TEXAS ENTITLEMENTAustin Development Watch ›
Firm profile

Self-Applicant

Land-use entitlement firm · 2 unique cases
2
Hearings
2
Cases
1
Concluded
0.0%
Approved of concluded
2018–2026
Active
1
Since 2024

The record, at case level

Of Self-Applicant’s 2 unique cases, 1 have concluded — reached a Planning Commission or ZAP decision — and 0 of those ended in approval at their final hearing: 0.0%.

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

Self-Applicant: hearings by year2018: 1, 2019: 0, 2020: 0, 2021: 0, 2022: 0, 2023: 0, 2024: 0, 2025: 0, 2026: 1011’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’251’26

Outcome distribution

Self-Applicant: outcomesPostponed: 1 (50%), Denied: 1 (50%)50%50%Postponed 1Denied 1

Hearing timeline

Hearing dateOutcomeDistrictAgent
2026-05-12PostponedD2Stuart Gerstacker
2018-05-22DeniedD3Michael Dennis

Where they practice

D3 1D2 1

Hearing-level rates, for comparison

Postponement rate vs the fieldSelf-Applicant: 50%, Field median: 44%Self-Applicant50%Field median44%
Approval rate 0.0% — below the field (46.1%) by 46.1 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 0.0% (vs the field’s 46.1%) and postponement is 50.0% — 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

C14-2025-0065C8-2018-0073.0A
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