02 C14-2026-0046 - Howard Plaza; District 1 - Correspondence — original pdf

Backup

Sirwaitis, Sherri Nick G Peter Pham RE: Zoning GR Response Letter for Event Venue Thursday, September 10, 2026 1:18:00 PM image001.png Conditional Use Permit Requirements and Process.docx From: To: Cc: Subject: Date: Attachments: Hi Nick, No, the staff has already made and posted our recommendation for the Commission’s consideration. The Cocktail Lounge use and Liquor Sales use that you cite below cannot be prohibited in a CO as they are not permitted or conditional uses in the GR base district. The first zoning district that these uses are allowed is in the CS-1 base district. Outdoor Entertainment is a conditional use in the GR base district. Therefore, this use would require a conditional use permit that would be noticed and heard at a public hearing at the Zoning and Platting Commission. Please see the regulations for a CUP that are attached. The City of Austin Law Department does not recommend public restrictive covenants with zoning cases. If you and the applicant come to an agreement about items that cannot be included in a conditional overlay, then you will need to consider if you want to enter into a private restrictive covenant to formalize those conditions. Sincerely, Sherri Sirwaitis Planner Principal, Current Planning Division Austin Planning 512-974-3057 sherri.sirwaitis@austintexas.gov Please note: E-mail correspondence to and from the City of Austin is subject to required disclosure under the Texas Public Information Act. From: Nick G Sent: Thursday, September 10, 2026 1:02 PM To: Sirwaitis, Sherri <Sherri.Sirwaitis@austintexas.gov> Cc: Peter Pham Subject: Re: Zoning GR Response Letter for Event Venue External Email - Exercise Caution 02 C14-2026-0046 - Howard Plaza; District 11 of 6Ms. Sirwaitis, Understood, thank you. Two questions so I know where things stand before Tuesday: 1. Will staff recommend adding the following to the conditional overlay for the September 15 hearing? Prohibited uses (on the same adjacency rationale the case report applies to Club or Lodge): Indoor Entertainment Outdoor Entertaiinment Theater Cocktail Lounge Restaurant (General) Liquor Sales Maximum height of 25 feet / one story; a 25-foot setback along the eastern property line with no structures or parking within it; maximum impervious cover of 70% and FAR of 0.25:1; and a 2,000-vehicle-trip-per-day limit (essentially the W/LO standards now in place, as set out in Section X of my memorandum). 2. Is there a path for a public restrictive covenant covering the items in Mr. Pham's letter, even if it isn't through the Commission? And if so, who would I work with on that? Best regards, Nick Graham On Thu, Sep 10, 2026 at 12:14 PM Sirwaitis, Sherri <Sherri.Sirwaitis@austintexas.gov> wrote: Please note that the items listed below cannot be a condition of the zoning case: (a) The three parking-lot light poles as you describe them (15 feet, low-wattage, at 30, 80, and 130 feet from the fence), written as full-cutoff fixtures. (b) no alcohol in the parking area. (c) your 9:00 p.m. summer / 8:00 p.m. winter cutoff, applied to all outdoor. (d) a block wall along the residential boundary behind the 25-foot easement. (e) biweekly maintenance of the 25-foot strip. In a zoning ordinance, a conditional overlay (CO) may: (1) prohibit permitted, conditional, and accessory uses otherwise authorized in the base district or make a permitted use a conditional use; (2) for a mixed use (MU) combining district, prohibit or make conditional a use that is otherwise permitted by Chapter 25-2, Subchapter E, Section 4.2.1 ( Mixed Use Zoning 02 C14-2026-0046 - Howard Plaza; District 12 of 6Districts ); (3) decrease the number or average density of dwelling units that may be constructed on the property; (4) increase minimum lot size or minimum lot width requirements; (5) decrease maximum floor to area ratio; (6) decrease maximum height; (7) increase minimum yard and setback requirements; (8) decrease maximum building or impervious coverage; (9) restrict access to abutting and nearby roadways and impose specific design features to ameliorate potentially adverse traffic impacts; or (10) restrict any other specific site development regulation required or authorized by this title. Outdoor sound is regulated by the conditions of City of Austin Land Development Code Chapter 9-2. - Noise and Amplified Sound. Thank you, Sherri Sirwaitis Planner Principal, Current Planning Division Austin Planning 512-974-3057 sherri.sirwaitis@austintexas.gov Please note: E-mail correspondence to and from the City of Austin is subject to required disclosure under the Texas Public Information Act. From: Nick G Sent: Thursday, September 10, 2026 11:50 AM To: Peter Pham Cc: Sirwaitis, Sherri <Sherri.Sirwaitis@austintexas.gov> Subject: Re: Zoning GR Response Letter for Event Venue External Email - Exercise Caution Dear Mr. Pham, Thank you for your letter. The specifics on lighting, sound insulation, hours, the block wall, and maintenance of the shared strip are helpful. This is the first written description of the project's operations I have received from you, and it helps move us closer. I'll be direct, because the Commission hearing is Tuesday, September 15. 02 C14-2026-0046 - Howard Plaza; District 13 of 61. I accept these commitments from your letter. (a) The three parking-lot light poles as you describe them (15 feet, low-wattage, at 30, 80, and 130 feet from the fence), written as full-cutoff fixtures. (b) no alcohol in the parking area. (c) your 9:00 p.m. summer / 8:00 p.m. winter cutoff, applied to all outdoor. (d) a block wall along the residential boundary behind the 25-foot easement. (e) biweekly maintenance of the 25-foot strip. I will tell the Commission I support these being written into the case as conditions. 2. Outdoor sound. Here I can't accept a time limit. Your letter treats sound as serious enough to insulate all four buildings against, and the 2021 approval of Building 4 was made on the record that there would be no outdoor amplified sound. Amplified sound outdoors at any hour defeats both. The term I'm asking for is no outdoor amplified sound, and a measurable limit for indoor sound at the property line. If the buildings perform as well as your letter says, there should be no issues here. 3. The open item is the use, not the building. Your letter says the event venue could go in any of the four buildings depending on tenants, and on August 2 you told me it would be Building 4. By your own account, Buildings 1, 2, and 3 are far enough from the homes that noise is not a concern; Building 4, 165 feet from the fence with its parking lot 25 feet from my property line, is not. Today, you've told me you can't say which it will be. That is why the restriction has to be on the use for across the tract. Staff has already recommended prohibiting Club or Lodge because it is too intensive next to homes. I am asking that the same logic be applied to the uses with the same profile: Event Venue (Indoor Entertainment) Theater Cocktail Lounge Restaurant (General) Liquor Sales. Office, Warehouse, Retail, and Pickleball are unaffected. You've said you don't know what tenants will want; giving up uses you aren't planning costs nothing. 4. These terms need to be recorded. Because the buildings may be leased or sold to others over time, commitments between the two of us don't bind a future owner or tenant. The zoning ordinance (a Conditional Overlay) and a Public Restrictive Covenant with the City do. The City drafts both, and staff 02 C14-2026-0046 - Howard Plaza; District 14 of 6can carry them into the recommendation. That is the same two-part framework I sent you on August 3, and the terms above are the substance of it. 5. Two paths from here. 1. If you (or your attorney) confirm to me in writing by noon on Monday, September 14 that you agree in principle to the terms above and will ask the case manager to carry them as conditions, I will join you in asking the Commission on Tuesday to postpone the case 30 days so the conditions and covenant can be finished, and I expect to support the zoning when it comes back. 2. If that isn't possible, I will present my position on Tuesday, tell the Commission that I accept the commitments in your letter, and ask that they be adopted as conditions along with the use restrictions listed above. Three requests: 1. Which building, if any, is currently planned or equipped for the venue 2. The acoustical engineer's report or STC ratings behind the "90%" figure 3. The wall specs: height, material, length along the shared line, and timing relative to occupancy. Thank you again for putting this in writing. Best regards, Nick Graham On Thu, Sep 10, 2026 at 7:09 AM Peter Pham wrote: Hello Nick, Below is the reply regarding the issue you raised. Thank you, Peter Pham Platron Investment Group ppham@platrongroup.com 3131 E. Howard Ln. Manor, TX 78653 02 C14-2026-0046 - Howard Plaza; District 15 of 6512.470.0434 CAUTION: This is an EXTERNAL email. Please use caution when clicking links or opening attachments. If you believe this to be a malicious or phishing email, please report it using the "Report Message" button in Outlook. For any additional questions or concerns, contact CSIRT at "cybersecurity@austintexas.gov". 02 C14-2026-0046 - Howard Plaza; District 16 of 6