OpenPublica

Accountability starts with access.

© 2026 · Filed for the public record

Use casesAboutAPIPrivacyTermsLinkedIn
Home/San Antonio, Texas/Boards & Commissions
OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD
Record of Proceedings

Historic and Design Review Commission Meeting - September 17, 2025

Boards & Commissions — Wednesday, September 17, 2025
BodySan Antonio, Texas
SessionBoards & Commissions
DateWednesday, September 17, 2025
StatusFILED
Video Record
0:00 / 1:37:49

Original source
Transcript — VerbatimClick a timed line to jump · ⧉ to share it
0:06

Commission for Wednesday, September 17, 2025.

0:10

May have a roll call, please.

0:12

Ma'am.

0:15

Present.

0:16

Savino.

0:17

Here.

0:18

Velazquez.

0:19

Here.

0:20

Galloway.

0:22

Here.

0:24

Mazuka.

0:25

Here.

0:27

Givada.

0:28

Here.

0:30

Group.

0:31

Here.

0:32

Cervantes.

0:35

Here.

0:37

Holland.

0:38

Here.

0:39

Fetzer.

0:40

Here.

0:41

And Gibbs.

0:41

Here.

0:42

We have a quorum.

0:43

Thank you.

0:44

May you have translation services, please.

0:53

Buenas tardes.

0:55

Good afternoon.

0:56

See alguna persona necessita interpretación inspanol.

1:00

Favor de pasar a la cabina para que se le entregue su equipo.

1:03

Gracias.

1:05

Thank you.

1:07

The historic and design review commission is an advisory board appointed by the city council.

1:12

I am J.

1:13

Maurice Gibbs, Chairman, and the Vice Chair is Jeffrey Fetzer.

1:16

It is the function of the Commission to advise the city manager in all relevant city departments concerning all applications for permits for properties in historic districts for landmarks on city property in the river improvement overlay and for diminished demolitions.

1:33

And considering whether to recommend approval or disapproval of an application for certificate of appropriateness, the commission shall be guided by the city's unified development code and design guidelines and standards that have been adopted by City Council.

1:46

An appeal of a decision by administrative official can be filed in accordance with the city's unified development code.

1:53

If anyone present wishes to speak in favor or in opposition to any item on today's agenda, please sign up on a public comment sheet.

2:02

It is not necessary to sign up if you are the owner of or representative for a project on the agenda.

2:08

You will be called on as the case is called.

2:11

Case representatives will be given no more than 15 minutes to present their case with an additional two minutes to respond to public comments.

2:19

Speakers for or opposed to a case will be limited to two minutes each.

2:24

Speakers may also sign up to yield their two minutes to another speaker who has signed up.

2:28

Anyone who is yielding their time must be present at the time the speaker is called upon.

2:34

Speakers will be called upon in the order in which they are signed up.

2:37

Following public testimony, any commissioner may call upon any speaker to respond to further questions.

2:45

Approval by the commission does not take the place of any type of permit.

2:50

Certificates of appropriateness for work approved by the commission will be emailed to you within 10 days.

2:56

No work of any type is to be started without obtaining the appropriate city permits after a certificate of appropriateness has been issued by the Office of Historic Preservation.

3:06

At this time, please silence your cell phones.

3:11

Good afternoon, everyone.

3:12

Thank you for being here.

3:13

Um first item is just approval of meeting minutes from September 3rd.

3:18

Mr.

3:19

Chairman, I move for approval of the meeting minutes for September 3rd, 2025.

3:23

Second.

3:26

Any further discussion.

3:28

May I have a roll call, please?

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting
Signage Regulations█████████████████████████████████████████████65%
Historic Preservation████████████17%
Public Art████6%
Permitting and Contracting██3%
Governance██3%
Procedural█2%
Environmental Protection█2%
Arts And Culture█2%
Summary of Proceedings

Historic and Design Review Commission Meeting - September 17, 2025

The Historic and Design Review Commission (HDRC) met on September 17, 2025, with Chairman J. Maurice Gibbs presiding and a quorum present. The meeting included approval of prior minutes, a consent agenda, public comments, and discussion of six items, including three digital billboard proposals that were referred to the Development Review Committee (DRC).

Consent Calendar

  • Items 3 (430 East Commerce) and 7 (103 West Magnolia) were approved unanimously with staff stipulations. Items 1, 2, 4, 5, and 6 were pulled for discussion.

Public Comments & Testimony

  • Patty Zion (representing the Conservation Society of San Antonio) opposed items 4, 5, and 6, arguing that the proposed digital billboards violate the sign code (Chapter 28 of the UDC), the City Council-approved Digital Media and Arts pilot program (lack of permanent art element), and do not provide for removal at program end. She stated the billboards fail to align with existing architecture and detract from the downtown streetscape.
  • Kathleen Trinchard opposed digital billboards in historic downtown, citing a city survey where over 70% of respondents were negative, and expressing concerns about safety and compatibility with beautification efforts.
  • Patricia Cratchett (voicemail) urged disapproval of items 4–6, calling digital billboards trashy, unsafe distractions, harmful to migratory birds (San Antonio is a Bird City Texas), and noting that the art component would be minimal.
  • Susan (voicemail) urged rejection of items 4–6, arguing they violate Rio 3 guidelines for traditional design, damage historic fabric, and harm tourism, film industry, and bird migration.

Discussion Items

  • Item 1 – 123 Alamo Plaza: Proposed signage for a business logo. Commissioner Velasquez initiated discussion, arguing the sign was too large and intruded into architectural details. The applicant (Gregory Kitt, Apex Sign Group) noted it is the company's logo and had been reduced from larger options through DRC review. Staff clarified the sign met guidelines at 50 sq. ft. The commission voted to approve as presented (10-0).
  • Item 2 – (Aztec Theatre building) Rooftop Restaurant Sign: Commissioner Velasquez raised concerns that the proposed sign (southwest corner) tried to mimic the historic Aztec marquee. Commissioners Group, Fetzer, Cervantes, and others agreed it should be lowered, centered on the second story brick band, and reduced in size to avoid mimicking the Aztec sign. The applicant (Rhonda Wallace) agreed to modifications. Motion to approve with staff stipulations and an added stipulation to lower, center, and reduce the sign passed (10-0).
  • Item 4 – 101 Bowie Street (Digital Billboard): Commissioner Velasquez pulled for discussion due to the sign cantilevering above the parapet with no relation to building details. The applicant (Yumna, Orange Barrel) explained they aligned the bottom with a belt course and noted visibility constraints from trees. Discussion ensued about structural supports, branding, and pilot program rules. Commissioner Group moved to refer to DRC for further discussion on size, proportion, and site visibility. Motion passed unanimously.
  • Item 5 – 506 South St. Mary’s (Digital Billboard): Commissioner Fetzer questioned the curved sign on a cubic building and location confusion. The applicant (Ashley Fairmon) confirmed the southwest corner location and supported DRC referral. Commissioner Group moved to refer to DRC. Motion passed unanimously.
  • Item 6 – 105 Auditorium Circle (Digital Billboard): Commissioner Velasquez expressed concern about the impact on the historic Municipal Auditorium and surrounding sacred space. Debate occurred about whether the property (a historic landmark) prohibited the sign under the ordinance (Section 12: no display on historic designated structures). Commissioner Group moved to refer to DRC for detailed discussion on architectural impact and visibility. Motion passed unanimously. Commissioners also debated the commission's purview regarding the city council-approved ordinance.

Key Outcomes

  • Items 1 and 2: Approved with stipulations (votes 10-0).
  • Items 4, 5, and 6: Each referred to the Development Review Committee (DRC) for further deliberation on architectural appropriateness, placement, size, and visibility.
  • Meeting adjourned after the final case.

Meeting Transcript

Commission for Wednesday, September 17, 2025. May have a roll call, please. Ma'am. Present. Savino. Here. Velazquez. Here. Galloway. Here. Mazuka. Here. Givada. Here. Group. Here. Cervantes. Here. Holland. Here. Fetzer. Here. And Gibbs. Here. We have a quorum. Thank you. May you have translation services, please. Buenas tardes. Good afternoon. See alguna persona necessita interpretación inspanol. Favor de pasar a la cabina para que se le entregue su equipo. Gracias. Thank you. The historic and design review commission is an advisory board appointed by the city council. I am J. Maurice Gibbs, Chairman, and the Vice Chair is Jeffrey Fetzer. It is the function of the Commission to advise the city manager in all relevant city departments concerning all applications for permits for properties in historic districts for landmarks on city property in the river improvement overlay and for diminished demolitions. And considering whether to recommend approval or disapproval of an application for certificate of appropriateness, the commission shall be guided by the city's unified development code and design guidelines and standards that have been adopted by City Council. An appeal of a decision by administrative official can be filed in accordance with the city's unified development code. If anyone present wishes to speak in favor or in opposition to any item on today's agenda, please sign up on a public comment sheet. It is not necessary to sign up if you are the owner of or representative for a project on the agenda. You will be called on as the case is called. Case representatives will be given no more than 15 minutes to present their case with an additional two minutes to respond to public comments. Speakers for or opposed to a case will be limited to two minutes each. Speakers may also sign up to yield their two minutes to another speaker who has signed up. Anyone who is yielding their time must be present at the time the speaker is called upon. Speakers will be called upon in the order in which they are signed up. Following public testimony, any commissioner may call upon any speaker to respond to further questions. Approval by the commission does not take the place of any type of permit. Certificates of appropriateness for work approved by the commission will be emailed to you within 10 days.

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI
TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com