TEXAS ENTITLEMENTAustin Development Watch ›
Attorney profile

Ricca Keepers

Land-use attorney of record · 26 unique cases
50
Hearings
26
Cases
17
Concluded
100.0%
Approved of concluded
2018–2026
Active
25
Since 2024

The record, at case level

Of Ricca Keepers’s 26 unique cases, 17 have concluded — reached a Planning Commission or ZAP decision — and 17 of those ended in approval at their final hearing: 100.0%.

Postponement is a clock, not a verdict: of the 7 concluded cases postponed at least once, 7 still ended in approval (100.0%). At least 11 of these cases are confirmed adopted as Council ordinances (Council records run only through 2026-04-23, so this is a floor, not a rate).

Counted once per case, not once per hearing: a case postponed several times before approval would otherwise read as several losses and one win.

Hearings by year

Ricca Keepers: hearings by year2018: 4, 2019: 3, 2020: 1, 2021: 1, 2022: 4, 2023: 12, 2024: 14, 2025: 7, 2026: 47144’183’191’201’214’2212’2314’247’254’26

Outcome distribution

Ricca Keepers: outcomesApproved: 18 (36%), Postponed: 32 (64%)36%64%Approved 18Postponed 32

Hearing timeline

Hearing dateOutcomeDistrictFirm
2026-05-12PostponedD5Keepers Land Planning
2026-03-24PostponedD5Keepers Land Planning
2026-03-24PostponedD5Keepers Land Planning
Pro · Full record
The complete 50-hearings record is a Pro feature. See what Pro unlocks →

Firm

Keepers Land Planning

Where they practice

D5 23D4 11D10 9D2 2D1 2

Hearing-level rates, for comparison

Postponement rate vs the fieldRicca Keepers: 64%, Field median: 44%Ricca Keepers64%Field median44%
Approval rate 36.0% — below the field (46.1%) by 10.1 pts.

At the hearing level every appearance counts, so a case postponed N times adds N postponements and one decision. Hearing-level approval-of-decided is 36.0% (vs the field’s 46.1%) and postponement is 64.0% — both far from the case-level figure above, for exactly that reason. Two stages, two denominators: these are commission-stage outcomes (approve vs. postpone/deny at the Planning Commission or ZAP hearing), not the City Council vote. Once a Commission-recommended case reaches Council it is approved in the high-90s%, so a low commission-stage approval rate reflects strategic postponement, not defeat.

Recent cases

C14-2025-0104NPA-2025-0030.01C14-2025-0024C14-2025-0025C14-2025-0026C14-2024-0128C14-2024-0092C14-2023-0094
Austin Development Watch · every figure traces to a certified record · hearing data through 2026-05-19 · Council outcomes through 2026-04-23 · gate-certified · generated 2026-07-29