‑time rules, so operational practices are controlled by code compliance and any conditions the commission or council might attach.

Outcome: Commissioner Azhar moved, and Commissioner Howard seconded, a substitute motion to postpone the matter to June 10. The motion passed unanimously for commissioners present. The postponement gives staff time to confirm outstanding code compliance actions and gives applicants and neighborhood representatives time to reach further agreements before the case returns for public hearing and final action.

What commissioners asked staff to follow up on: commissioners asked staff to confirm the exact status of code enforcement, the list of outstanding violations, and whether the property’s advertised business practices on public websites matched the operational controls offered to staff. Commissioners also asked the applicant and staff to provide a clear schedule of outdoor activity, details about supervision ratios, and a timeline for fence and site improvements.

Next steps: The item was continued to the commission’s June 10 meeting for further consideration. Staff and the applicant were asked to provide updated documentation about code‑compliance status, any proposed conditions limiting retail‑type sales, and more detailed operational controls for pet services.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Austin - Planning Commission - May 27, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","The Austin Planning Commission on May 27 postponed action on two related items for 6201 Crow Lane — a plan amendment (NPA‑2024‑0020.016201) and a rezoning (C14‑2024‑01686201) — after neighbors described a history of code complaints and at least one reported animal death tied to the dog‑care business on the site.","taxTitle","Austin, Travis County, Texas","taxId",2819,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6645857,"Planning commission approves consent agenda; several items postponed to summer dates",1336,202000,1538000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3533869-1cca22587ae570b3f375caeaa1704216&start=202&end=1538","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3533869-1cca22587ae570b3f375caeaa1704216/thumbnail_202000.jpg","/articles/6645857/Austin/Travis-County/Texas/Planning-commission-approves-consent-agenda-several-items-postponed-to-summer-dates","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6645857-0d328ba597a2e15494d8e49057131901/orig.mp4?Expires=1771139830&Signature=NGbm7GvxyJ60di-m~sqmjTy2wgjw1y5IcPtCh7O6mZ04EQmUkkf1~ICpLR2s8sJZatC24BzuOrhDPxjKMErk9T1euvop4OK5J9wkfrQHYpEXxq-3z69MM2VlQoKH~YLxDwJTnjkdkyVciNnp87LgWMRZMDX3bnzQs9IrwgwzWBjBxuGxwEQoP3Qu71RAL2Clnjct8IpA6axLNWGsM1h5f7Q4RyQQZ03HraywvLLNZPCEuKqTZFZXnHsjyHFX689dyvc5qTjY-~8k7cmUNZb1R20BtoGwpXR7Febbfq4v0ptCjCH0tYAB1VCHqIYCOFiz0F94fpCCcR3AGAsdPbarmA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Austin Planning Commission closed the public hearing on its consent agenda and approved the consent agenda, including the minutes from the May 13 meeting.

Key items on consent: Staff identified multiple items as consent, including plan amendments and associated rezoning cases for several districts, and recommended consent for items such as the Lake Austin plan amendment and rezoning (items 6 and 7), Northgate rezone (item 11) as noted separately, and a downtown density bonus application (item 18) among others. The applicant for items 6 and 7 (Ricky Keepers/Bridal Keepers) and other applicants waived full presentation and spoke briefly in support of their consent items.

Postponements and recusals: Staff also flagged items for staff‑requested postponement: items 8 and 9 (East Eleventh and Twelfth Street urban renewal area modifications) were postponed to June 24; item 10 was postponed to July 22; additional items (such as item 12) were postponed to June 24. Commissioner Howard stated a recusal for item 17 because his organization is a party to that initiative; the commission recorded his recusal for that item.

Vote: Commissioner Woods moved and Commissioner Skidmore seconded the motion to close the public hearing and approve the consent agenda (including the minutes). The commission approved the consent agenda; the minutes were added; Commissioner Howard was recorded as recused on item 17 and abstained on that item as part of the approval.

What to watch: The items moved on consent will proceed to the council/next procedural step per normal process. Items postponed to later dates will be re‑noticed for those hearing dates indicated by staff.","The commission approved the consent agenda and the May 13 minutes, accepted most consent items and accepted staff‑recommended postponements for several items. Commissioner Howard recused from item 17; the consent motion passed with that abstention noted.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6645862,"Commission limits potential convenience‑store uses at Northgate site, preserves restaurant option",1498,7200000,8698000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3533869-1cca22587ae570b3f375caeaa1704216&start=7200&end=8698","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3533869-1cca22587ae570b3f375caeaa1704216/thumbnail_7200000.jpg","/articles/6645862/Austin/Travis-County/Texas/Commission-limits-potential-conveniencestore-uses-at-Northgate-site-preserves-restaurant-option","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6645862-c8b4b191f0c048b5656ec69298799e03/orig.mp4?Expires=1771139830&Signature=mjb-1XMfgfgrORAH1AgscrYQwXyb~MUtRK~ZmdUtxOuMkMxXVj5QMFn2QmXrdVrgPg~gMoze2aUZKP9YPiHegbh1yqMAil8LvCftkr~5nZCeFSgT5munENu5bdtzKoblzvVBHhXhW1RsvYMBGU8leSUapWbiE~eYMgMUcvc-~gUZPwQBOXES1egIRGOjYID5QT0dQe9gxjWxU3NJKPlF0cq8Ty8kQPFqK1YIBMFqb42WkLVXYd0ytXmis3sOcPWf9abE~jY0Xgn6dEjncvQIDgkeTg1TDpld05cRZYNaHJF4r2dF2dAE8y4c5TntoVoheg6K4akS7V6~2-flVB0hBg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Austin Planning Commission approved a rezoning for a vacant parcel at 9117 Northgate Boulevard (case C14‑2025‑00429) with a conditional overlay that prohibits certain uses and places food‑sales uses under conditional use review.

Case background and staff recommendation: Planning staff recommended rezoning a grassy, sloped parcel from GO‑CO‑MP to G R C O MP (community commercial with a conditional overlay) to allow development of a restaurant and other neighborhood services while prohibiting higher‑impact automotive uses. Staff noted the parcel abuts multifamily housing, contains floodplain on its southern edge, and sits across from a Capital Metro stop; staff and the applicant shared a draft list of prohibited uses in response to neighborhood concerns.

Neighborhood concerns and public comment: Monica Guzman, chair of the North Austin Civic Association contact team, and other speakers said the area is already affected by crime and nuisance activity associated with convenience stores operated by the same owner elsewhere in north Austin. Guzman told the commission the neighborhood was willing to allow a restaurant with outdoor dining, but not a convenience store that could sell single‑serve alcoholic beverages to be consumed off site. Melinda Shearer (virtually) and other speakers echoed concerns that additional convenience‑style retail would worsen nuisance activity.

Applicant position: The applicant (Miss Mitchell speaking for Mr. Patel) said the intent was to open a restaurant. The applicant agreed to remove a long list of uses the neighborhood flagged; the applicant resisted prohibiting “food sales” altogether (which under the Land Development Code includes small groceries and delicatessens) but agreed to other deletions. During conversation at the dais the applicant said they were willing to remove the “general retail sales — convenience” category from allowed uses if that was what the neighborhood required.

Commission action and compromise: Commissioner Ramirez moved to approve staff’s recommendation and to amend Exhibit D to prohibit general retail convenience and food sales; that motion was modified on the floor by Commissioner Anderson to make food sales a conditional use rather than completely prohibited, while prohibiting general retail convenience outright. The substitute motion (staff recommendation, general retail convenience not allowed, food sales as conditional use) passed unanimously. Commissioners explained the compromise preserves the site for a restaurant while creating a zoning path to review any future grocery/deli use that might include off‑premise alcohol.

Why it matters: Neighbors argued the restriction would prevent another store that could sell single‑serve alcoholic beverages and attract nuisance activity; the applicant retained the ability to build a restaurant and pursue conditional use approval for a food‑sales use if proposed. Staff and the commission framed the outcome as balancing neighborhood safety concerns with allowing appropriate commercial services at a transit‑adjacent site.

Follow‑up: Staff will reflect the amended Exhibit D in the ordinance that will go forward to council. Any future request to permit “food sales” would require a conditional‑use review and public notice.","At 9117 Northgate Boulevard the Planning Commission approved staff’s rezoning recommendation with conditions that prohibit general retail convenience uses and make food‑sales uses conditional, after neighbors sought to prevent off‑premise alcohol sales and convenience‑store activity.",{"_33":100,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":101,"_41":102,"_43":103,"_45":104,"_47":105,"_49":106,"_51":107,"_53":108,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":109,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":110,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6645867,"Planning commission backs Waverly North affordable housing rezoning, preserving historic building",4131,2849000,6980000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3533869-1cca22587ae570b3f375caeaa1704216&start=2849&end=6980","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3533869-1cca22587ae570b3f375caeaa1704216/thumbnail_2849000.jpg","/articles/6645867/Austin/Travis-County/Texas/Planning-commission-backs-Waverly-North-affordable-housing-rezoning-preserving-historic-building","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6645867-0c75b4e4b1a79b544d320aca52e543f1/orig.mp4?Expires=1771139830&Signature=e~GGLODKLoOuPEwZ~lZLdMWKXlXsxvQ6StvKRpJZborRxy5hgwqyWGXs97k6HNAHk13Le1hqUFfPcvc8OrrL0~FiVoje1FocS26GcSCZ9-loaHrJvUzsSYzfLsyRNnS9T1oTLAB2DkbloeTBoMn6wjQ8FCdn43KwLLc1KKM6blgVFJ6tKnOMRH~BmgeLLcbxVW6L77mx6vjp1t1v1pSs~LuRjHOhscY2Z3Syh~6iB2N2eD~7w5vHbWaJhrD5HNpWoFCOiIF7A36tkdw8qthxONoyxwfcgGIdOPavw5SNX1T72Gi-YZbFUZej~thc0XqwnvbqvYzdnUsSzalIfpGc8A__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Austin Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of a plan amendment and rezoning for 3710 Cedar Street (Waverly North), clearing a key step for a proposed 76‑unit affordable housing development that would retain and incorporate a historic building on the site.

Staff recommendation and project: Planning staff recommended a future‑land‑use change from civic to multifamily residential and rezoning to MF‑4‑H (multifamily with historic overlay) and CCD‑NP conditions to allow a compact affordable development and preserve the existing historic landmark structure on the property. Staff said the site is close to high‑frequency CapMetro routes and an Imagine Austin activity corridor, and that the proposed zoning aligns with surrounding multifamily and commercial uses.

Developer proposal and timeline: OSTA Industries, a Texas‑based affordable housing developer, proposed a roughly 1.57‑acre project with an estimated 76 units, preservation of the historic northern structure, and use of Low Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) financing alongside historic tax credits. Applicant representative Abby Tatko explained the LIHTC and historic‑credit timelines that require timely zoning and said the team hoped to close funding windows this summer if the rezoning proceeds.

Neighborhood concerns: Neighbors and the North University Neighborhood Association supported affordable housing in principle but urged lower density, more pedestrian connections and protections for existing neighborhood character. Concerns raised during public comment included the project’s requested 70% impervious cover, potential building height and massing, loss of street parking in a tight neighborhood, and an inward‑facing site plan that neighbors said would reduce street activation.

Project design responses: The applicant said it had modified the plan in response to neighborhood feedback, moved an entrance away from a living‑streets corridor, and proposed a podium design to allow on‑site parking (the team said the proposal included approximately 77 parking spaces) while keeping the historic building and matching setbacks on Cedar Street. The applicant also committed to further design review through the Historic Landmark Commission and federal/state historic tax‑credit processes.

Outcome: Commissioner Woods moved to approve the staff recommendation; the motion passed unanimously. Commissioners said they appreciated the preservation component, the site’s transit access and the project’s potential to produce affordable units in District 9. Commissioners asked the applicant to continue design coordination with the neighborhood as the project advances through historic and permitting reviews.

What to watch next: The applicant said it must meet state and federal historic‑tax credit timelines and pursue National Park Service and Texas Historic Commission review for historic designation; the project team said construction would follow permitting and financing approvals and that they expected to begin construction next year if funding is secured.","Commissioners approved a rezoning and plan amendment for 3710 Cedar Street to allow a 76‑unit affordable housing project that keeps the historic Confederate Women’s Home. Neighbors raised concerns about height, parking and impervious cover; staff recommended MF‑4‑H zoning and commissioners approved the staff recommendation.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Planning commission postpones Crow Lane rezoning after neighbors raise safety and code concerns

Planning commission approves consent agenda; several items postponed to summer dates

Commission limits potential convenience‑store uses at Northgate site, preserves restaurant option

Planning commission backs Waverly North affordable housing rezoning, preserving historic building