Planning Commission approves rezoning for South Lamar salon after denying postponement

The City of Austin Planning Commission denied a request to postpone consideration of a rezoning for a South Lamar salon and then unanimously approved staff's recommendation to rezone the property at 2525 South Lamar to allow the business to continue operating.

The commission voted first to deny a neighborhood postponement request for agenda item 11 and to hear the case the same evening; Commissioner Anderson moved to deny the postponement and Commissioner Maxwell seconded. After public testimony and staff presentation, the commission voted unanimously to approve the rezoning to GOMU-CO for the site, adopting the staff recommendation.

The item had been before the commission in April and advanced toward City Council, but staff re-noticed the case after discovering a mailing error. Marcela Boudreaux, case manager for the Planning Department, told commissioners the property is a very small footprint (about 600 square feet, roughly 0.01 acres) currently zoned LOMU-CO and that staff recommended GOMU-CO for the existing hair salon. Boudreaux also said a code enforcement case exists for the site and that one prohibited use on the property is a holdover from a 2005 rezoning.

Neighbors and unit owners who opposed postponement and opposed the rezoning said they had not received notice in a timely way and raised operational concerns. Eric Vitella, who said he owns a ground-floor unit adjacent to the salon, testified he and his wife did not receive mailed notice and that when they posted to a neighborhood message board they quickly found other owners opposed to the change. Vitella said the complex has limited, compact parking and expressed concern about increased traffic, wastewater impacts and precedent for other nonresidential uses in the live-work complex.

Several other residents echoed parking and infrastructure worries. Christie Vitella (opposed) said the complex lacks adequate parking. One speaker described the homeowners association and financing questions that could arise if uses not contemplated when units were purchased were approved.

Owners, customers and other neighbors spoke in favor of the rezoning, describing the salon as a low-traffic, appointment-only operation. Kimberly Bacon, who operates Little Lion Hair, told commissioners she works by appointment and typically sees a maximum of five clients per workday, with one part-time stylist working alternate days; she said the salon is closed three days per week and that she uses non-toxic products. Bacon said she has one reserved parking space and shares additional overflow spaces with other businesses at 2525 South Lamar and that she receives a separate water bill for the suite.

Supporters provided time-stamped photos of open parking and said the salon has operated quietly for two years without tow incidents or public disturbances. Several longtime clients testified they rarely observed more than two or three people in the salon at a time and described the space as quiet and low-impact.

Applicant representative Rekha Keepers asked the commission not to postpone, saying she had attempted outreach and believed additional time would not yield new input; Keepers also said code enforcement had given the business a 60-day window that will end in mid-July. Case manager Marcela Boudreaux confirmed staff's understanding that a 60-day hold or deferment related to code enforcement fees is scheduled to end in mid-July but said staff would need to consult the code inspector for additional detail.

Commissioners asked questions about notice, outreach and utility billing. Boudreaux said staff corrected missing addresses on the notice mailing list after the error was discovered. Commissioner Brere Ramirez asked the owner to confirm whether the unit is metered separately for water; Bacon and the applicant both said the suite receives a separate water bill. Opponents continued to dispute whether water and wastewater costs are billed at the unit level or by the homeowners association.

After public testimony and a brief staff presentation that described the site's location along a Core Transit Corridor and referenced Imagine Austin planning, the commission voted to deny the postponement and to approve the rezoning request to GOMU-CO with the existing prohibited use retained per staff recommendation. The commission recorded the outcome as unanimous on both procedural and final votes.

Commissioners and staff noted the case will next go to City Council per the normal rezoning process with the updated notice, and several commissioners encouraged neighbors and the applicant to continue discussions outside the hearing record to address outstanding operational concerns.

Votes at a glance - Motion to deny postponement and hear the case tonight: moved by Commissioner Anderson, seconded by Commissioner Maxwell; outcome: passed unanimously (vote recorded as unanimous). - Motion to approve staff recommendation (rezoning to GOMU-CO, retain the noted prohibited use): moved by Commissioner Anderson, seconded by Commissioner Maxwell; outcome: passed unanimously (vote recorded as unanimous).

The commission adjourned at 6:58 p.m.