May I have a roll call, please?

Ma'amin Savino.

Here.

Velasquez.

Here.

Galloway?

Here.

Mazuka.

Givata?

Here.

Group Cervantes?

Here.

Holland Fetzer?

Here.

And Gibbs.

Here.

We have a quorum.

Thank you.

May I have translation services, please?

Good afternoon, everyone.

Buenas tardes at all.

Thank you.

Okay, well, welcome everyone.

Before we get into business, we do have our annual election of officers.

So at this point, I will open up to the floor to nominations for the business position of chair.

I'd like to nominate Jay Gibbs for chair.

Second.

Okay, we have a motion and a second.

Do we have any other nominations?

Okay, all in favor of Mr.

Gibbs as chair for another year.

Aye.

Yes, aye.

Aye.

Aye.

All opposed, same sign.

Motion passes.

So uh take it away, Mr.

Chair for uh Vice Chair.

Thank you.

Um we like to now let um see any nominations for the vice chair position.

Um are there any nominations Mr.

Chair, I'd like to nominate uh Jeffrey Fetzer for Vice Chair.

Say Jeffrey Fetzer, um, it's been first um motion and property second.

Are there any other nominations?

Hearing none, um all those in favor signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Opposed.

Ayes have it so moved.

Yeah, we can take the chairman's statement at this time.

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 and all relevant city departments concerning all applications for permits for properties in historic districts, for landmarks on city property, and the river improvement overlay and for 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 the public comment sheet.

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

Permits must be obtained for all work.

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

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

At this time, please silence your cell phones and please double check your cell phones to make sure they all silent because you know that's an interruption to the meeting.

We definitely don't want that.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Um, just a quick housekeeping note.

We do have a full house today.

Um we do ask that I think you're fine, but just nobody block the exit doors while they're standing in the back.

Um we'll be good.

Um we do need approval of meeting minutes before we begin for um the hearing from December 17th.

Mr.

Chairman, uh move for approval of the December 17, 2025 HCRC meeting minutes.

Is there a second?

Second.

It's been moved and properly second.

Any further discussion.

May I have a roll call, please?

Ma'amin.

Aye.

Savino?

Aye.

Velasquez?

Aye.

Galloway?

Aye.

Mazuka?

Aye.

Givata?

Aye.

Group.

Hi.

Cervantes.

Yes.

Holland.

Fetzer?

Hi.

And Gibbs.

All right.

Motion carries.

Motion carries.

Thank you.

At this time, we can draw our attention to the screen.

Um, we have 16 items on the consent agenda.

Item 16 is the Brackenrich Park item.

Uh, we have quite a few public comments on that case, so we recommend moving that to individuals so that we can get through consent first before dealing with those public comments.

Uh so at this time um we will play voicemails uh received uh beginning with item number five.

Um and then Edward, I do have an in-person speaker.

Actually, we might do them first.

Um, if for item number three, if Ray Herbert could come speak for item number three, and then we'll do voicemails.

Mr.

Herbert, if you want to come up to the microphone.

Okay.

Um my name is Roy Hebert, and uh I just wanted to state uh the reason or one of the reasons that I know of for uh the fencing needed on our entrance to our church.

We have very old historic doors on our church, and people have been using them for a restroom, and we need to uh prevent that.

Um it's easier to uh even if somebody uses a restroom on the iron, that can be um what's the name?

Those wood doors are 94 years almost 94 years old or 94 years old now, and uh they're very historic, so uh we we need to preserve those.

That's the reason for the fancy.

Thank you.

Hello, this is Lulu Francois, Chairwoman of the Dignity Hill Historic Neighborhood Review Committee calling in on case 1301 East Commerce HDRC case number 2026-001.

We are recommending that the sign option should be the smallest of all three proposals, and because there are existing hotels directly to the south and east side of this building.

Our concern is that the advertising lighting will interfere with those hotel customers.

We understand that an apartment building is supposed to be built on the vacant lot directly to the west of this building, but since it's not there yet and there's no guarantee as to when it will be finally completed, the lesser of all three eagles is to have the smallest sign facing the west side of the building, which faces Cherry Street that will give it visibility to downtown and anyone driving east on East Congress and everyone on Cherry Street.

In addition, we were wondering where the DRC notes were because they were not in the packet.

Thank you.

Hello, this is Lily Francois, Chairwoman of the Dicknowe Hill Historic Neighborhood Review Committee calling in on 136 Gorman Street, HDRC case number 2025 327.

HDRC guidelines under B section 4 references footprint and states that the building footprint should respond to the size of the lot.

An appropriate yard to building ratio should be maintained for consistency within historic districts.

The residential additions should not be so large as to double the existing building footprint regardless of lot size.

This addition does not meet that requirement.

As stated in staff's comments, the addition is 54% of the existing building footprint, which doubles the size of the existing building.

In addition, has OHP's previous 40% size of the existing house footprint limitation for new building additions been changed because we noticed that it's not called out in this document when it has been called out in previous guideline reviews.

Another question we have applies to the east elevation window, which is a single pane window.

We were wondering is staff approving this window since it's not the one over one.

Thank you.

Yes, this is Lisa Lynn calling on behalf of the King Williams Association regarding 504 King William case number 2026-006.

Dear commissioners, the architectural advisory committee of the King Williams Association reviewed the application, OHP staff findings and staff recommendations.

We generally concur with the staff findings with one concern.

The greenhouse and chimney should be carefully considered as it will be clearly visible looking in front from King William through the board of chair.

Thank you.

Was that item 15?

I don't I don't have those other two in the folder.

Do we have voicemails from the King William Association?

There should be one for 12, but not for 15.

Okay.

So that concludes the voicemails from public comments for items on consent.

Thank you.

Do any commissioners wish to pull any items from the consent agenda?

Mr.

Chairman, I wish to pull item one, three, and five.

One, three, five, thank you.

Any others.

Hearing no others, um, can I have a motion for the balance of the consent agenda?

Mr.

Chair, I move for approval of the uh balance of the consent agenda with all staff stipulations.

Second.

It's been moved and properly seconded.

Just to be clear, um, we're stating that your recommended approval for items two, four, six, seven, eight, nine, ten, eleven, twelve, thirteen, fourteen, and fifteen with staff stipulations.

That is correct.

Thank you.

Is there a second?

Second.

Thank it's been moved and properly second.

Any further discussion.

May I have a roll call, please?

Mammon.

Aye.

Savino.

Aye.

Velasquez.

I.

Galloway?

Aye.

Mazooka.

Aye.

Givada.

Aye.

Group.

Aye.

Cervantes?

Yes.

Holland.

Aye.

Fetzer?

Aye.

And Gibbs.

Aye.

Motion carries.

Motion carries.

Thank you.

Beyond the consent agenda, your address is East Market at Hemisphere, Flourish Street Capital Improvements, 293 Livera, 1914 West Magnolia, 320 Madison, 136 Gorman, 142 Armor, 226 Sady, 504 King William, 2509, Mission Road, 311 Roosevelt, and 309 Madison.

Your case has been approved, and you do not need to stay for the remainder of this hearing.

If you have any questions, please contact a member of staff.

Your certificate of appropriateness or commission action letter will be prepared and emailed to you within 10 days.

Commissioners will uh start with item number one.

It's 9800 airport.

Uh the applicant, uh John Trupiano is here in person as well as airport staff.

Commissioners, good afternoon.

Uh my name is Jeff Coyle.

I'm one of the assistant city managers.

Uh wanted to come down and number one, thank you for your service and all you do on this commission, but also thank you specifically for the input and feedback that has gone into this project.

I think you probably don't need to hear it from me that about how significant the airport expansion is for our city.

It's actually the largest construction project we've ever undertaken.

Uh, and it's gonna have a tremendous impact on our whole community.

So we take all of this work very seriously.

I I think we're all very comfortable that the the input that you've provided has cut allowed for some creative ways to honor the history of the the building we're talking about today.

Uh John will get on into those in a minute, but uh it's been a priority for us to make sure that we both do that uh and keep this project moving forward on time and on schedule and our airport team, our airport director Jesus Signs and Assistant Director Tim O'Cronley have done an extraordinary job moving this project forward, and we can't wait to uh have you all there for the opening in 2028 of our new San Antonio International Airport.

So thank you very much.

Thank you, Jeff.

Um good afternoon.

I'm John Trupiano.

I am with Corgan Associates.

We are the architect on this particular project.

So today I want to walk you through a little bit of what it is that we're doing based off of previous um feedback we've received from the commission for the commemoration of what we call building 1322.

Um previously when we had presented this, there were several items that we had agreed to with a memo of under of understanding.

And there are seven elements of that MOU that we wanted to share with you how we're progressing.

The first is that we were required to do the HABS documentation that has been completed and submitted to the Texas Historical Commission.

Part of that was also to develop interpretive signage that has also been completed that has been submitted to the THC and shared with OHP as well.

Another component was the development of 3D modeling.

The building has undergone a full 3D survey.

That survey is complete, and it has been shared as part of the HABS documentation.

Ultimately, that survey will be part of one of the later bullet points here, which is a airport operated website recognizing this particular building.

We have also completed our article to the Texas Historical Texas State Historical Association.

So I don't believe it has been published yet, but it has been submitted to the TSHA.

And so those are the items that we have been able to complete to date.

The elements that are still ongoing are the final three of that MOU.

The first is the context for the SAS website.

That will incorporate the elements that we've talked about previously, those first four, as well as a couple of these other ones.

And once we are done with documentation of the demolition of the building, all of that will be gathered together and then published on that website by the airport.

As part of that, it is the time-lapse photography.

So there are two steps that we're undergoing right now.

The first is that we are doing some exploratory demolition to understand what components of the building we are able to salvage.

And so with every element that is removed from the building, we are documenting the progress of that as we go.

Once the exploratory demolition is done, we will embark on the time-lapse photography or video of the actual deconstruction of the building.

And then the final element was that the MOU agreed that we would explore the salvage and reuse of materials from the existing facility.

Specifically, we were looking at the use, the possible reuse of the travertine, as well as a way that we can incorporate some of the unique Y-shaped columns in to the new structure.

Knowing that we can salvage them perhaps, but they are not in a condition that we can reuse them structurally, so they would be used in other places within the design.

What I wanted to do today was walk through how we've approached that salvage and reuse of the existing facilities or the existing components of building 1322.

So we developed multiple strategies.

The first is this idea of how can we reflect the character of this building in a new structure that is uniquely different than the original and works with the overall airport campus.

And our approach, and we'll share more about this as we get into it, is to utilize this this image that we see here on screen as part of our landscape design and create what we called a shadow effect of casting the shade of this building and its unique curvilinear roof form into the actual groundscape, landscape, and pavement around the building through the use of these materials in the Paseo area.

The second was the commemorative and interpretive plaques in the 3D model.

We'll show where we've incorporated those.

We talked a little bit about those already being submitted for some of those components, but we're going to expand beyond what was required as part of our HABS documentation to incorporate other features within that.

The third strategy was to reuse some of the salvaged Y columns as benches within the site.

Strategy four was reusing some of the original travertine off the building.

The building is clad interior and out with this travertine, and we're looking at ways that we can remove it from the building and then reuse it not only within the context of the building architecture, but possibly also make the materials available to the artist as part of the public arts program to utilize in their interpretation for this building.

And then the final was the commemorative plaque on the inside of the building.

So when we look at a site plan of the building, we can see where each one of these components is integrated inside or exterior to the building.

And on the exterior is where you start to see this shadow study of reflecting the Y-shaped columns out into the environment as if they were shadows of the original building but done on the new structure itself.

We can also see the the two Y-shaped columns.

We've got one near the connection to the main terminal, as well on the opposite side where it connects in with the new parking garage.

And then there would be interpretive signage throughout.

To take that a little bit further into a rendered image, what we see on the far right side of this image is one of those Y column benches.

And then you can see along the face of the building integrated within the landscape is the shadow of the building and those Y columns.

Opposite those you start to see the curvilinear roof form reflected in the edges of the paving of the Paseo and in the retaining walls that are necessary.

We're going to clad those with the travertine from the existing building and let that reflect that existing curvilineal roof form of building 132.

As we start taking more of a of a three-dimensional perspective of it, you can really see the way that the roof uh is reflected within those retaining walls and the shadow study on the ground.

Coming over to the first Y bench.

This is part of our outdoor paseo that connects to the main paseo in front of the terminal.

We were here probably about eight months ago and walked through all of those structures within the new terminal.

This will connect to allow passengers to move from the terminal all the way to the garage, either indoors or exterior, depending on what the weather is like.

Inside the building, we also see the incorporation of the interpretive signage and bronze plaque, as well as a physical 3D model of the existing building 1322.

So as passengers walk through the corridor, they can stop on the site of where the original building was, and we can have a commemorative model and the signage explaining how we've incorporated that into the new design.

This is an image where the Paseo ends at the new garage, and you can see the second of the two Y column benches.

We have a courtyard over here.

As that final uh area but before you enter the garage, or this can also be used for some shuttle services in this area.

So this is a way a place that you can actually wait for those services as well.

And then an image of what it would look like, uh a final image of what that looks like as people just approach leaving the garage, walking back to the terminal that we see beyond.

And you can see as well along that pathway, we would have interpretive signage that explains what you're walking through, and those signs would also bring in elements of the Y columns from building 1322 to reinforce uh the significance of that design within the new structure.

Talking a little bit about just the elevations and the materiality, the materiality of this building of the pedestrian walkway is very similar to the materials that we were proposing within the new terminal.

So we've got uh glazing stone cladding on the column pilasters, curtain wall metal roof, insulated metal panels.

Um on the rear elevation, the rear is primarily a service side of the building.

It faces a um a central utility plant and a service access road.

So while we have some high clear stories that let daylight in without highlighting views to the loading dock of the new terminal, we have just clad this with the insulated metal panels to have an energy efficient design that is utilizing the same materials used elsewhere on campus.

So those are the ways that we have listened to the feedback from this committee, taken it forward into our design, and our approaching our uh compliance with that memorandum of understanding of how to incorporate building 1322 into the new pedestrian walkway.

Thank you.

Um Commissioner Fesser is going to ask you some questions, and then um from there we'll since we have a full house today, we'll go in order down the road to make sure that everyone has an input to whatever question they may ask, and then we'll go from there.

All right, Commissioner Fesser.

Yes.

Um thank you very much for the presentation and thank you for coming to several DRCs and to this commission uh previously uh trying to get to a consensus on how to commemorate 1322.

Um I've been concerned that what is being proposed is not doing the building justice, that I think the um what's unique and character defining about the building is its three-dimensionality.

And other than the uh two remnants of the Y columns as benches and a 3D model, um I don't see that three-dimensionality.

And in the last CRC, asked y'all to explore that some more and just like to hear your thoughts on that comment or that request.

Uh there was some discussion about possibly doing something 3D as an arbor or trellis for shade over the uh paseo, uh, which would uh celebrate that building further, much more than just some paving on the ground.

So when we look at the new pedestrian corridor and we look at the general architecture of the of the new terminal and the campus uh overall, some of the shapes and forms of building 1322 are unique and are not necessarily complementary to the remaining aspects of the architecture and the approach that we've taken to the design.

Um we believe that we are making a strong statement by engaging this at the level of the individual, at the pedestrian level, and that's where we've really focused our efforts and and energy is in how do we create something that really people can get into touch, feel and look at um as they walk through the Paseo.

So we've we've heard your previous comments, we just believe that they are not necessarily the approach that we are taking within the ultimate design of the facility.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Uh Commissioner Group.

Commissioner Group, are you unmuted?

Try again?

Try again.

Thank you, Commissioner Group.

Um Commissioner Gabana.

No questions right now, sir.

Thank you.

Commissioner Mazuka.

My concern was that there be some homage to the Romanesque arches that are broken or the roof structure inside the building.

Um it could be flat against that wall, which is uh uninterrupted except for that uh open space that I see.

But I think that there could be some kind of homage to the original building that people would understand.

I I understand the references to the look of the walkway in planographic form, but people aren't going to experience it in planographic form.

They're going to experience it by walking through it, and they're not necessarily going to see, oh, this represents the roof form and the columns in the original building, and they'd have to go into the to look at the model to see any kind of reference to it.

Um I was hoping for something more in the interior.

Um that's my comment.

Thank you, sir.

Commissioner Cervantes.

Yes.

So if you go to the perspective uh view, please.

There you go.

So are you able to take that little black triangle shadow portion that's on the ground at the base of each column?

Are you able to replicate that and put something like that at the top of the column where the concrete meets the metal pole and then have it uh mirror what's on the ground uh at that level to provide some sort of shade of trellis?

With maybe two poles and the other end, you know, two poles and then it anchored at the column at the top there.

One of the concerns that we've expressed previously is that if we get too playful with how we trying to reference 1322, we start to mock 1322 in mimicry as opposed to celebrate it.

And if we did something like that, it would not be of the scale or the the size of the existing facility, and I think it would be it would not fit in with the architecture of the new facility either.

Thank you.

Thank you, Commissioner.

Just I what we have today is it's not a reconsideration of demolition of 1322.

It's that's something that was approved in 2024 with specific mitigation requirements and what we're talking about tonight is whether the applicant has met the mitigation obligations in a way that aligns with the prior stipulation.

So given that, I would ask just uh a lot of talk is and thought has been given into the uh the the design and the homage.

And I just wanted to give you an opportunity to um to tell us how a member of the public would understand the significance of the billing, the building without any prior knowledge of the building.

I think that the significance, whether we do something here or we incorporated something vertical.

Um to go back to a comment that was made at a previous DRC, the building has been long forgotten, and that not many people are aware it's there.

And so to make that connection once the building is demolished is going to require some of the other things that we've already heard about, right?

People are going to have to reference that 3D model to see there used to be something here that had that same shape, whether it's vertical or whether it's horizontal.

So I think that the public education and the interpretive signage become a very important aspect, regardless of if this is a um a 3D view or I mean excuse me, a flat perspective or a 3D view.

What we wanted to do is have something that worked kind of in both, right?

That's why these retaining walls are coming up out of the ground to reflect a bit of that overhang that the building had.

Um I think through the development of that interpretive signage, we can tell that story that would be just as compelling as a story we would tell if we just had a column sticking up out of the ground.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Commissioner Savino.

Uh I would like to address um the design as it relates again to the user.

Uh looking I'm looking at page number 14 in the PDF showing a floor plan.

There are two segments of the walkway of the Paseo.

Um is shorter, one towards the north.

Um the north is a shorter segment with four, six bays.

And the longer segment is where you're showing the landscape or that utilizes the materials, correct?

And the abstracted um expression of those arches.

What is the length of the longer walkway?

Oh, that's a great question.

Yeah, that's why I'm asking.

But I'd say it's probably going to be about a 180 to 200 feet.

Okay.

And so if somebody is walking through their, say they've come off their plane, they've picked up their baggage, they're going to go through that small segment, they're going to going to be given a choice.

Do I stay inside?

Do I go outside to walk, correct?

Um that makes the assumption that they've started their journey inside the correct.

That's what I'm commissioning.

Um they could have already have exited out into the Paseo and been walking along the short section as well.

Or coming from terminals A or B as well.

Right, right.

And the reverse is true from the garage.

Um, along that longest section, how many and other entry points are there before you get to the garage?

There are a total of three entry points along there.

There's one at either end.

Correct.

And then the third one is in the center.

At the joint, correct.

At the fulcrum of those two parts.

Right.

But from that fulcrum to the garage, there's nothing, right?

Um there's supposed to be one in there, yes.

From the garage.

Because um, I guess my point being is I want to better understand if you make your decision to walk indoors, how many opportunities do you have to change your mind and go outside to experience these materials?

The rendering that is inside showing the model.

Um there is it may not be in this window, I believe it's on the on the bay.

We can't see here that there is another entrance or exit from the building here in the center as well.

In the center, okay.

Um because with our weather, as somebody has brought up, um, typically a traveler may very well take the the shorter, straighter route, the conditioned route, and not have any awareness of what the landscape is all about.

So I just wanted to get an idea of what that those links are and what those access points are.

Thank you.

Thank you, Commissioner Galloway.

No questions.

Thank you, Commissioner Mammon.

No questions, Chair.

Thank you.

Commissioner Velasquez?

Yes, sir.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

On on uh page 11 and 12 uh it it it seems that there's an inconsistency in the material um texture or color uh uh providing a uh a more literal um experience of the shape.

So the clear story cover is shown light and and in page 12 it's a limestone.

And and the uh the the older T shape uh is a darker color.

It seems that you know, for the person that is a late layman walking through, you're gonna lose their ability to to do what you want them to do is to see what's there because the the Y shape is directly related to the to the chair to the bench.

Now there it's a little bit more literal, but but just trying to try to figure out which is which from page 1112 and then what's up uh 11 here that's uh that's a perspective, but in the plan 11 and 12, they seem to be different.

So it seems that that there should be a more uh a more literal uh attempt to to to bring these shapes together so that if you're a drone flying over it, you'll see it and then you'll have the effect that you are after.

But I I want to ask a a question with respect to the the old building.

Uh is was the old building in a place that prohibits any aspect of it from standing.

It is.

Uh it prevented us from realizing the rest of the expansion because it was kind of in the way of aircraft movement service roads and this pedestrian walkway, given that we're already bound by the existing roadway network that's out there.

So and there was no aspect of it that that could uh remain as an artifact.

There really wasn't.

And and one of the challenges that we've had is that the building is built in such a way that we can't do partial demolitions, right?

It it's all this one integral component that um the surveyors that did the structural analysis made the determination that they couldn't remove parts of it and reuse them.

Okay.

Well, uh let me just say that that the I can see one one of the things I appreciate about what you presented is that it forced a particular design that otherwise wouldn't have occurred.

So it means that y'all were affected and had to work within the constraints of something that perhaps you would rather not done.

So that's uh uh you know very important, I think, to say.

Um moving forward, you it you know, I don't want to dumb down what what you perhaps are are going to be doing, uh, but um that what you have achieved should should try its best to get as far layman visually as it possibly can, being that that the that that experience is going to be from above anyway.

Um, but in terms of materiality, you should probably tie it stuff together as best as it possibly can.

My comments.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Thank you.

Um anything to add, Commissioner Fesser.

Um we're going to um have a motion in a moment, sir, but I just want to add uh my comments in here.

I remember when we first went to visit, you know, the building, and um Commissioner Fesser and myself, Commissioner Civantes um and some others, um it was important to us that you know, being with his historical nature of that building that ideally we we wanted that to remain in some way, shape, or form.

I um I applaud y'all for what you've done in trying to incorporate some of the you know elements through the shadows and things in nature and just understand that no one's gonna be 100 percent happy, you know, when it comes to this because the the building itself, you know, is it's a piece of history that you know we especially us here on the commission and of course um the community as a whole, you know, want to try to retain as much of that as possible.

So um I um I would encourage that you know, even beyond today, whatever way this vote goes, that you continue to try to incorporate more and try to do things, you know, to make um to give reverence to the building.

A sign inside is great, you know, the shadows are are nice, you know, things of nature, but you know someone has to stop and pay attention and focus on that, and then you know, like some of the other commissioners have said is you know, more reverence should it be, you know, placed to that.

So just wanted to share that um with you, sir.

Um, do you have any final um things you want to say before we um do a motion here?

No, I do not.

Thank you.

Motion please, sir.

Yes.

Uh I would like to move for approval of the enclosed connector between the new terminal and the parking garage with a uh continuation of studying commemorating building 1322 on the exterior paseo, uh, especially as you go through selective demolition and uh finding what parts and pieces might be able to be salvaged and reused.

Is there a second motion dies for lack of a second?

And may I have a new motion, please?

I'll do a motion, Mr.

Chair.

Go ahead, ma'am.

I'll say.

Any final discussion?

Yeah.

Can I say something?

You're up.

Go ahead.

You're first.

Go ahead.

Oh, and I think that there's been a lot of discussion.

It's the second time we're looking at it.

I don't have a problem as how it was presented today, adding the statisticulations.

I think we're confusing salvage and mitigation to creating an experience.

And I think we're going beyond our purview.

I think the we are asking for mitigation and preservation, and it's been some I think that's what the applicant has complied with.

Thank you, Commissioner.

Mr.

Chair.

Commissioner Guevada.

Nothing further, sir.

Thank you.

Commissioner Mazuka.

I still wish that there had been some kind of homage.

It could even be on the floor in the form of the terrazzo being some kind of images of the building, the entire building or parts of the building, something that defines and gives homage to the to the original structure.

Thank you.

Commissioner Civantes.

Yeah, I think I, you know, I was more likely to uh agree with Commissioner Fitzer's motion.

I will not be supporting this motion.

I think that um what is being asked from a design standpoint is fairly easy, it's not cumbersome, and I think what you have here does not pay enough homage to the building that you are actually trying to uh tear down and and and and uh incorporate into the to the ground aspect there.

Um it's not hard, it's not rocket science, and I think you can do a little better.

And I don't think this does justice to the airport, the city of San Antonio or the building that we're looking at replacing.

So I will not be supporting this motion as it stands.

Um at the Commissioner Holland.

I I appreciate I appreciate what the applicant has done responding directly to the stipulations, particularly the requirement to salvage and reuse materials.

Um I feel the meaningful reference to the demolished structure uh with the reuse of materials.

Um it's to me I get uh it's I understand that there's an abstraction um and what we were discussing earlier is uh not everybody is going to be happy.

Um to me, the shadow landscape strategy directly references the former facade footprint, and I can see it.

Uh the application to me demonstrates a good faith compliance with prior HDRC direction and strengthens the public's understanding of the project.

Um I'm not sure that additional delay or redesign would materially improve compliance.

And uh I'm I'm I'm not sure what else we would be going for.

Uh at some point, insisting on more literal or architectural expressions uh is gonna move us from a pre preservation review into uh prescribing prescribing design solutions, which is not the Commission's purview.

So I will be supporting this motion.

Thank you.

Thank you, sir.

Um Commissioner Sabino.

Yeah, thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Um I've always looked at this request, the primary portion being the design of the walkway, the building, the structure.

Umsually we rever view these cases um with the structure being primary, being the main um emphasis.

So uh looking at the findings on finding D as noted and finding B a stipulation of the approval of building 1322.

Was that every effort be made to salvage and reuse materials and design elements from building 1322?

And that's just on the walkway.

So you're saying the most you can salvage for the walkway design was the strip of travertine right up by the storefront windows.

And that's it.

The remaining reuse and salvage and even of an abstracted arch, shadow arch, is all occurring in the landscape.

And I think the landscape tends to be it's in a we're in a harsh climate.

I I doubt this will ever look this way as being presented in a rendering.

That's always my beef with renderings.

They never look that way in reality.

So I'm kind of dubious about how that's going to turn out.

So it makes me skeptical, naturally.

It's the building that endures.

And if all we're using is that strip of traverantine, and that's the best we can do, I'm saddened by that, that the design elements couldn't appear in a more structural way.

Now the the shadow design in the landscape, it's abstracted because you would never ever see that form in that shadow as that form.

What you see, what has been done is sort of a photocopy of the arch and just plopped on the ground.

It would never appear as a shadow that way, ever.

So it how it will tie into the user through the building is of paramount importance to me.

And how that acknowledgement of that previous building in the new walkway design, the new structure, is very important.

Thank you.

Um the only thing I'll add is that I actually like the walkway uh, you know, um uh component of this.

Um I I like the fact that I can uh you know walk through this and uh potentially learn about the the roof or the historic part of the the building uh and it mimics that and everything.

So I I like this.

I what I would um suggest is you know, I know there's interpretive signage outside, but if there's a way to like, you know, etch some of that into the sidewalk, like how do you get people to slow down and experience that um on the sidewalk as they're as they're walking through it, so they don't think that's just some other sidewalk, um, then uh that would be my only suggestion.

But I I I like the design.

Thank you, Commissioner Galloway.

Commissioner Mammon.

No comment, sure.

Thank you, sir, Commissioner Velasquez.

Yes, sir.

Mr.

Chair, the the one of the most important elements of the of the of the case here is that um there's this foregone conclusion that demolition is already you know the function of uh the main conversation.

So seems that if the building had been able to be saved as an artifact, then that would have been the top uh objective.

But it seems that this decision was made that a demolition is that the building is gonna go away.

You know, kind of uh uh second to the fact that the building got torn down, or is is getting torn down by by decision already.

Uh the the the work that the firm has gone into to be informed by that information may not go far enough for for some or or maybe go too far for for others.

But I think w one one of the things that's that that might be explorable is this idea that fragments of the demolished uh uh building.

I and I heard in your presentation that that that that would be made available to the artist that would be involved in in uh uh the uh I guess the percentage that that would go to public art, right?

But but I think it as well uh it might be be worth exploring um how large pieces are are found um abstractly in the landscape, not not as things that are grown over, but as pieces that are there as a living museum, uh much like we find in other countries where buildings fall and they're left there, and they become things that uh that you can't take away.

They have to be there for the next God knows how long.

The site of the airport is a is a massive site.

Uh sometimes uh you know there are rustic things created and put uh to to put to get a particular look.

Here we have some pieces that perhaps some of those T forms or Y forms could could find themselves in the in the further distance as parts that were broken apart, but that aren't in the way of the airplanes and aren't in the way of what it whatever we're you're doing here, and maybe that should be explored further, the use of those pieces within the entry and exit.

Commissioner Velasquez, I'm gonna ask you to wrap up your comments, please, sir.

That that's it.

Thank you, sir.

Thank you.

Commissioner Group.

Yes, thank you.

And I just wanted to uh because we're in discussion right now, right?

So the demolition is not even happening, and it I don't think it's for us to judge whether how much salvage was done or not.

We can be saddened or whatever, but I mean I don't think we can judge that or or not approve something because we're not agreeing that only one piece or two pieces are going to be salvaged.

Somebody mentioned something about homage.

I don't know if that's even in our preview.

That's probably a little question to staff.

Is like how much are we to judge what is enough homage at bronze back as the applicant is presenting, doing a video.

I mean, to be honest, as front experience as the pedestrian outside or inside and video showing how the building was demolished and how it's been rebuilt is much more impactful than maybe an arch that's mitigating some historic element from the building and the Y or in the bench, or like I that's where I'm saying, like I think that we have to remove a little bit personal opinion and judge what is enough effort and not.

And I think we'd look at it from a standpoint of what is our preview and what is the applicant really done within the guidelines.

That's why this motion and this is why I made that motion.

Thank you, Commissioner Group.

Um Commissioner Fesser.

Yes.

Um I will not be supporting the motion as stand as it stands.

Um I believe the effort, just like the demolition approval statement said that every effort should be made to salvage and reuse materials and design elements from building 1322.

And as demolition has actually selective demolition is actually not started, that's my understanding, correct?

Exploratory demolition.

So we've started removing some of the trivertine to understand how it's going to come off the building, if it's little pieces, or can we get usable chunks of it?

Okay.

So as the building is selectively demolished, uh, I still think every effort should be made to look at the parts and pieces and see how they might be incorporated into the um the commemoration of the building, which is part of the mitigation uh request.

So thank you.

Thank you.

Excuse me.

Thank you, everyone, for your comments.

Thank you for your time, sir.

Um as you can see, it's a sensitive topic.

Um so but I uh appreciate you being here and and for all the uh work you have done thus far to get us to this point here.

May I have a roll call, please?

Ma'aman?

Aye.

Savino?

Nay.

Velasquez?

Aye.

Galloway?

Aye.

Nay.

Givata?

Aye.

Group.

Aye.

Cervantes?

No.

Holland?

Aye.

Fetzer?

No.

And Gibbs.

Aye.

Motion carries.

Motion carries.

Thank you.

Thank you, sir.

Thank you.

Item number three, please.

Item number three, 502 East Nueva.

Um, Mr.

Uh Toby Burke is here in person, can answer questions regarding the scope of work.

Do I sir come to the introduce yourself, please, and then Commissioner Fesser has some questions for you.

Okay.

Uh, do I need to present?

I don't know what to do.

Do you like it?

Is that something or answer questions?

You just answer questions and then if um then Commissioner Fesser will guide you if you need in if you need anything for us.

Thank you, sir.

Uh got to introduce yourself.

I'm Toby Burke.

I'm the senior pastor of St.

John's Lutheran Church.

Uh, I've been there about two years and born and raised at the church and born and raised in San Antonio and um back off of uh military service and back in town.

So um happy to be here and thank you for having me.

Thank you, sir.

Commissioner Fester?

Yes.

Um I can understand the need for the uh fencing and the the gates to protect the the church and the artifact.

Uh what I am but my concern is is that the uh the front gates uh as designed actually compete with and detract from the historic front uh limestone elements of the church.

And uh wondering if you all had explored something much similar, uh simpler in design, so that uh the doors beyond and the limestone carvings and all that could be read through the grill instead of being obscured by this design.

Sure.

Thank you.

Um yeah, this is um if the doors themselves do not have anything other than they're just really plain wooden doors.

Um and we took special care to make sure that the uh that the stone work was not hidden and was actually displayed and complemented um the aspects in the gate, kind of pulled them out.

So we we thought about those things and wanted to make sure that we we let the uh the architecture and the history of the church you know shine through despite um us trying to accomplish very practical things okay and then two other questions one the the side window grille which shows on sheet 15 the design again uh has some ornate elements which actually obscure at least in this photo obscure the uh part of the decorative window especially at the the head and wondering if that could be um modified so that the window reads as prominent as opposed to the grill yes sir we looked at um options maybe like some sort of uh reinforced glass or something that was on the outside instead of instead of ironwork um we thought about what is condensation do to that what is you know if it gets discolored through time how what does that do to the to the window um the coverings that we have on the window as well as some of the other things we have to take into consideration things going through that we had bars in other places and people squeeze through the bars um the the uh um the stained glass itself is kind of like reinforced and we had people punch in windows and and destroy things and so we wanted a way to kind of tighten up uh because replacing historic stuff is a lot more expensive than protecting it and so um we thought about some of those things but we thought the the iron the metal work would uh would match up better with everything else we have going on as well as kind of be more of a long term solution okay more of a classical feel as well the the the uh the glass uh seems like it would be kind of a a modern fix um but we don't know we didn't know how that would turn out and this seems like it was more of a um uh traditional uh feel to the building as well well in this particular uh drawing photo um having the ornate uh ironwork up at the top of that grill starts to obscure the uh stained glass itself so uh uh on the bottom you the grill doesn't seem to uh compete with the stained glass below and wondering if that top ornate grill uh metal work could be simplified maybe just continue the vertical oh sure we're we're extremely flexible on on uh the window coverings we uh we're very open to options and and uh changing things up okay and then the last one is the the and it may just be the way the drawing is presented the grill at the south end arcade uh the description says that it's a gate but this drawing uh seems to show that it's a single fixed grill is it actually a pair of gates I I don't know why that was submitted that's not what we're looking to to get approved here today I don't know why that was submitted so is this coming back to us at a later date the design of this possibly yeah it's already in place yeah it's this is if this is what I'm thinking of okay this one is inside the the facility this is not sorry this is not um on the street I thought this was a different one this one is inside uh the parking lot and this one is already up and it is a gate it is it is a it is a swinging gate and not just uh one piece okay thank you thank you um did we lose lose Commissioner group did we lose Commissioner Group?

She left yes Okay thank you um Commissioner Covata questions no comments no questions thank you Commissioner Mazuka Commissioner Cavantes no comments Commissioner Holland no comments Commissioner Sabino yeah Mr.

Chair I would I just want to confirm that you're um I guess understanding the the request that Commissioner Fetzer had regarding the front gates on the very front door and I guess that's number 11.

So would it be possible to simplify the design of this one this unit where there are more perhaps more bars perhaps it looks more like the gate enclosure on the portico that we looked at a little bit earlier.

Some bars perhaps a little decorative element on a border up at the top but is that something that you you could do is simplify it to that degree.

I guess we could um kind of what we were thinking is um you know when in La Vieta there's a lot of very bold pieces of art.

There's a lot of um very um bold expressions of of of what is and so what this what this gate is is doing is taking all of the architecture from St.

John's and bringing it out into the front gate.

So everything on every piece of artwork on that gate is is from the inside of the church and from the outside of the church and brought in to express hey this is this is the church this is the architecture that's already here and kind of bringing it together.

And so we wanted to do something beautiful for San Antonio and not something that's just going to be um very bland and and plain and and have something that kind of adds to where we're at and not just kind of just get the job done.

Okay.

Yeah.

So it could not be simplified in the Oh it could it could we would just hope that it's there's some lovely you know ball relief up there and the stone and brick and other things going on and I'm afraid it it would almost compete too much and take the attention away from what's already there on the facade of the building.

Because the church is beautiful on its own.

So I just wanted to better understand the degree to which you would be amenable to simplifying that particular um gate.

Yes ma'am yeah thank you.

Thank you Commissioner Clarley No comment.

Thank you, Commissioner Mammon.

I guess um keep it on Commissioner Savino's comments or question is maybe the simplification I don't know if this goes into what you're looking for is the simplification is just on the outer parts and not necessarily within the doorway framing or well I understand the unfill needed for security totally but it just uh seems like a uh quite a lot of detail and perhaps that's something that you could work with staff on and determine you know what's the best balance of security expressing the decorative artwork that's inside the church as well as allowing the existing stonework and masonry to be the focal point too.

And and we I guess we would think that it it it uh it amplifies the the we would argue it amplifies the beauty.

I know some people would disagree right but um we think that you know uh it it doesn't cover up any carvings and and I I guess we would we would argue it kind of makes them pop but um you know maybe that's just me.

No further question.

Thank you.

Commissioner Vasquez?

Yes sir question for staff um Edward I I thought that that uh religious facilities were outside the purview of the City of San Antonio or preservation I mean no I mean there's a state law that impacts the local designation the new local designation of religious owned properties but it doesn't impact something that's already designated.

Okay.

Well then I have a question it seems that the the placement of the gate I I don't know if you've already done it or already had it made but it seems that the placement of it is in a place that if you were doing it originally that's not where you would put it it it would go within the box that has absolutely no detail already and then you can probably as be as ornate as you want but I I can't see whether the door would open into it or how that would be dealt with it seems it would be ideal because then the door could close into the wall when you're when you're open and then when you're closed it would it would it would gate itself at the mouth not not where the designs are.

I I don't understand why it's placed in the 45 degree yes sir so the some of the handrails um are are right are in the way of the of the placement of those things as well as trying to uh bring the gate out to under that first step to uh give it uh more structural integrity but also to yes sir yeah the the handrails um on the walls on the side um they they get in the way of uh of that installation right but when you put the when you put the the the thing there you you make the rail kind of an unrail you know it it it now the rail is this thing that is like in a prison where where you can deal with there's a hundred different ways to do with the rail.

As a matter of fact the rail almost remains functional to a certain extent uh but it seems like it's a secondary issue try trying to to deal with the rail this this rail that is is consequential to a person that needs the rail but that's that doesn't seem to be an issue but then the little coat, the X, the book, all of that stuff gets hidden, you're never going to see that it'll be gone forever.

But then the little code, the X, the book, all of that stuff gets hidden, you're never going to see that.

It'll be gone forever.

And and you and not only that but any s any skilled person wouldn't put the the gate there whether you whether you wanted to do it or not you'd put it in in the opening.

Let me just say that if that's where you want it where you're showing it I mean it's it it's it's you know I'll look at it and I'll go, well that's where they wanted it, right?

But but it should go inside unless there's a situation that's not the rail that has to do with the length of the door when it opens and all of that because it just doesn't make sense that you have it all the way out there.

It doesn't make any sense.

Yeah so some of the uh do I can I you can ask okay sir okay so some of the uh some of the um uh things that we took under consideration was one the doors each fold each one of those sections folds and so it gives a complete open way so that when services or or anything is happening there like if we have a funeral and we have to do a recession then um there's nothing in the way um so they they kind of fold out into themselves and kind of disappear into themselves almost um and and like I said I want we wanted to bring it out to where the the that step had had a bit of a uh bit of a uh barrier uh towards um aggression or or whatever and again to uh to kind of push the perimeter of security out to a uh the furthest point of that structure and and we we feel that you know this is the entrance to the church this is the the entrance to the church and so for us it is it is something that we want to take a lot of of pride in and put a lot of effort into and and say a lot because this is the entrance to the church.

It's not a side entrance.

It's not one of many entrances for the history of of that building.

So there is another way in now but this is the way that um most people are going to be coming into the sanctuary to worship or to come to a funeral or a wedding or whatever else and so they're coming through this entranceway and we want we want uh their visit to San Antonio and St.

John's to be something that is is special and and says something at least that's that's the intention.

Thank thank you sir.

Commissioner Petra yes I'd like to move this to a site design review committee meeting uh where some of the commissioners can come out meet with you and your your staff and the designers of the grill and fully understand where and how the grill uh interfaces with the uh historic limestone second second spin mood and properly second um for discussion Commissioner Vetzer um I acknowledge that security is is needed uh and understand why you're doing this and you're also trying to celebrate the uh the history and the the elements of the uh sanctuary and that and I think having a site visit uh will help inform us as to your intent.

Yes sir and so I have a question um so with the well not a question but a comment um so I I go by this service like three times a week I mean it's like five o'clock in the morning when I'm running but you know I see it so and I understand you know what you're trying to protect there you know so because I see you know unfortunately I see the un unhoused there that you know camp in that space and also the one that's further down um on the corner of umueva and um forget the intersection but yeah I think you know I'm talking about the little small area so I understand but um the DRC I think will help you know some of the commissioners to be able to see what we're looking at as far as that ornamentation and seeing how it actually plays into this because it's a beautiful entryway so um I just hope you're amenable to that and if it actually goes to that so I'll give final comments to commissioners on Commissioner Guardian.

Commissioner um Cervantes no comments sir Commissioner Holly um commission Sabino?

Commissioner Galloway Commissioner Mammon?

Commissioner Velasquez Mr.

Chair, I'm wondering if the maker of the motion um would would be it seemed that there were there was one or two elements that had already been done if if there's the ability to have those off of the motion or to have been passed in the motion so that we don't have to revisit them again?

If if there's the ability to have those off of the motion or to have been passed in the motion so that we don't have to revisit them again.

Let me review what the request is.

I think it's at page thir uh uh thirteen.

Page 13.

I guess I would amend my motion to say approve with staff stipulations, uh items two, three, four, and five uh with a site DRC for item one.

Second stance.

Thank you.

It's been moved in properly.

Second, um any further discussion.

All right.

May I have a roll call, please.

Mammon.

I.

Savino?

Aye.

Velasquez.

I.

Galloway.

I.

Mazuka?

Aye.

I.

Cervantes?

Yes.

Holland?

Aye.

Fetzer?

I and Gibbs.

I motion carries.

Motion carries.

Thank you, sir.

Thank you, Commissioner Velasquez.

Thank you, sir.

We're good.

Thank you, sir.

Appreciate you.

Item number five, please.

Item number five is 1301 East Commerce.

The applicant, Ashley Fairman, is here.

Uh and Commissioners, I have uh an updated uh packet that potentially addresses some of your comments.

Hi, good afternoon, Ashley Fairmon, Killen Griffin and Fairmont, 10101 reunion place.

Um thank you all.

I I know you guys have a lot ahead of you, so I'll I'll be quick.

Um we had the opportunity to meet with DRC on this sign and had some alternative signage um that we were proposing.

And actually appreciate the comments because we actually like the two alternatives better than what was originally proposed.

Um so the site here is 1301 East Commerce.

I don't need to here we go.

The store space building uh is what we're talking about here, and we're looking at putting a sign on the southern side of the building or the front of the building facing East Commerce.

Um option A, which is what we originally submitted uh for HDRC consideration and what was went to DRC was a rectangular sign on the southwest corner of the building.

Um it was larger, about 600 square feet, 20 by 30.

Um and the feedback we received from DRC was to look at considering working with the panels on that corner of the building to design a sign that looks like it fits in better with the architect extra excuse me, architectural details.

Um so we have one option there, and then the other was to look at the center of the building under the store space sign.

It's not going anywhere.

Okay.

So um option B, and this is where it might be slightly updated from what was in your packet.

Um this one is working a more vertical sign and works with the panels of the building.

Um what we showed you in what was submitted to HGRC, we hadn't been able to go out and actually measure those panels.

Um so it shows a sign that is about this size um, but with one less panel.

So the the 20.5 feet by almost 15 feet um is actually six panels tall, and I think what was included when the application was five.

Um so it's just been this rendering has been updated to reflect how that would actually look.

And I'm sorry, and it's 304 square feet.

And then the other option is a much larger sign, um, and trying to work with the existing store space sign.

Uh so this is a horizontal sign, obviously, that fits under the store space, but it is much larger to kind of work with that signage.

Um so as I mentioned, we actually prefer the alternative options um to what we originally proposed.

Thank you, Commissioner Fester.

Yes, thank you.

Um because there were three options in the submittal, I pulled this to uh review those options and personally I think the option B is preferable to the other two.

It's the smallest uh of the three.

It actually works better with the uh building elements.

And um I'm ready to make a motion for approval of option B if there's no other questions or comments.

Okay, okay, sir.

Yes, I move for approval with option B and any other staff stipulations.

Second.

Second comments.

I just have one quick question, Mr.

Chair.

Uh, on option B.

I I think that's that's that's the best one too.

Question I have is that sign for the storage space, the one that's on the corner on the street there.

How much of it is does that sign obstruct the view of the That's a good question.

I I don't know exactly.

I don't know if I have a better view of it or not.

But it will be a good one.

I would assume Caddy Corner, standing caddy corner and anywhere around that that region it would cover it up or impede it.

So actually the it covers up more of this sign, the original one proposed.

Um but it would still I think cover some of the top of the vertical sign.

But not enough to discourage your customer to have a roll call, please.

Savino?

Aye.

Velasco's Galloway?

Aye.

Mazuka?

Aye.

Givata?

Aye.

Cervantes?

Yes.

Holland?

Aye.

Fetzer?

Aye.

And Gibbs.

Aye.

Motion carries.

Motion carries.

Thank you.

Okay.

Um next item up is item 16.

Um before we get into item 16, I want to um remind everyone that is speaking.

You have two minutes to speak unless you are in given time added by you know, signed up by another participant.

They granted your time.

When you hear the bell that telling you that your time is up.

If you haven't finished your comments, wrap your comments up.

Okay.

So just respect the time because we have a lot of speakers here today.

So I want to make sure everyone gets a chance to speak and everyone respects the time.

All right.

Thank you.

Okay, sir.

Core, do we have any in person that you want to start with, or do you want to start with voicemail?

Let's read the item to the record and have the applicant give the presentation.

Agenda item number 16, HDRC, case number 2025, 258, 3700 North St.

Mary Street.

Uh this is Brackenridge Park.

Uh the applicant is requesting a certificate of appropriateness for park improvements related to phase two of the Brackenridge Park bond projects.

The phase two scope of work includes one restoration of the 1877 pump house, two excavation, rehabilitation, and rewalk re rewatering of the historic waterworks raceway, three stabilization and rewatering of the upper labor saquia, for uncovering and rehabilitation of the upper labor diversion dam, five improvements to the lily pine, uh six rehabilitation to the two historic bathroom pavilions, seven rehabilitation and conversion of electric pump house into a storage building, and eight various site improvements, including landscaping, tree planning, walkway paths, pedestrian bridges, uh, and utility consolidations.

Staff recommends approval.

Sorry, let me staff recommends approval as submitted and archaeological investigation is required.

The project shall comply with all federal, state, local laws, rules, and regulations regarding archaeology.

Uh Jamal Moreno is here from the city.

Thank you.

Good afternoon, Commissioners.

Uh my name is Jamal Moreno.

I'm with the City of San Antonio Capital Delivery Department.

Um I'm a senior landscape architect and uh project manager for the Brackenridge Park Phase 2 project that you have before you today.

Um I do have uh a few uh city employees, uh city staff from Capital Delivery, uh as well as the Parks and Recreation Department.

They are my client department.

Uh and then I also have my uh design team uh SWA and some of their design team members who are here to uh potentially answer any questions.

So I'm gonna go ahead and turn it over to Ashton.

Um she is with uh SWA.

She's gonna walk through the presentation with you right now.

Forward on the hero's word on that.

Okay.

All right, thank you, everyone.

Um so the the area you see in orange.

Before you get started, um, just for the record, please introduce yourself and then you can go into your presentation.

Yes.

Uh my name is Ashton Williams.

Uh I am a landscape designer at SWA Group.

Um, and I am the uh design team project manager for the project.

Um in the image you see here, the uh area in orange um is both phase one and phase two of the 2017 broad uh bond project.

Um the area you see in blue uh is the overall boundary of Brackenridge Park.

Um so just to orient people, um the at the north there you can see it's East Hildebrand Avenue, 281 wraps around the park on the left there.

Um so on the left in blue, there you can see that is the phase one boundary of improvements.

Um that is not the phase that we're speaking about today.

That phase included the uh repair of the WPA era walls and the underpinning of the pump house.

Um so that was approved by HGRC back in 2023.

Uh, and so the area that we are speaking to today is phase two, um and that includes the area north at East Hildebrand Avenue down to uh the edge of the pump house as it wraps around towards the St.

Mary's Bridge.

Uh, and that includes the restoration of the uh upper Labor Lily Pond, the restoration of the dam, um, I'm sorry, rehabilitation of the dam, the uh dredging and repair of the historic asechia, um, the rehabilitation rehabilitation of the pump house, uh, improvements to pedestrian circulation and heartscape improvements as well as landscape improvements.

Um, so we had an extensive public process for these projects.

This is a multi-bond effort, both in 2017 and 2022.

Um the phase one uh public engagement included four meetings that included uh interactive board workshops, uh, public input sessions uh at site investigation reporting with uh expert QA, as well as a design overview.

And so for phase two, um, we had a similar process where we had two uh phase two dedicated meetings as well as uh one conclusion meeting for both phase one and phase two, where we received feedback from the public and we incorporated those feedback into the updated design.

Uh just last week we had another public uh informational session, and that's to demonstrate the improvements we have made from the phase one and phase two conclusion meeting to the um the 100% CD set that we're submitting for approval.

Uh and the public was able to ask questions as well as submit comment cards for last week's meeting as well.

Um so given the project goals, um, our goals are to uh rehabilitate the project as a cohesive cultural landscape.

So we are not taking individual pieces and just piecemealing rehabbing them together.

The idea for this project is to celebrate this park in all of its historic resources in tandem with all of the other important aspects.

So we are rehabilitating the historic features, uh bringing them up to a state uh so they will not degrade further over time, um and that people can interpret and understand their history as they influence the people and cultures that make up the city of San Antonio.

Uh we want to emphasize the story of water in the San Antonio River and how it's been used by different people in different ways through different methods of water delivery, um, and also to highlight its um its preciousness as a resource to our city.

Uh and Brackenridge has always had a very special identity and a very special place in the hearts of many San Antonians.

Um over time, this park hasn't seen the level of care and maintenance that is proportionate to how special it is to the city of San Antonio.

So we want to ensure that we are improving the pair repair and care quality that will enable the city of San Antonio to celebrate this place for many generations to come.

Uh and then we also want to restore the environment.

In 2019, the Lady Bird Johnson Wildfire Center did an ecological site assessment of Brackenridge Park, and they notated this northern portion of the site as extremely poor ecological health.

Um, as part of this effort, we want to completely rehabilitate the landscape so that it's able to support itself, um, reduce the amount of erosion, um, create lots of habitat, and then additionally educate the public on the cultural landscape that once dominated this area, which is the Blackland Prairie.

Um, looking at the plan, um, just kind of an overall of the design improvements at um let's see.

Number one, you can see the uh Upper Labor Lily Pond.

Um it will be rehabilitated to hold water, uh, and also interpret the story of the San Antonio River.

Uh number two is the Upper Labor Dam, which has been uh exposed so that the public can see it and understand it.

Um, so you uh travel along this number eight is a uh cultural trail that follows the progression of these historic elements as they appeared in history.

And then you travel along the path to number 15, which is the electric pump station number three building that once supported the uh Artesian wells on site.

And then you arrive at number 11, which is a cultural plaza where you can have celebrations, um parties, uh, Easter celebrations, um, all sorts of additional functions also to support the rehabilitated pump house at number 21.

Um as you travel across the river there, um, number nine is a pedestrian bridge, which approximates the historic location of the wooden bridge that once crossed the open asequia.

Right now, there's a vehicular bridge that crosses the channel.

Um the back side of the pump house has uh arches uh as well as um used to convey water through that channel.

So we're opening that up, giving the public an opportunity to understand how the pump house worked in tandem with the historic raceway, uh, and then also providing opportunities for people to access the river through a series of terrace ledges.

Uh number 12 is an arrival plaza for the pump house.

Um it's also uh doubles as a drop-off zone for uh supplies.

Um as you pa as you follow the cultural trail around, um, you experience a series of uh uh learning nodes.

Uh we can learn about the raceway and its history.

Um, and then you cross across the Asequia again, where uh you can learn about its history in time.

Um so this is the uh tree preservation plan.

Um so as you can see, most of the trees are being preserved in green.

Uh trees in orange are being removed, and then the trees that you see in yellow are being relocated to the areas in blue.

So we previously uh presented the phase two totals back in 2022 at that last phase two meeting.

Um so at that meeting we had designated that 185 trees were in the project site, two heritage trees were being removed, what uh 35 significant trees were being removed, 13 invasive or dead were being removed, and then uh for an overall uh preservation total of 135.

Uh since then we have updated the plans.

Um the total of uh trees have been expanded because the total project site has increased since the previous uh presentation.

Um so there are 208 total trees in phase two.

Um if you attended the workshop uh last week, we had a number of 209.

Um we realized that that was a typo.

The the number of total trees is 208.

So this is the updated uh inaccurate total that you see here.

Um total number of hair to trees removed is three.

Uh the total significant amount of trees removed is 23, so that's a big improvement from the 35 that we had before.

Um, and then unfortunately more trees have died since um our previous proposal.

Um we have 19 dead and dying, or I'm sorry, 19 invasive uh or dead trees, six of those are uh dead and dying.

Um trees to be relocated.

We worked with EDI who moves trees all over the world, uh, and they did an evaluation of the trees, all the trees that were slated for removal on site, and they identified 10 as being able to be removed.

Um, and one major win uh since the last time we presented this is that there was one major um one major live oak right on the edge of the raceway here that was slated to be uh relocated, but through design improvements we were able to keep it in its existing location.

Um as part of rehabilitation efforts, we are planting um a total of 88 new shade trees and 177 understory trees.

Um so going back to the Labor Johnson Wildfire Center report, um, the trees on site are not regenerating understory trees.

Um this um through soil improvements and through planting a robust diverse series of understory trees, we're enabling the site to regenerate a more diverse population of trees going forward as the park ages, as well as we're vastly increasing the amount of shade canopy that will ultimately cover this park in future years to come.

Uh and so these are some of the trees that you can see here that will be planted.

So they are all native Blackland Prairie trees.

Um, and so they are all things that would have existed here historically and provide a lot of habitat and biodiversity value.

Um a lot of the understory trees were chosen for their food for pollinators and small mammals, uh, as well as their importance to indigenous cultures uh in religious ceremonies, medicines, and dyes.

Okay, thank you.

So as part of the ecological restoration, we are bringing in soil amendments across the site since the soil is uh devoid of nutrients.

So we want to make sure that any improvements that we're adding can be supported by the soils that we have to work with.

So we have several ecological zones as part of our rehabilitation efforts.

So if you look at the orange areas, sorry, I'm trying to get the pointer.

It will only point.

But the areas in orange are in a short or mid-grass prairie.

And so that is the prairie grasses in those areas have roots that are five to twenty feet long.

And so that is going to stabilize the soil from erosion and provide important habitat value.

It's going to slow runoff water.

Um, it's going to provide a diverse prairie landscape that would have existed here ecologically.

And we're also, so we're hydroceding this down, putting a wood fiber erosion control mat over it, and then we're putting in plugs of uh native grasses, and what that enables us to do is create a rigid structure of prairie grasses that will be there from day one, but then we'll have a more diverse understory that will pop through these mats.

Um as time goes on, as uh we periodically mow or burn this landscape, um, the landscape will become more diverse, things will blend together, um, and it will uh function as a native prairie.

Um, in terms of understory ground covers in that kind of mid-green area, um, that's where we have a lot of existing trees.

Um, there's a lot of erosion along the steep slopes leading down to the raceway.

Um, so we will be adding a diverse population of understory uh shade grasses and ground covers to cool the root protection zones of those trees and provide habitat as well as uh stabilize the erosion of the grade there.

Uh and then we have uh near the uh cultural plaza up in the right hand corner in that kind of teal blue, that is a rain garden where the water will sheet flow from the plaza into that space and the water will purify uh and infiltrate into the soil.

Uh and then the ornamental zones that we have in the landscape are all native blackland prairie uh plants with a couple of extra uh Edwards plateau uh species thrown in for uh for uh water conservation and evergreen structure, but there are also things that would have been here historically as well.

Here's an sampling of the uh the planting species, but we have over 87 currently proposed in the design.

Uh and then, of course, at the lily pond, we would be uh introducing aquatic species to help with the water quality as well as return its identity as a lily pond.

So the existing site has quite a bit of hardscape for a park its size.

So in total, that's 37% of the total site area is covered in heartscape.

And most of these areas are asphalt parking that were located within the environmentally sensitive area of the site.

They do not have any curbs in the water sheet flows off of the hot asphalt, takes um uh pollutants along with it and dumps it right into the assay and lily pond.

Uh furthermore, there have been uh concrete flumes that have been designed to catch the water and funnel it right into the water bodies as opposed to a cooling and uh cleaning the water before it enters the historic features.

Um this is the proposed design for the hardscape.

Um we have removed um uh the portions of asphalt uh that have uh sorry that are causing uh significant strain on the historic resources.

Um it's a 10% uh reduction of impervious surface, which doesn't seem like a lot, but that's almost an acre of space that has been returned from mostly zoo operations to park space and ecological restoration zone for the park.

In addition, the new spaces or new uh paving that we have added is lighter in color, it will reflect uh heat instead of absorbing it.

Uh, and then also it's broken up over the site as opposed to concentrated in specific big areas.

So the water will flow from the hardscape areas, filter through the native landscape, purify, slow down, and infiltrate through the soil, which will cool the site drastically and prevent a lot of erosion as you see today.

Um thing to note here is that while we have removed the parking, that has been reloaded that will be relocated nearby in the park.

Also, the uh picnic tables that we had in this area will be relocated in order to provide the uh tall grass ecology zone and the notes for the overlook, but those will be also um relocated.

People will still be able to picnic here.

Um they will just bring in um temporary picnic tables for big events and uh celebrations.

Um so this is a map of the cultural resource rehabilitation.

So uh the items you see in number one, three, five, uh, six, eight, and nine, and seven, those are all base bid um uh improvements.

So we are rehabilitating the pump house, uh, the historic riprap along the edge of the raceway, um, the donkey piers that cross the raceway, um, the raceway itself, uh, the historic asequia channel, the walls to the lily pond, the dam, and the lily pond.

Um, the items you see in 10, 11, and 12, those were items that were added at the uh request of the public.

So those are the two historic restroom buildings that are currently not operational.

Uh, and then the electric pump station number three, which would serve as storage to support those functions.

Um, this is the underground utility conversion.

So, right now there's a web of overhead utilities that block the historic viewsheds for the park and their poles located all over the place.

So, as part of this project, we are burying those to restore uh viewsheds to the historic features, and so you can see how these features uh worked over time without being distracted by them.

So, in terms of rewatering the asechia and raceway, currently it's mostly dry uh in these areas.

The asequia used to have gray water that ran in the historically inappropriate direction from uh the edge of where you see that bridge there down towards the lily pond.

Um, and so as part of this project, we are restoring the flow of water in the historic direction to interpret how these features worked over time.

So there are two major routes that that this feature will take.

So if you see number one there at the pump start, route one will go from there over to the lowly pond, where it will be uh inlet just at the north there.

Uh it will flow in the natural direction of the historic asequia down to the drain where you see it number 5A, and then it will pop over to the uh to the raceway where it will then return to the San Antonio River.

So that is a 24-hour route that will be going all the time.

Then Route 2 will start at that same number one location, and it will outlet at the um at the back of the raceway close to the historic Donku Bridge, uh, and it will flow over a series of weirs back into the San Antonio River.

So that will happen during the day.

And then at the request of Saws, uh, we added kind of a 2B kind of situation here where we uh where we the route that would normally be going down the raceway is pumped over to that where you see that 2C outlet at the lily pond.

There's an existing concrete pipe at the river edge.

So we would be cutting that pipe so that it's no longer flowing from the uh lily pond to the San Antonio River, and then we would be feeding a new pipe through there so that the water at that location continue to flush out the zone between uh the back of the lily pond and the uh woody water inlet.

Uh so these are just some of the images of the historic resources that we would be rehabilitating rehabilitating.

I like to draw attention to the historic pedestrian bridge in the second column because this is a new resource that was not presented to the public previously.

Um we they discovered this when they were doing an excavation study on the um asequia, and so that has been incorporated to the design since then.

Uh in terms of restoration of the rehabilitation of the lily pond, um we are rehabilitating the walls that are adjacent to the lily pond, deepening it so that we have uh cooler and uh cleaner water flow, as well as uh providing wetland shelves for aquatic species, and then adding a clay liner so that it cannot uh seep into the soil.

Um for the the upper Labor Dam, we're only exposing the top ashlar portion of the dam because the colonial portion is too brittle to expose.

Uh the THC um Texas Historical Commission would not uh approve any structural interventions to the dam itself.

Um so the proposal is to stabilize the bank on either side of the dam so that if the large-scale uh water storm comes through, uh it's going to uh keep the dam in place.

Uh we are stabilizing the walls of the upper labor asequia um as well as rehabilitating the stone features.

Uh and then we are uh regrading it to flow in the historically appropriate direction.

However, this was very uh shallow at the time that the umsequo is built because the water was flowing so fast.

So there is one area where we essentially have to create a little mini water elevator to get it over the weir, um, so that it will flow in the correct direction.

Uh at the historic raceway, as I mentioned, we're removing the asphalt roadway to provide access down to the water.

Um, and so you'll uh allow people to view the repaired arches at the pump house.

Um, and then also uh providing that series of queers and uh clay liner.

Um this is that uh historic pedestrian bridge that was discovered during the excavation of the raceway.

Uh we would be removing the non-historic uh culvert topper that is on the structure, carefully demoing that, uh, and then placing a uh bordering down a flagstone pathway on top of it so that it's accessible for people to walk on, uh, and then returning the juniper hand railing that would have been there historically.

Uh and for the historic pump house, we'll be doing um masonry repointing and repair, uh stabilizing the structure itself, the trusses and beams, uh, and then restoring the historic arches, as well as um bringing it up to be able to uh have an interior finish out for a tenant in future use.

There was a lot of uh thought that went into hiding utilities to protect the historic viewshed of the facade, especially the HPAC system.

Uh and so these are the ad alternate cultural resources.

So uh these uh features were documented as part of the set uh that we are submitting for approval.

Um and so based off of uh uh the prices that get back from bidding, uh they may be included in the project or um renovated at a future date.

But all of the improvements underground for utilities that are required to make these projects work will be uh included in the base bid so that it makes it much easier and that we're not ripping up landscape um that we have implemented in order to do that.

So with this, uh this concludes our presentation, and I'll turn it over to Jamal for any further comments.

No comments right now.

I think we're gonna do public comment.

Well, I'll call our in-person speakers first, um, beginning with the first speaker is John Greel.

Mr.

Greel will have six minutes.

Several people um are here and have yielded their time.

He'll be followed by Cecilia Black.

Uh I have some handouts.

Can I give you all handouts?

Is that your handles?

Oh, my time is begun.

My name is John Griel.

I'm a clinical law professor at the University of Texas, and I represent Gary Perez and Mateo de Torres who are here in the uh Perez versus City of San Antonio litigation.

So I wanted to clarify some issues with that because I I've seen that there's been some uh false and confusing information about that.

Um I know in the past week there were some articles, including in Texas Public Radio, that the lawsuit uh had been resolved or had been concluded.

That was false information.

The um Texas Public Radio has since revised.

So we are still very early in that litigation where we're at the preliminary injunction stage.

We haven't started discovery.

Uh we haven't gotten any internal documents.

And I know that that largely focuses on phase one, but what it really refers to with today's proposal is this uh 1877 pump house repair.

So the trees surrounding that are sacred to many indigenous individuals.

There's in particular two large Cypress trees, which have previously been denoted as trees 106 and 141 by the city.

Uh those Cypress are part of religious ceremonies that can only take place at this riverbend.

Comanches come from across the country, multiple indigenous tribes, including the Wapan Apache tribe has previously objected to this.

And I'm concerned that the 1877 pump step of phase two is going to destroy two of those Cypress that are religiously significant.

So far, the city has said that it has to remove those two Cyprus because there's regulations that tie its hands as to how to repair the wall, which I understand is largely phase one, but the bid and design for that wall repair included those trees that'll unpack this step one of the pump house.

Those regulations, what the city has never told its engineers, is that there are statutes that apply to religion that make regulations different than regular regulations.

So I know there's people in the community who like the way the shade looks, they like walking the dog.

That doesn't give you a legal right to an accommodation to regulations, but the Federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act gives you an exemption from federal regulations, and the state religious uh freedom restoration act applies to all state local regulations.

So if an engineer says I can't drill through the front of the wall because of some regulations, then the response to that is well, if that burdens someone's religion, are you going to destroy someone's religion forever?

Which is what Gary and Matilda testified to in federal court that if these trees, including those two Cypress next to the pump house, are destroyed, then they will never be able to perform these ceremonies.

Well, when regulations burden religion, you get an exemption.

And the city's never told its designers, its engineers, okay, in your scope of work, if you knew that you had an exemption from this regulation because of federal religion law, how would you change the design?

They've never done that.

And so there are alternatives that would allow these religious ceremonies to continue, and they would preserve the wall and they would allow the pump house to be repaired.

My clients have never said that you can't repair these walls, but you can either choose a result that allows the wall to be repaired and religion to continue.

The alternative has been this lawsuit that I don't know if if the city's informed you of the money it's spent on this lawsuit.

It spent over $2 million on outside attorneys.

And this is a $10 million project.

We I I was here in 2023, and I testified that we are happy to work with the city on those overlay between regulations and religious rights.

And my clinic can provide legal resources to the city for free to get through this red tape for these constitutional rights and these religion rights.

And still we are in 2026, and the city has never asked engineers, if you had a religious exemption to these regulations, how would your plan differ?

So that is as to this phase one.

Uh I would be I would ask that the commission is very specific that whatever approval is given today does not give the city authority to remove uh those two large cypress that on the image that showed the um pump house.

There's if you look at the design that's in figure two and three, um, there are these two dots that are right to the left of the pump house.

There's a split tree cypress that's down near the water line, and then there's another one that's further up the bank.

And I'm concerned that these repairs to the pump house, the city is going to say that that requires removing those two religiously significant cypresses.

Um I would just ask that the city work collaboratively with these indigenous communities and with these religious practitioners.

It's going to save you time, it's going to save you money, it's going to respect the Constitution, and it's going to make sure that this religion that's been practiced, you know, we talk about like this park has meant a lot to the people of San Antonio.

This riverbend has been sacred to indigenous communities for thousands of years and is on indigenous rock art.

So I would ask that you consider those interests as well.

Thank you.

Cecilia Black.

She'll be followed by Alicia Garlock.

I'm Cecilia Black, lifetime resident and user of Breckenridge Park.

And I want to ask you how is the destruction of these trees, these heritage trees that cannot be replaced, our natural landscape created by God, great spirit, not man, picnic tables, roads that are used and needed, as well as parking.

Preserving and telling the story of the history of Brackenridge Park.

The pictures that have been presented at phase two look like an extension of the Pearl and the River Walk, not our historic gym that is on the National Registry of Historic Places, Brackenridge Park.

Other areas that have already been pushed through, also mirror the Pearl and the River Walk.

We are discussing this unique historical gym.

And one of the oldest in our nation's history.

Therefore, specific standards must be upheld, and we are asking that you revisit those.

We would like a guided tour of what is being proposed in the space that it's being proposed.

It is imperative that this be outside of regular business hours to be fair to all people, as most meetings are not, just like this one today.

Do the donors that are pushing these changes use the park?

Because I don't see them when I'm using the park.

Only when they close areas for exclusive events.

The pictures that I've seen proposed and what I've seen happening in person.

Um there is nothing about the destruction of all forms of wildlife and the plans of the modern concrete that echoes the city's own motto, balancing the needs of people and wildlife in our urban areas.

Rethink our people's needs.

Are we being greedy here with what you're doing?

We also are asking to delay this.

Having this area of the park closed at the same time will have give us no place to be.

Thank you.

Okay, when I tell you.

Should be followed by Sabrina Choppa.

Yeah, it's gonna be.

When I tell you to start, don't start it when I'm talking because I'm gonna talk for a minute.

And then this video, you can see it later because it's 17 minutes.

Hold on just a sec.

Where's my timer?

Ma'am, before you get started, I need you to make sure you introduce yourself, please for record.

Alicia Garlock.

So the Secchia has been running for a hundred years.

The WPA put stone walls back in the 1930s.

The pump house only worked for about a decade.

The tannery was only in operations for two years.

The park has been in existence for over 125 years.

That we have came to this park that was bequested the city by Brackenridge to keep it a park for the people.

His focus was on the trees.

It was a tree drive-through three trees, sorry, which you'll see in the film.

So the National Historic Preservation Act is about cultural heritage, which implies a shared bond, our belonging to a community.

It represents our history and our identity, our bond to the past, to our present and to the future.

According to the National Um, sorry, Department of the Interior standards for preservation is that the property will be used at his as it was historically, or be given a new use that maximizes retention of distinctive materials, features, spaces, and spatial relationships.

The historic chapter of a property will be retained and preserved.

You can see more about this film, which shows that we value this park, and we've been coming to this park, the people of San Antonio for 125 years that bypasses the history of the secchia, the lily pond, the pump house.

Watch the film, it shows what I care about and what happens.

Yeah.

Sorry.

Brackenridge Park is considered one of the most culturally significant parks in the United States.

The park was first designed as a driving park with roads carefully planned to preserve the park's majestic trees, allowing earlier visitors to enjoy their drives through the picturesque landscape.

The history of the park includes prehistoric settlements and Spanish irrigation.

This is a gathering place since prehistoric times with human occupation dating back thousands of years.

The indigenous have gathered along the San Antonio River for thousands of years.

They call it Yanawana Spirit Waters.

They still gather here for ceremony and to offer prayers.

Indigenous people view Earth as a living sacred relative, Mother Earth.

This is a sacred place where we gather to worship.

This natural area by the river is where we gather to worship and connect with the divine.

We sing praise, share testimony, and learn about the word of God.

They say the park does not have an identity.

How is that?

If an identity is the fact of being who or what a person or thing is.

How does Brackench Park not have an identity?

The identity of the park is the culture, the people.

This cultural resource of the people is physical evidence.

A place of past human activity, artifacts, buildings, archaeological sites, landscapes, things like traditions, beliefs, and practices.

That is the identity of the park.

Easter camping is a tradition.

And these are the tradition, and I've been doing this for going on 13 years, same spot.

I mean, if you cut down the trees or whatever remakes you make, you're gonna ruin our park.

And this is the best park in San Antonio.

Because you know what?

This is it.

This is our park.

It gives you a good feeling that all the families are here with their kids.

You know, get out of the house.

Even if you don't have any money, bologna and lettuce and domain.

This is our park.

Tradition is the set in a family spending Easter in the park for 70 years.

This is a place for birding, for bird watching, for teaching children about birds.

Where do they come from?

Why not to feed the ducks bread?

Low riders in the park.

That's part of our tradition.

Part of the Chicano culture.

Like Sunday cruising in the park.

Low riders in the park is a tradition.

Tradition is the transmission of customs, beliefs, stories, and practices from generation to generation, often by word of mouth or example, creating cultural continuity and a sense of identity.

Identity.

That's part of our history.

Our culture, our connection to Brackenge Park.

The natural heritage, the landscape represents legacies from the past.

Ecosystems and biodiversity.

For over a decade, I have walked the park.

I have watched as it has been neglected.

Suffering from Allah.

Sabrina Chapa.

And she'll be followed by Chris Maitree.

With gratitude and permission from Mother Earth, Taptai and the Four Directions and the Four Elements, the Sasina's every day.

I'd like to send appreciation to let letting the historical commission be here today and making decisions on Yanuana.

And I'd also like to send gratitude to our ancestral stakeholders and ancestors that have given us the wisdom to continue to exist here as cultural beings, tied to the land and the water, Taptayi and Wana.

Hi, my name is Sabrina Chapa.

Wanawu Sabrina.

I just introduced myself in the traditional language of this land.

Um very diverse language, very incredible language.

And I also recognize that I am me, I am a human, I am the water, I am the trees, and I'm the birds.

And all of that has to do with why we're here today.

Um in the nexus of spirituality and ecology, also spiritual ecology.

Um I'd like to state that I oppose the removal of the grandmother and grandfather trees, the Cypress trees.

Specifically, I'd also like to say I oppose the disruption of anything having to do with uh extracting or renovating or uh disturbing Taptayi, Mother Earth, and any projects that do not engage in free prior and informed consent, otherwise known as FPIC, which is a fundamental right of indigenous peoples and local communities to grant or withhold approval for projects affecting their lands, resources, territories, and cultural and cultures.

It also ensures that decisions are made without coercion, free with timely with time uh timely uh uh moves prior and with fully understanding the impacts informed and also allowing them to shape projects or say no with full and fully be consensual.

Thank you.

Chris Maitre.

He'll be followed by Susan Strawn.

I'm Chris Maitre.

I'm uh CEO of the Brackenridge Park Conservancy, and I'm here to uh ask for your support of the certificate of appropriateness for this project.

Um first off, the condition in this existing space has broken asphalt.

It has four dumpsters.

It is not currently in a state of historic preservation.

It has the harmed ecology because of all that, the trees because they're surrounded by the asphalt.

What we're asking for is a restoration of this area to highlight a lot of what you've heard today, the culture, the history of a park.

The assacius date back to 1719, 1776, the raceway, 1877, as you've heard.

That's history, right?

This project is about preserving and sharing the portion of Brackenridge Park that doesn't need to live in books anymore, right?

We have an obligation to protect and preserve what's there now before it falls and is neglected even more.

I don't think the current people of San Antonio really want to read about history in the textbooks alone.

They don't want to have to see it in museums.

They can live it and they can consume it in person firsthand.

And they can bring future generations of San Antonians to the park to enjoy that space.

It's just a living reminder about the importance of the water in the daily San Antonio's life.

How important the Edwards Aquifer is in the San Antonio River.

And that's why some of my colleagues and some of our supporters have endorsed this project.

You've probably seen letters from San Antonio River Authority, the zoo, the Whitty Museum, as well as the Conservation Society amongst others.

HEB, Bear County have all put up money towards this project to strive the importance of the historic preservation of this area.

So thank you for your support and listening to this important project.

Susan Strong.

Ms Strawn will have six minutes.

Richard Reed and Ed Piner have yielded their time.

Yeah, Edward can take it.

Hi, good afternoon.

My name is Susan Strong, and I'm here on behalf of the River Road Neighborhood Association.

And I am urging you to get more information before moving forward with this approval.

You may remember, I know we're here on on the new phase two, but you may remember back in April 19, 2023, this commission approved phase one, the certificate of appropriateness for phase one, with stipulations that were.

Can you uh next page?

Or do I do it?

Ah, perfect.

Um so we uh with stipulations that were requested by the River Road Neighborhood Association.

One of those stipulations was that no work will occur until the Federal Army Corps led uh Section 106 process is complete for phase one.

Phase one at the time included the pump house foundation work and the grand staircase that is now being incorporated into phase two before you.

So the Section 106 process now uh has denomed is denominated by the city as phase 1A and has gone before the Army Corps, but it has been stalled due to uh to the USA's concerns and tribe objections.

Now on October 23rd, the City of San Antonio submitted a new treatment plan for that area around the pump house.

Can you put the timer up?

Thank you.

That requested that included the area around the pump house, but it only asked for the specifically for the removal of one tree, and that's the tree on the northeast side of the pump house, not the two cypresses that are at issue here that Mr.

Grile spoke about.

The project area that was given to the Army Corps did not include that area.

So if you look at the Phase 1A project area provided to the Army Corps, you can see that the project area is much narrower, and the tree to be removed is that one down there growing out of the pump house that I don't think anybody objects to having removed.

But the two cypress trees are outside the scope of what was provided to the Army Corps.

Those are still in the phase one approval for the purposes of Section 106.

Now here's today's submission, the plans that you've gotten before you today.

And you can see that those two that the phase two has been redrawn to incorporate quite a bit of what was previously phase one, both to the south and to the northwest of the pump house.

It's a different area.

And those two cypress trees are now arguably one of them is definitely within phase two, the other one is right there.

So I've just put the two comparisons up here today.

So over here you have uh phase one A for that was provided to the Army Corps on the left side, and then the scope of work, the project area that's been provided today.

So again, and then today's submission has only two trees identified for demolition, and that's the tree that was presented to the Army Corps, which I think has been permitted, which is on the northeast side growing out of the pump house, and then you have another tree adjacent to the pump house on the what I believe is the east side, um, which has been they those are the only two that are in the plan for demolition in what you have before you today.

So that if you look here though, the area down there right above the pump house, right above number 21, is clearly in the construction plans and shows no trees.

And that's where those two cypresses are.

So and here again we have the tree preservation plan.

This is what you've been provided today.

It does not show any trees.

It doesn't show trees to be relocated, it doesn't show existing trees, it doesn't show trees to be removed.

Those two trees, those two cypresses are just not on this plan at all.

And yet the project area you know covers that that plan, that area.

So here's a picture of the pump house.

It's those two cypresses right there, the twin-trunked one and the one up there behind.

Those are the two trees at issue.

So they're not on the plan to be demoed, they're not on the plan to be preserved, but the plan, the project scope clearly covers that area.

So the question that we have is what's going to happen.

So we have requested stipulations.

One is that the April 29th stipulations as to phase one trees remain in effect.

Uh the second one is that the two heritage cypresses may not be removed until the Section 106 process is complete for that area that covers those trees, and that you should continue this meeting until complete plans for the trees are presented to you so that we can see why those trees are being removed, what's the purpose of that, and what the alternatives might be to doing that.

It appears from the what we have it's they're being removed for the an ADA ramp, um, which I think most of you as designers know we might be able to find someplace else for that.

Um personal comments very quickly.

Um River Road Neighborhood Association did not have time to gather and get together newcomers, so we're just trying to protect our stipulations we got the last time.

Um there are plans to remove this small historic kiosk, um, which we don't know why or where it would be taken, but that's the plan.

We object to that.

So thank you very, very much.

Ida Ayala.

Ms.

Ayala should have four minutes.

Um Anna Brown is here and has yielded her time.

Thank you.

My name is Aida Yal.

I am in District 2, 5922 Pearl Pass.

I'm here in opposition to the current plans for phase two of Brackenridge Park Project.

Specifically, I oppose the removal of the picnic tables as well as parking spaces across the road from the phase two area.

The CLR, which is the cultural landscape report, is one of the documents that was used to develop the reconciliation plan and the guiding principles for the Brackenridge Park Project.

The executive summary from the report recommends, and I quote, and you have this um in the front.

It's the first page.

As the system-based treatment is implemented, the many current uses and rituals that contribute to the park and San Antonio's rich identity can and should remain.

What the City and Brackenich Park Conservative Conservancy are attempting to do by removing tables and parking spaces is absolutely contrary to this recommendation.

Phase two encompasses one of the most heavily used picnic sites in the park by families, hobby groups, runners, and local business people on their lunch breaks.

Then there are the Easter campers, including the Cerna family 70-year tradition along the Aseccia.

Fifty years is the magic number for the designation of historic.

On the it was page three, there's a sheet from the cultural landscape report that the Conservancy had in an annual report.

If you look at the bottom, it says the cultural landscape is the creation of the women, men, and children who live their lives within that landscape.

That's what this is all about.

We keep hearing the word culture, but culture is about the people.

And its environment.

Section 35641 from OHP states design and construction on public property should employ such standards because the use of public monies for design and construction is a public trust.

The big portion of this project is bond money that citizens, residents of San Antonio that the public voted for.

Thank you.

Norma Santos.

Hello.

My name's Norma Guadalupe Santos.

I'm from the south side of San Antonio.

I just want to start off by saying thank you for hearing us.

I'm part of the Kwahuiteco Pacawa Nation, Lipan Apache Nation.

Um but first and foremost, I'm a grandmother.

And my mother is a great grandmother.

When I told her about the two trees that are going to be cut down, our heritage trees, she literally cried.

My 84-year-old grandmother cried.

Mother cried.

And the first thing she said was, Ilos Niños, the children.

Those trees mean everything to us.

They are relatives of ours.

They're not just trees to be moved or removed.

God put them there like God put that river there, like God put the river in the sky.

That's why we worship the way we do.

We're keeping time going, not just for our nations, for all of us.

For all of our kids, all of our grandkids, for you.

We say those prayers for you.

We're only asking you to consider these things before we move forward.

We want renovations.

We want the right things too.

We want progress.

Which are those trees.

You know, there's companies in Ireland that they won't build a road if it's gonna hurt one of their ancient trees.

They'll go around it.

I'm just asking you to consider this.

And I want to leave you with um three quotes from Frank Lloyd Wright.

Some of you might have heard of him.

Study nature, love nature, stay close to nature.

It will never fail you.

The good building is not one that hurts the landscape, but one which makes the landscape more beautiful than it was before the building was built.

And lastly, form follows function.

That has been misunderstood.

Form and function should be one, joined in a spiritual union.

Thank you.

Alfredo P.

Yamas.

Alfredo?

I don't think I said your last name right.

Okay.

Uh hi everyone.

Hope you're doing well.

Uh as you know, my name is Afrodal Polygonus.

Uh I have a master's in biology, and I actually taught ornithology at Texan M San Antonio, so I know a bit about birds and plants.

But I would like to yield my time to the Comanche Nation representative if that is possible.

They're here?

Yes.

Did they sign in?

They were they are right there.

Awesome.

Thank you very much.

Yeah, I'll just ask that you um give your name and then come give uh write your name when you're done speaking.

Okay, great.

Thank you.

Hello, welcome.

Um is Sally Kirchy Stry.

My comanche name is Little Dagger.

I am from the Comanche Nation of Oklahoma, and I was asked to be a representative here today on behalf of our chairman for us Tatanapa.

Um the Comanche Nation received an email on January 2nd from the Army Corps of Engineers giving the nation 30 days to respond.

Consultation is ongoing at this time, and the nation opposes anything until the consultation is over.

We, the Namena people, have objections to the number of trees being taken down due to concerns about habitat destruction for birds.

As per Chairman Tatanapa, the nation has not had a chance to review the new plans yet, but intend to do so in the near future.

The Nemina have had a long history and relationship with the park and its surrounding areas within um around San Antonio.

It has been used as a camp for the people on their way south, making their annual pilgrimage to the Peotti Gardens, as well as the Blue Hole and the Comanche Lookout.

Um the Comanche or the Nemina have a legacy, not always a positive one with the city of San Antonio, and has its shape and how it has shaped the heritage for the people here.

Again, I want to stress that the Comanche Nation, we oppose any plans right now for removal of the trees until further uh consultation can be done.

Thank you.

Deborah Ponce.

Hello.

Um I respectfully ask that the commission um does not approve the certificate of appropriateness.

Ma'am, let me stop you for one more moment.

You can start the time over again.

Please state your name first.

Deborah Boone say.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Um, and I pretty much rewrote everything.

Um I am asking you respectfully to urgently slow this process down.

Um put time on it or something.

Um this decision that today that you will make is permanent.

Um it will permanently affect the wildlife, our community.

Um it will outlive us all.

All of us.

When we're dead, your decision is still gonna go on to eternity.

So it's worth that little bit of time.

They're rushing this through.

Phase one hasn't even been decided at this point.

Um, and again, it cannot be undone.

I look at the findings and I see things in here that concern me.

Um on the findings item C, it talks about community engagement.

I've been to every one of them.

I listened, I was there.

And the water story that they're talking about, it says recent public input that we unanimously passed that we wanted the water story um presented or interpreted.

It's true.

Yanawana's water story.

We don't want to know about the Isaquia, the German Isaac there.

Um we want to know about the water story.

Do you know that the water, the shape of the river, it matches a constellation in the sky.

I learned that from um Mr.

Gary and Matilda, who have been studying uh this water for years.

It's on a rock art in the Pecos Valley.

NASA has come down and presented thousands of dollars for them to present STEM classes to um local youth in the area.

They would they were gonna get another grant, but of course the administration has cut all grants for now.

Okay.

I went to events where NASA scientists were there, and they show that once a year that river lines up with a consolation.

Um for these stories not to be told, and stories of German leather for the Confederate Army is not okay.

I'm sorry.

I'm very passionate about this.

I apologize.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Jasmine Herrera.

Hello.

My name is Jasmine Arena.

Um I'm a board member with HWRA and one of the many voices of Yanawana.

Have you ever seen the movie The Lorex or read the book Hallorax by Dr.

Seuss?

If you haven't, you should to remind us of the inner child to make the right decision.

I remember hearing this phrase from Laurax saying, I speak the for the trees.

And I'm just like him.

That's why I'm here.

I speak for the trees.

Grandpa the tree, grandmother tree.

They have no voice.

It hurts me and pains me that I have to come upon here.

But I am also honored to be a defender.

The trees have been here before you and I, before our ancestors.

They have done us the favor of giving us clean air and push harder and harder every day while we keep polluting the earth.

They give us they give the animals habitat and space and food.

We should let them still be in the ground, not replace them.

But add replacing them with little trees.

It will take years to grow for shade and food for animals around.

Or knock them down for one more concrete structure or more confusures that we do not need.

There's also a space in the in the Bracken Bridge, I pray.

A spot for us Native Americans.

It has been there for us hundreds, if not thousands.

Not only is the city missing with the Mother Nature, but also disturbing the prayer circle of the indigenous community.

And is I'm sorry.

Um this way.

It's is it's it's messing with our religion.

There was much more, but thank you.

That's all I have for in-person speakers.

We do have voicemails as well.

Aaron Rodrigo.

Agenda item number 15, Bracken Ridge Park.

I think that should leave the benches in there.

I've been coming to the park all my life.

I'm 50 years old, and I don't really think that the plan would actually improve the park.

I don't think it really needs much improvement upon.

Those benches are definitely part of the history and should remain my opinion.

Thank you.

I am Antonia Casaneda.

I live at 2420 McCullough Avenue, apartment 302 in San Antonio Texas, 78212.

I want to address agenda item number 16, the plan for proposed plan for Breckinridge Park.

I am deeply concerned that the proposed changes to Breckinridge will effectively push out Mexican American families from the park from the rich time honored historic public cultural space of West Side Family and Community Gatherings and of the traditions that are central to the cultural life of San Antonio writ large.

The proposed removal of all the picnic tables north of Brackenridge Road and on the east side of the road near the Lily Pond will eliminate 10% of all the picnic tables in the park, which will effectively eliminate most of Westside families' camping birthdays anniversaries and other celebrations in the park.

And while the parks, while the city staff have stated that the picnic tables will be relocated to other areas of the park, to my knowledge, there has been no plan released about cost estimates or funding identified to do so.

The issue of parking, the proposed removal of all parking north of the raceway and along Breckenridge Road eliminates about 22 spaces.

It closes the road north of the raceway and removes the bridge next to the pump house that makes a loop.

This will kill the antique and low rider car culture as there will no longer be parking, grilling, or the ability to drive around the loop.

The proposed changes are clearly going to and are perhaps intended to reduce access to and use of a large piece of the park to working class Mexican American families.

Please I ask, do not approve this plan.

Thank you.

Hello, my name is Bernard Sanchez.

My address is 422 Dresden Drive San Antonio, Texas 78213.

Um I'm calling in regards to agenda item number 16.

Um please vote against the plans, the phase two plans that the city um that the park um sorry the Breckenridge conservative conservancy has in store and all these trees are very old that they want to cut down.

Uh I thought that there was a policy with heritage trees um options to protect that wall would be perhaps uh adding something, some reinforcements on the river side to to keep that wall up if that's the problem, but do not cut these trees down.

Um the city's always talking about not having enough trees.

So why are you going to cut all these heritage trees down?

And that's my comment at this point.

Thank you.

Yes, hi, my name is Claudia Sanchez, and I'm calling regarding HDRC case 2025-258 for uh request 2025 34842 or the address at 3700 North St.

Mary Street, which is Brackenridge Park.

Um, was calling to uh make a comment um through a voicemail saying that uh wanna make sure that we uh have all of our public input before cutting of of over a hundred trees in the Breckenridge Forest.

As we know, uh these trees are historic.

They also have an important part for our environment.

And I know a lot of people are not in support of this, and we're asking that they be um that there's a run through of the project design um before for a public walkthrough tour, before the uh to review the project design before everything is decided in um you know the project is completed.

I'm asking for that uh as our request.

Okay.

If um you have any questions, again, my name is Calia Scientist, and I'm just concerned about the impact that this is gonna have on on our environment as well as the impact it's having on the birds.

The birds are native to the area, and they deserve to be in that area by the water because that's how they survive.

Thank you.

Hello, my name is Delilah Barrios.

I am a resident of Haight County.

I'm calling today on behalf of myself and my children.

We request consideration for the trees wildlife habitat and public spaces at Brackenridge Park.

Please preserve as much as possible these areas which hold religious significance to indigenous peoples.

Please save the trees.

Thank you.

Ellen Patterson, 1250 Northeast Loop 410, San Antonio, Texas, 78209.

I'm commenting on commenting on item number 16, address 3700 North St.

Mary's Street, San Antonio.

Restore the restrooms, repair the historical interest points, but don't forget the trees.

Their shade is free, their beauty is restful, their stature is majestic.

When I had cancer, I sought answers to many questions I was facing sitting at a park bench under the trees.

When migratory birds come through San Antonio to rest, feed and breed, they seek shelter and protection in the trees.

When naturalists come to enjoy the park's green space of quiet beauty, they photograph the trees.

There is no comparison.

Many trees have already been cut to date.

Thank you.

Emily Rosengrin Ferry 104 Anastasia Place, San Antonio 78212.

Speaking to item number 16, Brackenridge Park.

Please, please do not move forward with what you call upgrades at the Brackenridge Park Bond Project, and which I view as an amusement parkification of our beloved parkland.

Please do not move the picnic tables near the Berlin Bridge.

San Antonio residents, so many San Antonio residents use those tables every week, even in the winter.

I know there are picnic tables in other parts of the park, but removing them removing a much used element in order to put in the heritage trail, whatever that is, seems absurd.

And do not remove the historic stone kiosk.

You say that you will store and relocate the structure, but I cannot really believe that this will happen.

I anticipate a pile of seemingly unimportant rocks being used for someone's driveway somewhere.

Please cease your attempts to improve and modernize our park.

Brackenridge Park is magical because it has so much minimally tamed area.

It's naturalness is what makes it special, particularly for a big city park.

Please, please leave well enough alone whenever at all possible.

Thank you.

Hi, my name is Frank Garcia.

I am at 110 West French Place, San Antonio, Texas, 78212.

I'm speaking on number 16, Brackenridge Park agenda item.

I would like to save our picnic tables and our parking spaces.

Please do not remove them.

Thank you.

Hi, my name is Gracia Left Dansus, 278 Montez on District 5.

Um, and I'm calling about the item number 16, the Breckenridge Park.

I'm a lifelong resident of San Antonio and Brackenridge Park has been community people's park.

We're very concerned and upset with the changes that are being proposed uh for this item.

We are concerned that the of the removal of the picnic tables.

Um five of them which are WPA replica tables with stone grills, and they were just put in 20 years ago with bond money.

Just to put it in the heritage trail is not something we need at this moment.

By moving the picnic table by cutting street access, we are avoiding the wonderful and beautiful Easter camping, birthdays, and other celebrations, and just a hangout place for our people.

Our folks don't have a lot of money, and just having the park is the most affordable form of entertainment and leisure time that our communities can have.

Hello, my name is Jessica Castle.

I live at 1054 River Bend.

Item number 16, the address uh 3700 North St.

Mary Street, Brackenridge Park.

Um, I'm calling.

I've lived in San Antonio for about 15 years all over the city, and the one thing that remained constant was uh Bracken Ranch.

That's always been kind of our park that my family and I go to the most often.

Um want to state that I'm firmly against removal of native trees.

I believe that uh trees are so important to fight the urban heat island effect, which San Antonio has a definite problem with, and it also helps ease drought conditions, which as we've seen over the last as I've seen as we've lived here, has gotten worse each year as the city has gotten bigger.

So the remaining trees, I've firmly believe need to stay.

Um, I also am very disappointed in hearing that so many pregnancy tables are going to be uh removed and instead replaced with just concrete paths and signs.

Uh one of the beautiful things about Brackenridge Park is it is a living park for the community where people can gather and to take away uh one of the last remaining abilities, one of the last few places that people can gather uh for free in groups uh to create community is heartbreaking to me, and I feel like it goes against uh the heart and soul of the park.

Um I also uh would like hi, my name is Leticia Sanchez.

My address is 1710 Viraclu, 78207, and my phone number is 2103635895.

I'm calling on behalf of the historic Westite Residents Association in regards to agenda item number 16.

Our association opposes the phase two plans being submitted by the Brackenridge Conservancy.

The park has been a public space accessible to San Antonio residents for generations, but design features that are being proposed will prevent or limit accessibility and the use of this public park as it has been used by our residents.

It will also remove important historic features such as the historic stone kiosk that is next to the pump house.

No plan for its relocation is included, and no reason is given for its removal.

Additionally, the plan includes removing the concrete picnic tables, of which five are WPA replica tables, and which were put in 20 years ago with bond money.

These picnic tables have been used for generations by our association's families and families from all parts of the city.

There's no actual plan or budget identified to relocate these tables.

Plan also calls for the removal of heritage trees, which have lived on this site for generations.

Although the Conservancy representatives state that their removal is required to preserve an historic wall, there are landscape and structural engineers who know how to preserve both the wall and the trees together.

The proposed designs will more than minimum minimally alter buildings, structures, objects, and the site and its environment, and will actually destroy the character and site of its environment.

And for these reasons, we ask that you vote to oppose the applicant's application.

And thank you very much.

Goodbye.

Yes, hi.

My name is Lupita Gonzalez.

I live at 209 Queen Anne Court, San Antonio.

I visit the park every single day, Brackenridge Park.

I'd appreciate that you consider not removing the picnic tables.

This um would re be removing the WPA replica table with stone grills that were put in just 20 years ago with bond money.

And the removal is to make way for a heritage trail with interpretive signage and up observation points to look at the asequia and race way.

Um but I think that would be problematic.

Also, um cultural landscape report uh emphasizes that continued dynamic dynamicism is equally vital to the landscape's longevity.

Um San Antonio's rich identity should remain.

Um let's see, the parking.

We should leave the parking undisturbed.

Um, I think about uh when there is antique and low rider uh shows uh and folks hang out to grill there uh right around the parking area.

I think we need to keep that loop.

Um also removal of the historic stone kiosk adjacent to the pump house.

Um the plan calls for the removal of this feature, but um, you know, it's uh the budget for removing um is not uh we don't know much about that.

I think we need to keep it um wanted just to cite section 35-643 alteration, restoration, and rehabilitation.

It says, and considering an application for a certificate certificate to alter the case.

Hello, my name is Marco Antonio Yalo Senior, and I live at 5922 Pearl Path 7822.

I am calling regarding agenda item number 16, Brackenridge Park.

I'm calling to express my strong opposition to the removal of the stone picnic tables and parking spaces between the Brackenridge Drive Bridge and Hildebrand.

First, on fiscal responsibility.

These stone tables were built only 20 years ago using taxpayer funds.

It is a waste of city tax dollars to demolish functional infrastructure just to replace it with a museum scape and signage.

Second, on accessibility.

Removing removing these parking spaces creates a barrier for families, the elderly and the disabled.

This section of the park is a vital space for our community's culture, including traditional Easter camping.

Removing parking and tables makes the park less usable for the very people it was built for.

I urge the commission to preserve these tables and the parking.

Thank you.

Hello, my name is Matthew Almaraz, and I live at 526 Bertetti Drive, San Antonio, Texas, and I'm calling about agenda item number 16 at Barker Ridge Park.

I'm a lifelong San Antonio resident, and for as long as I can remember, my family and I have used Barkin Ridge Park for gatherings, picnics, and also community events.

The picnic tables along Barkley are more than just stone and concrete.

They are the hardware family traditions and shared memories.

The plan renovations will remove these tables and parking spaces, replacing them with observation points and signs.

While I understand the city wants to improve the park, taking away these tables erases the real life experiences of everyday families who rely on them.

These tables are only 20 years old and we're built with our tax dollars.

Removing them doesn't make sense financially, culturally or socially.

I urge the commission to keep the picnic tables and parking spaces where they go so families like mine can continue enjoying Barkinbridge Park in the ways we always have.

Thank you for listening to our perspective and for considering the importance of preserving these spaces for community use.

Matthew Almara.

Hi, my name is Isaac Rosalis.

My address is 7103 remeter, satisfied sector 7827.

I was calling about agenda 16.

Thank you.

Oh, I'm against Agenda 16.

Thank you.

My name is Monica Cruz, and my address is 168 Cheppy Chase.

And I'm speaking to express my concern regarding item number 16 on proposed changes to Brackenridge Park.

I believe the proposed plan near Lily Pond to remove all of the picnic tables and limit parking will affect the accessibility of many San Antonio families from utilizing the park grounds for gatherings at leisure.

With all of the redevelopment around Broadway and the Pearl with housing being built exclusively for high-income households, what we are observing is a slow erosion of access to this precious public park for the lower and middle class families in our city.

Our cities invest in parks through partnerships and redevelopment.

We must be honest about a growing risk.

When planning is not equitable, the very families who rely most on public parks are often the first to lose access.

This can happen through subtle changes, such as more ticketed events, higher fees for amenities, increased policing of everyday behavior, fewer parking spaces, or designs that prioritize residents directly adjacent to the park, tourists and donors over residents from the entire city.

Over time, these choices can send a message about who the park is really for.

Parks should unite us, not divide us.

They should reduce inequality, not reinforce it.

Furthermore, my hope is that the commission will adhere to city code that provides guidelines set forth by the Secretary of the Interior standards for rehabilitation and preserve historic objects and structures in our park.

Barak and Rich Park is a public good.

It belongs to everyone, and it's our responsibility to ensure that it remains welcoming, accessible, and rooted in the entire community it was meant to serve.

Thank you.

My name is Joachi Kokopilli.

I'm Lee Pan Apache descended.

My address is 6541.

Apartment U.

San Antonio, Texas, 78249.

And I'm calling about item 16.

Is there an indigenous representation for that for phase two?

My numbers 210, 2901.

Hello, uh, this is Raymond, the two or three method drive, calling about agenda item number 16 on Brackenbridge Park Improvement.

I'm calling regarding my concerns with the removal of 10% of the picnic tables, including WPA replicas without any consideration to replacing or increasing the number of picnic tables that our families and friends use during holidays or special occasions.

There is no actual plan or budget to relocate or add picnic tables as we've been told.

This will greatly diminish or completely remove cherished conditions with a lot of families during Easter birthdays, family reunion, and result in reduced dynamic value and cultural engagement that is currently very available and very affordable to most San Antonio families.

This is counter to the cultural landscape report, which are the guiding principles of the park's renovation.

To remove any parking spaces and 22 hours schedule will decrease access and increase traffic congestion due to additional searching for parking spaces.

Families or groups obviously obviously can't transport coolers, chairs, strollers, etc.

Also, removal of a historic stone kiosk that is adjacent to the pumphouse has no merit without a real plan and budget for restoration.

This violates section 35-463, the HDRC's design guidelines for restoration rehabilitation and adaptation.

What is the purpose for removal and relocation?

This is completely altered that existing historic and distinctive architectural features, which should be avoided when possible for this section of the city called.

We appreciate many of the improvements that are happening at Brackenridge Park, but I ask you to reconsider these items as well as any of the reduced the park dynamic qualities and historic structures that make the park the duo of San Antonio.

Thank you for your time.

Hi, my name is Rebecca Flores.

I live at 502 Cass Avenue, and I want to speak on item 16.

I attended the open house last week, and I still have some concerns about the design that is being proposed.

One, removal of the picnic tables.

This plan calls for removal of all of the picnic tables, about 10% of all the tables in the park on the east side of the road near the lily pond.

The removal is to make way for heritage trail with signage and observation points to look at the assequia and the raceway.

We're concerned that the removal of so many picnic tables used generally for relaxing for Easter camping, birthdays, and other celebrations will diminish the traditional uses of the park.

The city staff has said that the tables will be relocated, but there has been no plan release or cost estimate or funding identified to do so.

Moving these tables is going to be costly and impractical.

Number two, on parking.

The plan includes removing all 22 parking spaces along Brackenridge Road.

The plan will close the road and remove the bridge next to the pumphouse that makes a loop.

This plan will kill the antique and low rider car culture, as there will no longer be parking, drilling, or the ability to drive around the loop.

This will also limit parking for the adjacent softball field, the weekly zoo run, and the new playscape.

These changes are going to reduce access to and use of a large piece of the park by residents who have traditionally used this park.

Three, removal of the historic stone kiosk adjacent to the pump house, also for later relocation.

Again, there's no plan or budget for relocating it and no explanation why it needs to be removed.

Please read again the city code section 35-643.

A every effort should be made to adapt the property in a manner which requires minimal alteration of the building structure, object, or site and its environment.

B the distinguishing original qualities or character of my name is Rebecca Galvan and I live at 857 East Magnolia Avenue.

I'm speaking on agenda item 16 for Brackenridge Park.

While we very much appreciate some of the design changes the city has made to protect more trees in phase two, we still have some concern.

These include number one, removal of about 10% of all picnic tables, including 20-year-old, bond financed, WPA replica tables with stone grills.

This at great unnecessary expense.

Two parking changes that appear to reduce access to and use of a large piece of the park.

Three removal of the historic stone kiosk, emblematic of Brackenridge Park, with no budget for its relocating and no explanation as to why.

Thank you for your kind attention.

Good morning.

This is Richard Aguila.

I'm just leaving a voicemail.

I live at 14919 China's Council 78207 District 10.

And to voice my disapproval of the plan for Brackenridge Park to cut down trees into reduce greatly the parking accessibility into the into that historic park.

I've been going there since the 1960s.

And it's just a shame to hear what these plans are would take place and what might happen to limiting the access to the park.

Thank you very much.

This is Sally Reels, 210464029.

Email SA Rios 1949 at ATT.net.

I'm calling specifically to speak against removal of the parking spots betwe at Brackenridge Park between uh Hildebrand and the Iron Bridge every Wednesday since um since the early 70s.

There has been a Wednesday night zoo run at the park that begins the first Wednesday in April and continues to the last Wednesday in October.

This event begins at 6 30.

It's a free event, open to all citizens.

We have moved throughout the park as a result of remodeling and different issues.

We are currently located at the area where the nature playscape will take place.

So for 2026, we are planning to move to the area at the corner of Tuleta and Brackenridge Way.

After the two-mile event, we plan to have a social hour over in the area between the donkey barn and the uh ball field.

We cannot stand there or sit there to enjoy a social hour afterwards.

Uh as a result, if if they do remove all the parking spots, there will be no place for us to park over in that area.

Currently, the little parking place between the ball field and um where we start where the nature playscape will take place or will be it's filled by ball players as well as runners.

Once the nature playscape opens up, that whole area will be taken and they will there will be no place for anyone other than ball players and uh people attending the playscape will be able to park, or they'll have to walk some distance.

I understand runners can walk that hi, yes.

I am Sandra Lagunas, and I am calling from 1801, Santa Anna.

Um District One, I am calling in regards to item 16 for the 3700 North St.

Mary's and Breckenridge Park.

Case number 2025 258.

Um my concerns is the uh the trees, how many trees will um be preserved?

And also um will the roads be repaired or they're going to be removed the parking spaces.

Um picnic tables.

Um I saw that you know a lot of the historic buildings are going to be repaired, which is good.

But our concerns is the uh cultural uh tradition.

Um I didn't see it in the design.

Um I saw that we were losing a lot of the parking areas.

So that is my concern.

The parking areas.

Um are they going to be repaired or removed?

And how many trees are going to be um cut down, removed, and all of that.

So that is my concern.

Um thank you.

Hello, my name is Tammy Viarriada.

My address is 8914 Long Branch, San Antonio, Texas, 7821.

Um calling on agenda item 16, Brecken Ranch Park.

Please do not remove our picnic tables and parking spaces.

Records the way it is is wonderful.

I take my family there.

We go there on weekends to barbecue.

It's nice.

It's it's it's changed so much from when I was young.

And now my kids are adults and I have grandchildren and they love it the way it is.

And y'all are just gonna ruin it by removing things that are that have been there for decades.

Hi, my name is Carrie Gorler.

I live in 715 River Road.

My phone number is 21070844.

I was planning on being at the meeting, but I cannot, and I just wanted to say, oh, not much time, that uh removal of the picnic tables is absolutely bizarre.

It's like the park wants to take away anything that families use to enjoy the park.

They just want to destroy the whole spirit of the gifts from the Brackenridges.

There is no reason to remove the picnic tables, they're used by citizens and needed.

Also the historic um pressed for time.

Uh pump house work and all of that.

Let's like let's let's preserve our store historic things and let's not remove and try to and parking and all of that.

Removing the historic stone kiosh, that's what I was trying to say, is totally no reason for it.

Um it just the destruction of the park.

What they've already done is been to remove the wildlife, the murder of all the birds.

I mean, there's not been one good thing that they've done to make it park for the citizens.

There's so little that hasn't been privatized by the zoo or or the witty.

Stop it.

Just stop doing that and let the citizens have a nice city park.

Mr.

Chair, there's our last voicemail.

Thank you, sir.

All right.

So does well, we're going to start in order to make sure everyone has a voice here for questions.

So I'm going to start with my left.

Mr.

Chair, I just also just want to reiterate that um we do have a number of city staff and members of the project team here to respond to any of the concerns or questions that were raised.

Okay.

I'll entertain those.

Hello?

All right.

So I I mean, I will I can there's a lot of stuff to talk about.

Um I can try to answer uh my my design team can try to answer any questions or issues that you guys heard from the public that you wanted to bring up.

So I think what we heard a lot of was um picnic tables and parking spaces.

So um I sir.

Trees trees as well, yes.

Um so the um I don't think we have an issue putting some picnic tables back, uh parking spaces, a little bit different.

Uh there is a lot of asphalt in that area, a lot of impervious cover.

Um if you recall from the proposal or the presentation that we gave, um a lot, a big important part of this project was trying to um improve the ecology of the area, get as much of the impervious cover out as we could, come back in with soil amendments, plant material, and a lot of new trees.

Um so uh to uh to keep some parking or to keep some picnic tables or even all the picnic tables, just need to understand that would be an increase of impervious cover from the plan that is being proposed to you right now.

That would be a decrease in the ecological uh restoration of the project that is being proposed to you right now.

Point of order, Mr.

Chair?

Yes.

Um so if you're going to speak, you have to have um permission to speak here.

So if you have some comments on the you have we had time for that already.

So if you want to add anything else, you can't.

Yeah, I I I do want to mention and just kind of clarify uh you also heard a lot of um uh questions and concern about uh phase one of the project along the river, some of the trees that are part of phase one.

Um all of that work is complete and separate, completely separate, excuse me, from what we're proposing here in phase two.

Um so we can uh discuss that more if we need to, but uh it seems like some people came here to talk about uh the improvements are proposed for phase one.

This is a completely separate project.

Thank you.

Um anyone other from your staff like to make any comments or things in nature before we move into discussion.

I don't know if anybody has any other comment.

I think we can just kind of open it up to you, Commissioners and and uh try to answer either from staff or from the design team.

Thank you, sir.

Appreciate it.

All right.

So we'll start off with questions from commission.

So I'll start off on my left.

Um, Commissioner Gavada.

Uh yes, just one question uh real quick.

Ms.

Strawn, I believe, uh brought this up.

Uh section 106.

Uh this was before my time on the commission.

Okay.

If you could educate me on that and where we are in the process, I'd appreciate that.

Yes, again, so the section 106 is part of the 404 permit that we have to get from the Corps of Engineers for phase one.

Again, we're not here about phase one.

That was already given approval in April of 2023 by this body.

So we're here strictly to talk about phase two.

And for phase two, I'll just also add there's not the Section 106 process is not triggered because there's no core involvement.

Um however, it did go through permitting with the Texas Historical Commission, and so we do have a permit from them for the phase two project.

Yes.

Uh we did ask for a determination from the U.S.

Army Corps of Engineers uh to see if they would take jurisdiction over this phase two project, and they decided that um no uh uh no jurisdiction was necessary.

So we don't have to go through those regulatory permits uh with the core for this project phase two that's before you today.

Thank you, Commissioner Mazooka.

Sure.

Uh there are a lot of questions and a lot of things to talk about, but one thing that's been brought up several times are the picnic tables.

And I understand that you need a cement pad for those picnic tables.

But for the parking arrangements, isn't there such a thing as not impervious but pervious?

Is that the word way to say it?

Parking areas where you have a grid, say of stone that's open, like a uh I don't I don't know what you call it, my I'm a boss.

But it's a uh an open brick with uh where the brick open spaces are filled with uh crushed granite or something that would allow the water to to go into the earth.

To percolate, yes, sir.

Um is that something that could be considered for the parking areas?

Uh for the existing parking area uh possibly, but you know, the that parking area uh that folks were talking about is right along the road as you exit uh to uh Hildebrand or as you enter from Hildebrand.

Um that area um is in in pretty bad shape with respect to erosion and um uh and uh impervious cover, there's a lot of asphalt out there, broken up asphalt when we see um uh uh water events, rain events come through uh a lot of the uh particulates and material from that asphalt uh gets um moved into the waterways.

So what we did for the design is we've completely kind of um taken a look at that area, try to minimize as much of the um the road or uh vehicular pavement as we could um and again try to green up that area with um you know with plant material and uh open grass area.

So we can certainly take away some of that open grass area, uh places for people to uh picnic during Easter or anything like that, and we can add in a parking area, but it's gonna significantly shift uh our design purposes for that particular spot of the park.

Well I would think that the amenities and the new vistas that you'll see in the raceway area would be a great place for people to appreciate at a picnic site.

Uh it it is for people to appreciate.

Correct.

And that's one way to appreciate it as a part as a side aside from just walking through the area.

Um, you're you're right.

I mean, we we will have uh benches and other place for seating uh in the project.

Uh that's in the design drawings as well.

Um I don't think that a picnic unit, so to speak, with a table of grill and a trash can is necessary for that type of of park use, but we can certainly entertain adding in adding back in some picnic areas for people who want to use that area uh to picnic.

Uh right now it's not very seldom used for picnicking, and all of the uh parking is typically used on a daily basis for the students over at Incarnate Word.

So, you know, we wanted to in trying to take some of that away, uh some of the parking away and some of the picnic units away is to um do our best to kind of um improve the ecology in that area.

Really the the best way to do that is to remove the impervious cover.

So we have plenty of other parking just on the other side and actually still a bunch of parking within the project area.

Um and we were going to be looking with the parks department at maybe where to put some other parking spots so that people could still park near this northern section of the park and be able to walk to it to get to it and enjoy it.

Um to have people to have a parking area right next to where you want to go.

I understand the convenience of that.

Um but that's not really why we build parks.

Um we we want people to be able to access the park and be able to walk it and use it.

Please, if you have comments, please keep it down while he's speaking here.

Everyone has had an opportunity to speak.

So respect the speaker that's up here now so we can get through this, please.

Thank you.

Okay, sir.

Thank you, sir.

I'm pretty pretty much done with that comment.

So if you have any other questions.

No, it's uh I understand the roadways, but Breckenridge Park is rather unusual in that the uh roadways are covered with trees everywhere.

You drive past uh Lambert Beach and the roadway has trees, big trees going going right through the asphalt.

Yeah.

Um it's it still will.

So there will there's still a road there.

We will plant some trees close to that road.

We'll plant we're planting trees all along the uh the walks and the trails that we're proposing to to build.

Um so it will be a heavily shaded area.

Um this area right now is heavily used by uh uh the vehicle, people in cars, parking, driving through it.

We want to give this section of the park back to the pedestrian.

We want to open it up to them.

We want to improve the amount of impervious cover, improve the ecology, add a bunch more trees, which you saw on our on our uh presentation, add a bunch of um uh new ground cover and plants uh that will help the ecology and bring in new habitat, new animals to come into this area, new birds, um and and people actually, because people don't use this section of the park.

This northernmost five to six acres, it's basically a sea of asphalt and concrete right now.

Uh it does have the historic structures intertwined in between it, uh, but a lot of people don't even know that those historic structures are there because when you're accessing this part of the park, you're in a car.

You're not on foot.

So what we want to do is change that, get the car out of this six acres, bring the pedestrian back so that they can actually see all of the cultural resources that are in this area, um appreciate them, um, and you know, enjoy uh the nature that that's gonna be in this area.

Sure.

I I understand that, and that makes great sense, but you don't want to throw the baby out with the bathwater, so you've got to find a way to do both to allow people to drive through there and to park and to picnic there, as well as bringing in pedestrian traffic.

And I I agree.

Sure.

That that's a whole different way to appreciate the park.

Talking about driving through there, one thing I also wanted to bring up that we did not bring up during the uh presentation is down here in the bottom right corner.

Uh we included a turnaround.

Uh so with all of the asphalt that uh original asphalt that went around and created a big asphalt loop, uh we created a turnaround so those lowriders or anybody who is going east and out of the park, they don't have an opportunity uh elsewhere to turn around back into the park.

So we created an opportunity right there.

It's a turnaround within the uh existing street that people can use the turnaround, come back into the park and circulate how they want to in a car.

Thank you.

One more one last question.

I know there are so many people who need to do that.

You you found um can you hold that to the next round?

Let me uh get to the next one.

Um Commissioner Cervantes, please.

Yes, I'll try I'll try and be quick.

This uh for Mr.

I might be pronouncing wrong Mr.

Gra Griel.

Yeah, I have a question for you.

Can you tell me, give me a head count of how many people and then a uh number of groups that use this site for religious purposes year-round?

I'm not able to do that.

I know I've seen historical records of Roman Catholic masses at the site.

I've seen, I believe, Orthodox Christian baptisms.

Um we saw what looked to me like probably non-denominational Protestants.

Um I only have a legal obligation.

I represent Gary and Matilda uh who are members of uh Lapan Native American Church.

And that's what I'm asking for Native American.

I'm not talking about the Christian, I'm talking about Native American indigenous tribes coming.

Um Mr.

Perez and Ms.

Torres are members of the Lapon Native American Church, so that's one organization.

Um there are two Lapon Apache tribes in Texas who have each registered their religious objections back in 2022.

Uh I believe that the Ponca tribe submitted a religious letter to the Army Corps related to this project, and then you heard the representative from the Comanche Nation.

Um they have all expressed their official position on this project.

No idea on numbers though that migrate or that that pilgrim to the site.

Any idea from the I don't know.

The numbers.

Um, if if you're interested, one thing that's unusual about some indigenous religious practitioners is that they keep some of those pilgrimages secret from authorities from non-participants in the rituals.

Um I don't have numbers.

I'm not sure that there's any person on earth who knows the numbers of those.

Thank you.

Commissioner Holland.

Thanks.

Um what the what what tree removal is proposed and and what protections are in place for the existing trees, the remaining trees.

Just quickly.

Sure.

Only because we talked so much about that.

Yeah, so uh the proposed numbers are on the right.

Uh we're proposing uh three heritage trees removed.

Actually, um we had a bit of a mistake on that.

We assumed there was a WESAC, we read the the um uh code wrong, um, mistakenly assumed that it was a heritage, it's not.

Um so that number three of of heritage trees removed is incorrect, but uh we'll address it as a heritage during permitting if we need to for mitigation purposes.

Um there will there will also be 23 significant trees removed.

Um are to be relocated, and of course there are uh right now 19 uh invasive or dead and dying trees.

Um as you guys well know as time continues, you know, these these numbers are just a snapshot of the tree picture today.

Um it might be different a week, a month, a year from now.

Uh but I want to point out that our plan um is uh um proposing to keep 153 uh trees, either significant or heritage trees within this project.

Is that out out of out of 2080?

Thank you.

And real quick, just if you can outline the public engagement process that has occurred and how that has shaped your plan.

Uh absolutely.

So uh we started the public engagement in early 2022.

Um we did a uh a site visit, we did an online um uh town hall, so to speak.

Um and then beyond that there were seven uh in-person public meetings.

I believe uh all of them were held at the Whitty Museum.

Uh we did a series of uh the first meeting was kind of an introduction to both phases.

Um the second, third, and fourth meeting we concentrated on phase one.

Um the um fifth and sixth meeting, we concentrated on phase two, got a lot of great input uh from the public on that, uh which is the project we're talking about here today.

And then the seventh uh meeting, which happened I want to say at the end of August of 22.

So we met from February of 22 to August of 22 uh with the public um essentially nine meetings, seven of them in per or in person plus the tour.

Um at the end of August, that final meeting we proposed our um our um final conceptual plans for both phase one and phase two, uh, and then from that point uh was finishing up those projects consecutively, not necessarily concurrently.

Uh and then just last week we had a uh final phase two public meeting.

It was an open house uh with all of the images you see in the presentation, they were on boards.

Uh we had about fifty or so uh folks who actually came to and signed in.

I think we had more people than that, maybe some didn't sign in, but we had 50 people sign in.

They were able to speak with uh city staff and the design team on a one-on-one basis uh in front of all of these images uh to listen to their concerns to talk about uh the scope of uh this project um and how we came to that conclusion.

Um and that now we're here today for this for this meeting.

Yes, sir.

Commissioner Savinous Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Um I agree with fellow commissioners' concerns about the parking and the picnic tables, um all of what they've said um it could use those topics really do need to be addressed.

Um because I'm afraid what happens um well I'll leave my comments for later.

Questions?

Um as we look at one of your drawings with of impervious cover in the orange tint.

Can you tell us where those picnic tables are in this drawing?

Are they the dots?

Yes, ma'am.

Yes, ma'am, they're the uh orange circles.

Those are the two the small orange circles that are in and amongst all of the trees, yes.

Okay, okay.

Um they don't look like they include or add a whole lot of impervious cover that can be dealt with.

Um the missing trees, I don't understand.

The two missing trees, the mesquites by the pump house on the river side that were missing from the new construction drawings.

I looked in Cypress trees.

Cypress sorry, what did I say?

See?

Oh, Mesquite, sorry, the the Cypress.

That's okay.

Sorry.

Um I noticed um, let's see.

Will those have been phase one?

Is that when those were dealt with?

Correct.

They will they will be dealt with in phase one, yes, ma'am.

That was part of the phase one.

That was part of phase one, correct.

Okay.

And that's why they don't show up.

In the set, we don't see any of the existing condition plans, because those aren't in the set, so it was difficult to see what existing conditions are.

Um I think we had some existing condition plans in the set, did we not?

No.

Uh they're not on the ones loaded, uploaded.

But anyway, I don't want to spend the time on that.

Um picnic tables.

Um so the pump house, that's phase two now.

That's phase two?

Yes, ma'am.

It's it's always been phase two.

It has.

Yeah.

And it's also undergone or it's um has a 106 review, correct?

The foundation does, not the rest of the building.

Okay, but the foundation does.

Um the newly uncovered pedestrian bridge, is that immediately adjacent to it on the raceway?

Is that the one?

No.

No, that uh new uncovered pedestrian bridge is actually over the asicia.

Is over the Osequia?

Yes, ma'am.

Um the other bridge, the one immediately immediately adjacent to the pump house.

Why wouldn't that foundation also be eligible for a 106?

Which bridge are you talking about?

It's the pedestrian bridge to the east, northeast of the pump house.

Um I mean, there's the road that is in front of the pump house.

Okay, it's road.

Yes, ma'am.

Um yeah, we had uh at-length discussion with uh Texas Historical Commission on that.

Um that uh road is majority fill.

Um and they did not um I forget who it was, but um I don't know it maybe it was the THC uh that deemed that uh it was uh non-contributing, or we had a a third-party consultant who considered it non-contributing and the THC agreed with that assessment.

So the the majority of that vehicular bridge is filled with asphalt.

The only thing that remains of that vehicular bridge is the wall to the northeast with the sluice gates?

Yep.

Yep.

Yeah.

So any other besides the pump house, any other structures eligible for a 10 section 106 in phase two?

Because you mentioned that there was nothing.

In phase two, no, correct, yeah.

But it's so the the 106 review is the historic portion of a 404 permit.

Okay.

And so if you are not required to have a 404 permit for your project from the Corps of Engineers, then there is no 106 review.

Okay.

Concern also about the drive and also going through the park, reducing vehicular traffic through the park.

Um somebody mentioned or did someone mention that Brackenridge Drive would close at Hildebrandt.

Is that the case, is it?

No, no, in these plans, no, ma'am.

The there will be a uh continuous road through.

Uh-huh.

Um all we're removing is if you look at this, all of the asphalt on the top, and then there's a huge parking lot asphalt right there.

All of that will go, and then you can see the bulge of red uh right over here by the lily pond.

That includes the road and uh some parking spaces on either side.

I recall so it's those parking spaces that were uh proposed to be removed.

I recall what that looked like.

Okay.

Um I think that is the majority of my questions.

Okay.

Right now.

Thank you.

Thank you, ma'am.

Um, Commissioner Galloway.

Thank you.

Um I just want to confirm the two cypresses that are being referred to as you know, significantly religious are in phase one, correct?

So like so uh my next question, or if I could have the staff pull up the PDF that says heritage removed, could you walk me through why these three trees need to be removed?

Yeah, we uh we can do that.

I think Ashton would probably be uh uh better at explaining those.

So the tree that you're looking at right now, it's tree 40 on our plants.

Uh and this is a um a black willow that's sitting directly over the upper labor dam.

Um and its roots are going in through it currently.

Um so as part of the project we are removing this to protect the historic resource.

Uh next one.

So and this one is tree 41.

Uh this one is being removed to provide uh an accessible pathway to the Domingo uh Red Week is uh football outbridge.

Uh and that is part of the overlook um design for the Lily Pond.

Uh and then go to the next one.

This is the one that we thought was uh small species heritage, um, but it's just a small species significant to be removed.

Um and this is to provide an accessible path from the overlook areas facing the raceway over to the pump house plaza um for the people who are parking across the street by the the baseball field to be able to get to the pump house.

So if I understand correctly, most at least two of those are just like convenience, correct?

Like we just need to do that because we need to build the pathway or that kind of stuff.

Do you understand that correctly?

Yes, it's like design, the design would have to significantly change in order to not have or to preserve those and it would uh uh impact accessibility improvements to the park.

Okay.

If I can if I can add to that.

Um the uh second picture that was shown, tree 41.

Uh the roots are also in close proximity to the beginning of the uh upper laborus.

So you have on one side the asequia that we're addressing, and then you have on the other side um accessible pathway that we're required to uh to build by code.

Thank you.

Um I have a question for Mr.

Quill.

For everyone, it is Griel rhymes with smile.

Okay, I'm sorry, Mr.

Gold.

No problem.

Um uh question for you.

You mentioned uh during your testimony that um the two Cypresses in question for phase one were religiously significant um to your uh to your clients.

Um are there can you talk a little bit about like you know, are there other religiously significant items in phase two?

No, it's it's really limited to those.

Um for my clients, it's really that river bend which mirrors the constellation Iridanus in the sky.

Uh so the big concern is those Cypress.

The larger concerns um north and east.

Um maybe there's like some complaints about they want picnic tables, but that's not the religious impact.

And and one thing I did want to mention about those public um meetings that were held about input, is that actually Mr.

Moreno testified in federal court that they have not changed the design to accommodate the religious beliefs of the Native American church.

And he said that the city heard their testimony and they made no changes because they wanted to save time and money.

That's a that's a federal court testimony that's actually in the handout that I said.

So I understand that the city hosts meetings where they hear people.

Um let me interrupt you for a second.

Um the uh commissioner asked a specific question, so I'd like you to focus on that, please.

Yes, sir.

So as to the rest of phase two, um it's really limited to the trees at that riverbend.

Um if they have been redrawing, I I agree with Ms.

Strawn that I'm a little confused as between what's within uh phase one and phase two.

Um, but really it's limited to trees along the riverbend, and so the other improvements to the north and east are not part of the concern.

Thank you for that.

I have other questions, but I'll thank you.

Commissioner Mammon.

Yeah.

Thank you.

Uh thank you, Chair.

Uh there's 10 trees that are being relocated.

Th those are within this phase two space relocation.

And there are 26 trees being removed.

Altogether, so only 10 of those 26.

What's happening to those other 16?

Just disposal?

No.

So the the 10 being uh relocated are in addition to the 26.

They're not part.

Is that that's right?

Yeah.

It's a separate category.

Got it.

So they they will they will remain in the uh site after construction.

They will be in different spots.

Uh we're still gonna have to mitigate them uh per the ordinance or um excuse me, per the code, the UDC.

Um so we'll still be mitigating for them, even though we're trying to keep them.

Uh we're gonna try to put them as close to their original location as possible.

Um but yeah, they are being relocated.

And are there what are the reasons why the other 26 cannot be relocated?

Uh there are various reasons.

I you want to or hold on just a second.

I think Ross, can you come up here and talk about um the assessment from EDI?

I think Ashton can as well.

Um this is Ross Hosea, he's uh uh Arborist with the uh Parks Department.

Um and then Ashton.

We we did have a uh team come in and take a look at um all of the proposed uh removals to see which ones uh could be relocated or or not.

So uh Ross, uh good evening, uh Ross Hosea, Urban Forestry Manager for the Parks Department.

Uh we did an assessment on all of the trees one by one and determined that those that we have not um listed as relocations were due to either their current condition or just uh the inability that they would survive or likely survive a transplant.

Perfect.

Thank you.

And I think it was confirmed earlier or just in the past couple of questions, but the only religious the the only trees seen as religious significance are in phase that are being removed are in phase one.

Correct?

Yes, sir.

Yes, sir, to my knowledge.

None have been identified in phase two that have religious significance that are being removed.

Correct, not that I am aware of.

Yes.

And then was the community ever involved in identifying the plants or the trees that would be planted in the in phase two?

Yes, sir.

So during our um our public meetings on phase two, uh, we did share some ideas for the native species that we would likely put in there.

Um we did not receive any negative comments on what we had proposed.

Um I don't recall.

D do you recall, Ashton, if there was any.

That's fine.

Okay, as long as they came up.

Okay, good.

And then what's the number of parking spaces being removed?

Um I want to say it's 22.

I don't recall exactly.

But with no identified plan of relocating those 22?

Not identified plan yet.

Um that's something we wanted to work with the parks department on is to try to get new parking spaces as close as we could to this area, uh, try to hit those twenty-two.

Um there are some opportune spots where we can do that.

Um, but in order to to work through that, we were going to have to expand the limit of work.

Didn't want to do that.

So we we're gonna address that um either at the same time with an another contractor or at a later date, but we we definitely want to make sure that we're adding in the same amount of spots.

Sorry.

22 of in how many total parking spots are in that phase two area?

Well, um, yeah.

Um I don't know.

I don't know the answer to that.

There this uh these two little bays here, you have parking.

Um I want to say there's close to 20 in that section.

There's also several parallel parking spaces on the opposite um curb uh that will remain.

So uh there's still plenty of parking here.

Uh we will uh we're probably gonna have to take a look at and address the amount of accessible parking spots.

Uh we may end up needing to add one, um, but there will be accessible parking here to for people to be able to get to this part of the park once we're done with construction.

Yes, sir.

Commissioner Laskis.

Yes.

Yes, sir.

Uh uh listening to everything I I end up last, so I get to hear everybody, which is kind of cool.

Um I'm not getting any sense that there's any recognition that this is actually a massive cultural change.

And I'm wondering why why isn't why haven't y'all chosen to present the alterations as something that radically changes the use of this into the park?

Uh radically change the use.

Well, it it it it it it exactly, I mean that's my point.

Is that there has been a historic use that includes the cars, which is which seems to be intentional, the the drive-thru in the park and and and the fact that most of us that have lived in the city have have driven through the park many times.

Uh the uh the use, the holiday use, the the benches, the the um um uh the uh the turnaround.

Uh every aspect of that is radically changed.

And the the use seems to be uh contrary to your statements that we're gonna return it.

Do you return it to what?

I mean, it it it it's just say my age.

It's had the use that it has at least for the last sixty years.

So return it.

And the fact that the park was a gift and it's been in use and that that it's it's it's actually become what Breckenbridge is.

So that it's it's in its living self.

It seems that it's your obligation to present a project that improves something, and that if it has a radical change, that that that should be up front and you shouldn't be uh uh afraid of that.

I wonder why why is that not given to us ahead of time because it's very hard to understand this project backwards where there's a change that's gonna occur and and we're trying not to I think I I uh at least myself I'm trying to to be supportive of every aspect of what you're saying, but uh i i at every other turn there's something else, or there's something else, and there's something else.

So all of a sudden, it seems that this thing has never worked, that the park has always been a failure, uh that the people shouldn't be going there for Easter because it's ruining the park, and that if you've been there a long time, the the the number one pollutant in the river there has been the zoo, not the people.

You hardly ever see trash in that river.

So I'm wondering why why uh the confidence isn't there to be very happy about presenting uh radical beneficial change.

Rather, it just seems to be uh a presentation of preserving something that is really not a preservation of anything.

It's a change, it's a radical change.

The bikers that are there, the low riders that use it on the weekends, the holiday people, but particularly the people that use that little area.

I I'm not put connecting with which your testimony that is not hardly ever used.

Every time I drive through there, there's people picnicking in on those tables.

And and and I know that because every time I drive through there, I'm wondering uh I wonder what wonderful thing is going on right there.

Uh because it's a wonderful drive, right?

So why haven't you chosen to take a more proactive approach to your presentation with respect to the radical change that you're proposing?

Well, uh I would say I don't necessarily agree with your uh radical change.

Um you talk about the low riders.

They're that's not going away.

They can still go one direction, turn around, go the other, and cruise through the rest of the 347 acres of the park.

Remember, this is just the northernmost five to six acres of the park.

There's a lot more park that the lowriders use.

Well, but see, that exactly exactly you that's a radical change.

You just um it's not kind of a there's not much change at all, sir.

Not much change at all.

You have you we've just heard a thousand people practically uh uh exaggerating, but a very a lot of people that also don't agree with you.

Okay.

But but I mean that doesn't mean that you're wrong.

It just be it just is a contradiction to to the way that you're presenting it.

That that that it should you should be able to say that it's a radical change because the people that have spoken are not wrong.

And and if you're not wrong, then that's only because you believe that you're not wrong, and that's perfectly fine that both parties believe that they're not wrong.

Sure.

But that doesn't mean that what you're proposing isn't a radical change to the culture and the way that this area has been used.

You're gonna limit the amount of parking for the baseball players.

I mean, do you know how many children's lives have been changed because they've they want a game there?

I mean, it it it it's all very, very important.

But when we when when I get your presentation, I'm trying to understand uh how this is not changing the cultural use that is the only use that anybody alive, I would think, if you're not 70, 80, 90, i any of the rest of us.

It's it's only ever operated one way.

And it's been a beautiful way.

So I I'm just uh uh we're we're gonna we're gonna get into questions over here with the commission, but uh I I just think that you should really work on the way that you're presenting it because it you come off as very disingenuous.

And I don't mean that it in an insulting way.

I'm sure that you have a uh uh a real strong belief in what it is that you're presenting.

It just a twist.

I I'm gonna um I'm gonna say I'm gonna let you wrap up here, but then go ahead and answer that on his question, and then I'm gonna have other commissioners get into as well.

Okay.

Yeah.

So uh well, Mr.

Mitch, I don't want to he answered.

I I don't want to drive him nuts on it.

Uh we uh but I'll come back over the code.

You're saying I'm not making my case or we're not making our case.

I want to make our case to you.

Is that fair?

It's it is okay I would say that the he's of course keep it limited because you still have other commissioners that have questions.

Sure.

Absolutely.

So you you talk about the cultural use in this area.

The cultural use is and if I miss one, please let me know.

Cultural use is uh the low riders you mentioned uh and others have mentioned uh picnicking in the area, uh uh throwing up tents during the week of Easter and being able to camp out and stuff.

Picnicking in the area, throwing up tents during the week of Easter and being able to camp out and stuff.

That is not going to change.

That is still going to be allowed.

That's an operational thing that this project doesn't really speak to.

We're we're actually increasing the green space so that even more people can come and use this area during the week of Easter.

That's apparent in the plans that we're proposing.

We're taking out a ton of asphalt.

I don't think people camp or go to Easter on the sea of asphalt that's out there.

We're going to be adding a bunch of new green space that they can use.

Now if we want to discuss and argue about, you know, circular concrete panic units, those are easy to add in.

We just felt like in the effort of trying to improve the ecology and the natural feel of this area by removing as much impervious cover as we could.

We're still gonna people are still going to be able to use it in the typical ways that they do.

So we can add some picnic units back in.

People will continue to be able to camp for Easter and picnic out here.

People will still be able to uh have a turnaround for their low riders and their bikes and continue to cruise throughout the whole rest of the park.

Um what we are really trying to do uh in addition to the ecological piece is to enhance the cultural resources that are in this area.

These are historic structures that are a hundred, 150, 250 years old uh that a lot of people, a lot of San Antonians don't even know are there.

Um and we want to celebrate those uh cultural resources.

We want to let people know number one, why why they're there, how they contributed to the growth of San Antonio during those different periods of time, the 1700s, the 1800s, the early 1900s, and even to today.

So that's again one piece, one focus.

We think it's really important, the ecological piece and removing as much impervious cover as we can.

That's really another important piece of the project.

But we want to make sure again that we don't um completely remove um any use that somebody wants to do here.

We feel like we've enhanced the area enough so that those type of cultural umes with family can can continue to happen.

So from our perspective, that's what we see in this plan.

Again, if you disagree, that's fine.

We can certainly have a discussion about it uh and kind of go through the details on that sort of thing.

But uh from our perspective, we're very excited about the plan.

Um we we know we put a lot of hard work into it.

Um we've thought about just about every square inch of this project as as you can think about, and making sure that the improvements that we're gonna be uh that we're proposing here uh are an overall benefit to this uh northern section of the park.

Um that's our that's our position.

Thank you, sir.

Appreciate it.

Um Commissioner Fetcher.

Yes.

Um a lot of good comments and questions have come out of the Commission, a lot of uh wonderful comments uh from the um from the public and also voicemails.

We thank everyone for coming out and making your voices heard.

Um I think that based on what I've heard today, things that need to uh be revisit revisited are uh picnic spaces, parking.

Uh and one question I have is if those things were being uh removed from the current plan that you are proposing, and you're saying that you're gonna talk with parks about uh where to put them in the future, I would think that part of the discussion would have already happened so that when you come with this plan, you could have presented where you're proposing to do uh picnic tables and parking to augment what you are removing here.

We we actually did present that um to the public back in uh 22.

Uh we did not get much feedback at all.

Um, no negative feedback.

Um we showed uh plans to the public of where the uh other potential sites for picnic units and other potential sites for parking could go.

We had a few different options to try to get some feedback on hey, which option do you think is best?

Um there really, like I said, wasn't much input uh on those pieces at all.

Okay.

So from an operational standpoint, now it's okay, let's you know, get with the parks department, figure out where we can uh where the best place is operationally to put those things.

Okay.

Um not to uh beat a dead horse, but the two Cypress trees that are by the pump house.

They are not shown in drawing 56, which shows the cultural plaza encroaching on that area.

It's showing a new uh handicap accessible ramp.

Yes, sir.

So is that area in or out of this phase two?

The area is in phase two, yes, sir.

So where are those trees?

Well, so do you have 50?

What he's talking about.

What number what number did you say, sir?

He's showing it 506.

Okay.

Just north and west of the pump house where the two heritage cypress.

Yes, sir.

So those are not shown in this plan.

Yeah.

One of them is heritage, one of them is not.

The one below, closer to the river is a heritage cypress.

I don't recall the diameter, but it's considered heritage.

Um it is impacting the river wall and therefore is in the uh uh the phase one project and is being reviewed by the Corps of Engineers.

Uh the one up top is uh going to be impacting uh construction on the wing wall.

Um, but when phase one is constructed, that wing wall is part of phase one, so that's why the tree is being removed in phase one.

Understand there's a phase one, phase two.

Everybody has assumed as we've progressed, phase one is going to happen before phase two.

So to get the drawings right for phase two, those the tree down below, because it's completely in phase one is not shown, it's not impacting any work in phase two.

And then the one up top, uh, if phase one is constructed first, will already be removed due to the work happening on that wing wall.

And so therefore it won't be there when phase two construction comes in to build that ramp.

That's why you're not seeing it in the drawings on phase two.

Okay.

Um, knowing that it's part of a uh lawsuit, I'm sure that will be a lot more discussion with uh all parties in terms of the uh cultural significance of those trees, whether they're considered uh heritage by the size or whether they're considered heritage by the uh the uh individuals who are contesting it.

So I'm sure that'll be much more discussion on that.

Um any of the other structures in phase two, such as the stone kiosk or the uh the little pump house or the uh restroom buildings, are they subject to THC review as uh historic?

Yes, they are.

All of them, I believe.

Have they have they ruled on those?

They have.

Uh we received our uh approved antiquities permit, I want to say back in August or September of 25.

Okay.

So the THC has approved this plan that you see before you today.

Okay.

And uh again, looking at what might come in the future.

Uh any thoughts on where this the historic kiosk is gonna go?

Well, yes.

So um the historic kiosk is, and I I've got some design team members who can kind of dive into it.

Um, but we we the THC told us that wherever we put it, it needs to be as as close to where it is now uh as we can um just for um historic integrity's sake.

So uh the bathhouse that is adjacent, the long bathhouse that was turned into a playscape, um, there is uh gonna be a future project that addresses that bathhouse and the uh grounds around it.

Um and our proposal to the THC was that the kiosk would be stored in its whole um without being selectively demolished at all.

Um our engineers feel like they can move it all as one piece and will be stored until such time as a project on the bathhouse and the bathhouse grounds can be addressed, and then the um kiosk would uh would come back into that little section of the park.

And there is a cultural plaza considered as a location.

I just want to clarify it is in the plans.

And so Edward, if you had that landscaping plan pulled up, there is a placeholder for that kiosk location that was.

Yeah, there's a little dashed area for the for where the kiosk would go.

It's in the top left corner of this page.

Okay.

So the cultural plaza.

Oh, there it is right there.

So the cultural plaza, which is adjacent to the to the historic pump house was was that considered for a location for the kiosk?

I'm sorry, sir.

Can you repeat that?

Was the cultural plaza considered as a location for that kiosk since it's adjacent to the pump house?

Um, no.

I don't recall us really talking about that.

Um we felt like we wanted it as uh close to um the because it I think historically it worked more with the bathhouse than it did with the pump house.

Um so we felt like it was better to go into that bathhouse footprint.

Um there may have been some preliminary discussions about having it off of one side of the plaza, uh, but that did not come to fruition during our the rest of our design process.

So certainly something we can take a look at.

Uh but for purposes of construction of the project, uh it's going to be removed and and stored.

Okay.

Thank you.

That's all for now.

Yes, sir.

Thank you.

So it was two uh three commissioners that I uh cut you off as far as questions concerned, so I want to give you the opportunity to ask one more question before I ask for a motion.

Um Commissioner Mazuka, um, you were in questions.

Did you want to add I'll give you a chance for one more question, sir?

No, I just made uh uh an analogy of not throwing the the baby out with the bathwater.

The baby being the people who use that area now.

Yes.

I agree with the plans to bring back the asequia and the raceway and and all those things and uh remediate the earth and all those those things are all great.

But don't forget that people are using that area now.

Yes, sir.

Want to use it when it's beautiful again?

Correct.

Yeah, we absolutely want them to use it.

That's why we're building it.

That's why we want to build it.

Yes, sir.

All right.

Thank you.

Um Commissioner Sabino.

Um the additional conversation answered some of my questions that I would be interested in either making a motion or having somebody make a motion.

Okay, we had option at the Commissioner Galloway.

Commissioner Galloway?

Just a couple quick questions.

Um for the staff.

Uh I wasn't here in 2023.

Were those two cypresses discussed in uh phase one in 2023?

Yes.

Okay.

Um uh second, if I could uh ask the arborist a question.

The three heritage trees that are marked for uh removal or um uh could you uh talk a little bit about the willow that's grown into the dam and uh like is that is the tree suffering because of its because of that condition, or is it more like the construction of the dam is going to damage the tree?

It's a little bit of both.

It's more removal by um construction by impact, but that tree is in poor condition.

It's had uh multiple failures over the years.

Um I I couldn't put a term of life or how long it's gonna last, but uh I would classify this one as removal by impact from the construction that's gonna be happening.

Would you also say the other two would be, you know, we we've heard that they're design, you know, removals for the other two heritage trees um and that kind of stuff.

Uh would those also fall into that category of like the construction within the plan is going to damage those trees as well?

Um on that larger, I believe it's that oak, yes, that that would be one.

Although that one has some issues because of its lean, uh that's the one that we cannot move.

Um we did evaluate that one.

The other one that I wanted to make sure we distinguish that third one, that's a WESAC.

It's only 13 inches.

Uh there was a mistake made when we were looking at the code.

It was not become protected until it's 24 inches.

So although we're still classifying it as heritage purposes, it is nowhere near heritage.

But it's being removed, I think, um due to its proximity to the cultural resource and the impact that would happen to the tree.

Great.

Thank you so much.

I appreciate your help.

And last question is for the city, how are you working with uh local organizations, indigenous tribes on to like inform your cultural education offerings?

Yeah.

So the all of the um interpretive signage for the cultural resources and the indigenous uh stories that we want to incorporate into this project, um, that's going to be a separate application that we will bring to you guys at a later date.

Um this project focuses on the um the um the construction of the signage, the framing, you know, the the physical aspects of what that is, uh the historical and narrative aspects are still yet to uh to be determined.

So we want to uh have a process where we go through that and uh invite the public to do that as well along with us so we make sure that we get everything correct.

We also have are going to be working with historians who are very familiar with um uh the uh um the confederate and um uh colonial cultural resources that are in this area as well uh to get their their uh expertise and their um the aspects of of those cultural resources to put into our um interpretive signage uh material.

Great.

And then um last question uh how long from the time y'all start phase two to the time it's ended, how long how how long is that construction period?

Can you get the Wells?

Yeah, that's really that's really tough to say.

Um when we bid the project out, that's something we're gonna ask of the respondents.

Um we're going to give a um a ballpark um one year or 12 month to 18 months.

We you know we we want to make sure that there's plenty of time and that it doesn't uh exponentially raise the price.

Um but we also don't want to the the contractor to be able to linger too long.

So we're gonna set kind of uh um in the solicitation a range, so to speak, and then we're gonna ask them uh the individual respondents when they submit um if they can give us an idea based on the scope of work uh and their schedule plan how long they think construction would be.

Um and so when we score those um respondents uh submittals uh then that will um uh kind of inform how we score them.

Yes, sir.

Thank you.

All right, um Commissioner Savino, I'll entertain your motion, please.

Um I will explain it once I've made the motion, but I would like to uh motion that this request go to a DRC to specifically address certain items to include the trees, the relocation of the kiosk in that general area, the roadway and traffic, vehicular traffic, um picnic tables.

Um parking.

To include those, not to be limited to those, but to include those specific items.

Second.

I was gonna second that, but I had a suggestion for it before she closed it out.

Sure.

Would you be able to include a site visit?

There's it's it's been three years, and we've had a few commissioners that have not uh actually been out there and we did the walk around I think three years ago.

I think it was three or two.

Yes, sir.

But again, that was that wasn't for you, sir.

Yeah.

So if that's if that's possible for the another one.

I think because of the significance of this project, the investment, the scope of this project, it would be beneficial to do both a site visit, and that could be first, and then also at the table DRC, so that you have a chance to integrate the comments and the concerns that we have in a way that um um best balances as many stakeholders as possible.

Second stance.

All right, second stance.

So um we're gonna go into discussion now.

Sir, have a seat, please.

Thank you.

Um so before we get into um the discussion concerning this, I want to make sure we're all clear, and I think we are, but I just want to make sure we're focused on phase two.

Okay.

So we're focused on is phase two here.

And um from the testimony that we have heard today um from the um the respondents from the community, um, from our commission here, as well as our case records here.

Um, I think further pushing this to another committee meeting, I think is not going to serve as well.

I think what we need to do is that if we're going to we need to say some type of action on this today, and I believe that we can stipulate what we're looking for as far as what we need to get done.

I think what we need to do is that if we're going to we need to say some type of action on this today, and I believe that we can stipulate what we're looking for as far as what we need to get done, because if we we're going to another committee meeting, and when we've probably been dealing with this for a few years now, I think this is going to push it for push it out further.

And I think that we need to do probably get to some type of resolution here.

So I'll open up for quite um concerns with that.

Yeah, Mr.

Chair, with all due respect.

Um typically a case like this would come to for conceptual review.

And I don't think we've actually had that opportunity as a commission.

Um I would uh I I don't think there is anything that is actionable at this point, but I'll let the other commissioners speak.

Mr.

Chair, I am sorry for interrupting.

Ma'am.

Sorry for interrupting.

Just want to clarify that the motion um needs a time certainty.

So we don't have a time certainty for the site visit or for the DRC?

The site visit first schedule opportunity, which would probably be next week sometime.

And then a desk DRC at the applicant's ability and convenience.

Okay.

So I'll start down on my left here.

So um, Commissioner Gravada.

Um, we're of course focused on the discussion of the motion as well as comments about how we need to move forward at this point.

So go ahead, sir.

I guess the concern is just the the delay process.

I understand, you know, uh visits and you know, having a committee uh, you know, take a look at it again.

How long would this prolong this entire project if we do something like that?

I would say that if we're you think about what we've done today, we've we started this particular case at around 4:30.

Um at 7 o'clock now between the comments from the community, um, between the applicants, between our questions, and we're we're getting to a point now where we're we're in discussion.

I I believe that if we do that again and push it back, we're going to be right back into the same situation again.

I don't I don't want to discount anyone's comments, anyone's opinion, anyone's um voice here, but I think that as a commission, I think we're doing ourselves and the community a disservice if we don't provide some type of action um moving forward today.

So it it it seems to me that uh a DRC could help articulate what a stipulation would be, because if we just make a motion that says we uh approve of this uh project with the following stipulations being benches, uh all those things that we've just discussed, I think they could be further articulated through a DRC where we come up with things that are actionable by the city to um to make a motion and I would hope that the next meeting would be the following Wednesday.

So you don't think that by making a motion and then stipulating in the motion that that doesn't um provide action for them to do?

Um because I mean we're we're the advisory board appointed by city council, so we're providing them stipulations about how we are to move forward, just like um staff provides in their um their write-up to us, they provide their recommendation as well.

So what do you think when it comes to comes to that?

Mr.

Chair, point of order, Mr.

Chair.

Uh I mean, if if if if the Chair is going to invoke the power to question every commissioner down the line, then perhaps we should have a motion where the commission can go into discussion.

So I'm not going to be able to do that.

So that we can have discussion across the board here separate of the community separative staff, the commission can have that discussion.

The commit the community is part of this, and I believe that if um this part of the discussion, um, since we we've heard everyone here or everyone has the opportunity that we um they're gonna hear, they can hear our discussion as well.

And just want to be clear, not questioning every commissioner, okay.

I just want to be, I just want to make sure that we are doing the right thing along the way.

So uh and I understand that, Mr.

Chair, but that that's that's a direct contradiction to the maker of the motion.

Because the maker of the motion obviously feels that we should go to a DRC.

So there's the conflict right there.

When we're in discussion after the um after the motion is made and it's been properly second, we go into discussion.

So I didn't ask the maker of the motion to change her motion, and nor am I want to do that.

We're in discussion, and so that's where we are right now.

So again, not questioning every commissioner.

I just want to make sure that we understand what we're doing as far as when we're um a decision that we're going to make today.

Thank you, though, sir.

Did you have anything else, sir?

No, it would just be if there is a motion that includes all the stipulations that we have just been discussing.

Um I would approve of that.

Otherwise, I would be in favor of a DRC.

Thank you, sir.

Appreciate it.

Commissioner Cervantes.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Um, as much as I hate kicking stuff down the road, kicking this can down the road, I totally agree with you that something needs to be done.

And I will tell the audience here that no one throws more hot water on this staff than me.

I poke them in the eyes publicly all the time, and they will nod and say it's true.

I respect them, I love them, they are great people, and they are all doing the best they can.

But it is it is somewhat of a bureaucracy.

Well, by the same motion, I do believe that some of the things need to be addressed and looked at one more time in due diligence.

Some of you are not going to be happy with what we ultimately decide, but I think putting forth the effort shows the community that we serve, that we care, and we are taking your feelings in into consideration.

Right?

But you look at some of those trees, and I'm not going to pick any one of them out.

You look at, they're falling over.

All right.

Who is responsible if a limb falls on a kid that's out there?

It's not anybody out here, it's the city is going to pay for that kid.

It's going to be sued, you know, that kid's going to sue, parents are going to sue.

They have the city has a responsibility to maintain a safe environment, right?

And that's part of this process.

So as much as I hate doing kicking things down the road, I am going to vote for this uh DRC and a site visit for those that haven't been down there.

You know, that's where I'm at.

Thank you, sir.

Commission Allen?

Sure.

I'm I'm I'm wondering and I'm hearing um I I'm feeling the the need to take some action here as well because I am wondering um, you know, if we do kick the can down the road, what ends up happening if it's you know the same sort of deal.

And so I would be willing to make a substitute motion if there was some support, but I would need some help constructing that.

So I would make a substitute motion for discussion to approve with staff stipulations.

Um but I need some help here.

So how so how would we shake this out?

And so um so your motion, I mean if you are going to make a substitute motion, um that is exactly what you would do there, and that's how we would do it.

And then um if we have a second to that, then we can have further discussion on that as well.

So what we were just talking about, we talked about putting stipulations in, because I would like to take action here if we could.

Um but I don't know how to categorize stipulations such as protect the trees and preserve picnic tables and know where they're going to go.

Um you know, I want to I would like to trust the process and and I would like to trust staff on this one because I feel like they have it right.

Um I I also want to acknowledge that uh I appreciate the public's comments on this, but um I do believe that it would be important to take motion here too.

Would be uh conceptual approval for restoration of this north five or six acres with the with staff stipulations and the inclusion of the items that have been under a lot of discussion today.

Additional picnic tables, parking, um, the kiosk, uh more clarification on the trees that are being removed.

And I'm and I'm open to that.

I I'm asking for help on crafting the verbiage on it in something that is quantifiable and maybe and maybe you can help on that.

So Mr.

Chair, um hopeful one second, sir.

I'm not coming right to you.

So um I believe that if if you do want to um offer a substitute motion, I believe that um Vice Chair Fetzer, I mean he you know pretty much provided much of the language there um for that if that's something that you like to go with, then if he is willing to do that, then we'll yeah, I would.

I would like to make a substitute motion and and pull me back online if the strays here.

So uh I I would like to approve with staff stipulations and add um additional picnic tables and protection of the trees within the guidelines as well as I I don't know.

Chair um do are you going to add to the motion or do or do you want to no Mr.

Chair I just object to the display of uh of um uh a sense of urgency that our commitment is to the citizens and and that is to vigorous um uh use of uh the our due diligence and if that takes another meeting that we only want to get down to the bottom of of what is the absolute best solution uh the city is already uh uh or at least Sparks has already indicated that there were aspects of of what the community has talked about that that they might be able to do and a DRC is is within past practice of this commission it's common.

You're lucky you weren't involved in the Alamo uh uh period that we had this is normal don't go not get scared of this that this is normal and this is good.

Sunlight is the best disinfectant they say.

So let's spend some time with the gentleman from the city and let him go through DRC like so many others that have benefited from the good counsel of some of the professionals on this commission.

The sense of urgency I think maybe what we should be asking is the community if we come back don't come in 80 people and make a sit here for two two years.

So I just want to be a good favor I just want to be clear um I'm not I'm not scared or I'm not concerned about it.

We're rushing is we're we're not rushing we've been there almost three hours we're not rushing anything we're we're we're still we're we're still in discussion so we're not rushing anything so what we're gonna do is that we're going to give every um commissioner the opportunity to voice their concerns and then once we have a motion that we all can um agree to vote on then we'll vote on that if it's a no I I understand that Mr Chair but I object to the negotiation once sir but see the thing is if I it doesn't matter right now because what's going on is that once we um have a motion on the floor once we vote you can vote yay or nay up or down and then that's how we go I I just question the appropriateness of negotiating the language of a motion it just doesn't seem appropriate.

But I but it it may be totally fine with the rules of the ethical rules I I'm not making any accusation.

It's just to me doesn't seem appropriate.

Thank you.

You objection point of order with the chair chair may we continue with comments based on the motion on the table.

Absolutely with withdrawal I didn't have a chance to explain the motion the reason for the motion when I made the motion so again this is a incredibly large project.

I really wish the city had brought it to us for conceptual approval first so that we could make these incremental comments on on moves but that was your choice to bring it to us for final approval.

The package I'm looking at is 232 pages frankly I would love to spend more time with it to better understand the moves that you have made and the design considerations I ain't got that kind of time not in four days three four days.

I really don't I'm gonna get personal today is my wedding anniversary I'm dedicating my time to the community and to the city for a project that is very important to all of us in so many different ways.

Moving forward um I stand by a DRC second stance.

Thank you Commissioner Callaway I just want to thank the public for being here to speak on this uh issue today uh you know I appreciate the city's planning and uh the the information here uh but I also uh have uh concerns with uh a lot of what was uh brought up today um and so um I'm generally in favor of a DRC thank you sir commissioner Mammon I I think a DRC is fine but I don't know how many moved picnic tables is enough or how many parking spot replacements or in the right spot is enough.

So I feel like we will be back in the same spot of public comment against whatever we come back with.

I to Commissioner Velasquez's questions earlier about bringing the bringing the existing use of the space into the new space I don't think that that happened in the best way.

I get what the city is trying to do make it in make it more ecological and and gathering places and all that it all makes sense but it was done without respecting what's already the use of the space too as well.

It all makes sense, but it was done without respecting what's already the use of the space too as well.

And I think that that's where it fell short and why we have today and all the comments and everything that are going on.

I think a DRC is is the best way to try to mitigate against this, but I think we also hit the same wall.

Thank you, sir.

Commissioner Velasquez.

I I only have I have two things, Mr.

Chair.

The first is that uh I I truly believe that if if if the city has a criteria, begins with a criteria that you can achieve that uh good solution with that given criteria.

Uh uh so it just seems that there are some things that maybe have been taken for granted that that that maybe aren't the most prominent things, but for those people, and I would have to include myself in there.

I I don't see how um there's been a priority priority to satisfy the criteria of the actual uh user of the park.

Maybe a good vision for the future, but for people that there's no way to ask them because they don't exist yet.

Secondly, I just want to uh say that you know the use of the term uh confederate and colonial is very interesting because this is the birthplace of a people before there were a people.

So all of the myths and that we go to the hemisphere and they loosely use the word Yanawana.

Let me tell you what, this is a place where that's not a marketing term.

This is the this is the real word.

So uh you know the sophisticated capabilities of design today are are will no way be better than the way that it is just used naturally by the people that have been using it that was gifted in in the dumb way that we've used it.

It's a park bench, is a place to kick a ball or uh as a place to drive your car.

It's unique, and I imagine that if you compared it to any place in America, just the way that it's used, it would be seen as a wonderful place.

So there's a there's a I think a challenge to the designers to take everything that you've done, to take the the uh the uniqueness of the ecosystem restorations that you that you that you have the ambitions to do.

But to remember that the people, the people, they're I mean, you know, they're real as well.

They're just like the birds.

Uh they're just as important and they drive cars.

Uh so perhaps it isn't what you want it to be.

Perhaps it is what it is, and that maybe we're missing the what it the trees for the forest.

All right.

So thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Thank you, sir.

Commissioner Fesser.

Yes.

Um again, I thank you all for coming and and uh voicing your concerns and opinions and memories.

Um I also thank the city staff for their efforts and the designers and trying to make this a more ecologically uh improved site.

Uh but I think like what's been said before, what's missing is the uh the element of the people and how it's currently being used in this area.

And uh that's why I will be supporting the DRC to have those discussions on site and further in-depth discussions in terms of how to incorporate uh those issues into a plan that uh not everyone's gonna get what they want, not everyone is gonna be happy, but uh I think closer to what uh the city uh deserves.

Thank you.

Thank you, Vice Chair Fesser.

Um before we go take a vote, I just want to um just add a few more comments in here.

Um I appreciate everyone.

I appreciate everyone here, everyone who had comments, I appreciate the city staff, everyone here, um especially my fellow commissioners, because we are um we're here to try to do the best we can in order to preserve um history um here in in San Antonio and it's um we have differing opinions at times up here and it's okay.

I mean that's what part of the um democratic process is, and so have no problem with that.

And so when it comes to the actual project here, um I still you know believe that you know we'll we'll get there, and I I truly believe that there may have been a waiting in order to get it done, but um destiny the here or there, we're about to take a vote and then the vote is going to go the way it goes, and then we'll we'll abide by that.

But um I um appreciate everyone's patience today.

Like I said, this is a long case, and we still have uh a couple more to do today, so thank you everyone for your time and may have a roll call, please.

Mammon.

All right.

Savino?

Aye.

Alaska?

I Galloway?

Aye.

Givata?

Aye.

Cervantes?

Yes.

Holland?

Aye.

Petzer?

Aye.

And Gibbs.

Motion carries.

Motion carries, thank you.

Can we have item number 17, please?

Agenda item number 17.

Excuse me.

HDRC case number 2025, 243, 153, and 155 East Crockett.

The applicant is requesting a certificate of appropriateness for approval to construct a two-story multifamily residential structure on the vacant lot at 1253 and 1255 East Crockett located within the dignity.

Let me stop you for a second.

Excuse me.

Excuse me.

Can you all take those conversations in the hallway, please?

Thank you.

Located within the Dignity Hill Historic District.

Staff recommends approval based on findings A through R with the following stipulations.

One that board and batten siding should feature boards that are 12 inches wide with batons that are approximately one and a half inch wide.

Composite siding may be used, however, it should not feature a faux wood grain texture.

Is noted in finding J.

Two that window materials adhere to the guidelines for new construction.

Uh window specs need to be submitted to staff for approval.

Um that all finestration should be designed in a manner that features traditional proportions and dimensions.

Currently, windows on the front and rear feature widths that are in unproportionate to their heights, their width should be reduced.

Additionally, staff finds that a window should be added to the right of the balcony on the front facade.

Um I can draw that on here in a minute if I need to.

And then there's uh stipulation that mechanical equipment be screened.

Um there's a case comment, various site elements have not been submitted for review.

If you go up to the findings of fact, we have a comment about the driveway and landscaping documents.

The applicant can submit that directly to staff for review and approval.

Uh and then also uh foundation inspection is required.

That's a standard practice for OHP.

Uh the applicant Ricardo McCullough is here.

Uh please note there's a letter in your packets also have a voicemail that I can play.

Okay, sir.

I'm Ricardo Macala, the project designer.

And everything he just said is it said yes.

We actually uh we already added all those recommendations to the to the to the plants.

So you're stating that you um agree with all staff stipulations for the case.

All right.

Yeah, well, so we we changed we added windows, we changed the the shape of some of the windows that were windows that were square, we made them more rectangular.

Uh changed the note about the the aboard and batten.

Um of course then we we still have to show how we're gonna uh uh hide the the AC units from Zoo with planting material and in the the dry door.

Chair, I have a motion.

Um play the voicemail.

Okay, sir.

Okay.

Hello, this is Lulu Francois, Chairwoman of the Dignity Hill Historic Neighborhood Review Committee calling in on 1253, 1255 East Crockett, HGRC case number 2025-343.

We do not agree with staff's recommendation for approval.

Five of the seven or seventy-one percent of the stipulations called out when this applicant was given conceptual approval have not been met, which is why certificate of appropriateness should not be granted to this applicant.

Thank you.

Commissioners, I know you're all answered to move on, but I just want to clarify with the applicant.

When you say you've met the stipulations, are you saying that these drawings that are on the screen are what you find to meet the stipulations?

Because I think we have a disagreement.

Yeah, I actually last week I emailed Edward uh the the final plans we those are stipulations already done.

So that's news to me.

I I don't have those.

But if you can email them tomorrow, that would be good.

I just want to make sure you understand stipulation three that talks about the fenestration pattern in particular adding the window on the front facade on the second floor.

You understand that?

Yeah, yes.

Okay, okay.

Yes, and actually it's gonna be a blackened window because the the location of it.

I have uh is the side of a closet, and there's no way to make it to make it work as a one particular window.

Uh but yeah, it's gonna be there.

And just so just to be clear.

Well, staff stipulations are gonna be met.

I mean we say staff stipulations.

That's the same.

I just want to make sure that we are all on the same page so that we weren't in an argument later on as the outcome of this hearing, but it sounds like we're on the same page.

It's on the text right there.

All right, thank you.

So um questions from the commission.

So um Commissioner Gabana?

No questions.

Thank you, sir.

Commissioner Mazuka.

Thank you, Commissioner Savantes?

No questions, sir.

Thank you, sir.

Commissioner Holland?

No questions, thanks.

Thank you.

Um Commissioner Galloway, no questions.

Commissioner Mazooka.

Commissioner last motion?

Uh well he has he uh he has he's last, so I um Vice Sheriff Fetcher.

Yes.

Uh two questions.

One is um in the findings there were several stipulations, and it was mentioned in the letter that uh several of the conceptual approval stipulations had not been met.

Have those been met in your latest drawings?

Yes, sir.

Yeah, I don't know how old that message was.

But it every single stipulation and and recommendation has been met.

The point is the documents that are on the screen are the only documents that staff has received.

Okay.

Uh and the second question is yeah, this particular drawing, that front porch, the balcony over it still is cantilevered.

However, there is a rendering that shows it with columns supporting the uh balcony.

Uh, which is the correct yeah, it's got the columns and needs cantilever.

It's both.

At the beginning, my proposal was to to just have a cantilever, so it looks a little more contemporary, but that was one of the the first stipulations they wanted to see columns on on the So your the design of your latest drawings show columns supporting that balcony.

Okay.

Sir, I have a question.

So you mentioned that you submit you submitted it to staff.

Staff doesn't have it.

Um you're stating that you met all the stipulations, but we have nothing to back that up.

So actually, I don't know what happened there, but not only are you submitted it via email, Edward responded, saying thank you, and that's when he said when he sent me the letter saying that I was already on the on the agenda and they they were proposing for approval.

Those are the documents that are uploaded here.

Staff is noted in the findings.

It's finding B that these documents have not met the stipulations of conceptual approval.

So, sir, then staff sent an email last week.

But the stipulations that are noted here in the recommendation, those are the stipulations of approval.

If you can meet these, which are generally the same from conceptual approval, you could submit updated documents to staff.

Okay, so I'll you'll get them the first thing tomorrow morning because what happened probably I I send the wrong file.

Okay.