TEXAS ENTITLEMENTAustin Development Watch ›
Firm profile

Carlson, Brigance & Doering, Inc

Land-use entitlement firm · 15 unique cases
27
Hearings
15
Cases
12
Concluded
58.3%
Approved of concluded
2016–2021
Active
0
Since 2024

The record, at case level

Of Carlson, Brigance & Doering, Inc’s 15 unique cases, 12 have concluded — reached a Planning Commission or ZAP decision — and 7 of those ended in approval at their final hearing: 58.3%.

Postponement is a clock, not a verdict: of the 1 concluded cases postponed at least once, 1 still ended in approval (100.0%).

Unique-case counts here are distinct case numbers. 8 of this record’s hearings also carry a case name but no number — but ~0% of those are the same matter as a numbered case already counted above, so the true unique-case count is a narrow range: 15 numbered, up to ~23 including the genuinely un-numbered matters. The case-level approval rate is computed on concluded numbered cases and is unaffected.

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

Carlson, Brigance & Doering, Inc: hearings by year2016: 2, 2017: 0, 2018: 9, 2019: 6, 2020: 8, 2021: 2492’16’179’186’198’202’21

Outcome distribution

Carlson, Brigance & Doering, Inc: outcomesApproved: 12 (44%), Postponed: 3 (11%), Denied: 6 (22%), No decision: 6 (22%)44%11%22%22%Approved 12Postponed 3Denied 6No decision 6

Hearing timeline

Hearing dateOutcomeDistrictAgent
2021-06-22ApprovedD1Brian Kelling
2021-02-09Approved(none)Brian Kelling
2020-11-24ApprovedD2Bill E. Couch
Pro · Full record
The complete 27-hearings record is a Pro feature. See what Pro unlocks →

Where they practice

D2 11D8 5D1 4D9 1

Hearing-level rates, for comparison

Postponement rate vs the fieldCarlson, Briganc: 14%, Field median: 44%Carlson, Briganc14%Field median44%
Approval rate 57.1% — above the field (46.1%) by 11.0 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 57.1% (vs the field’s 46.1%) and postponement is 14.3% — 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

C14-2021-0037C8-2019-0114.1ASPC-2019-0098CSPC-2019-0097CC8-2019-0114C8-2019-0110C8J-2018-0156.0AC8-2017-0253
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