The Historic Compliance and Technical Advisory Board (CTAB) met on Thursday, August 21, 2026, at 9:00 a.m. to consider five cases involving certificates of appropriateness for properties in San Antonio’s historic districts. Chairwoman Juanita Sepulveda presided. Roll call confirmed a quorum with ten members present. After approving minutes from the July 17 meeting (9-0-1, with Commissioner Ziga abstaining), the board heard staff announcements and proceeded to the agenda.
Item 1 – 370 East Weesatch (Consent pulled) – Applicant Colin Stone requested approval to install a standing seam metal roof on a craftsman-style home. Staff recommended approval. The board approved unanimously (9-0) with staff stipulations (crimp seams, no ridge caps).
Item 2 – 2026-188 (917 Burnett Street) – Violation case – Applicant Christian Hernandez sought approval for a four-foot wrought iron front fence, a six-foot privacy fence (stepping to eight feet at rear), artificial turf and gravel in the front yard (already installed), and a ten-foot driveway. Work was completed without prior approvals. Staff recommended approval of the fence and driveway, but required reduction of the privacy fence to six feet and a revised landscape plan with at least 50% natural green space. The applicant asked for exceptions, citing a nearby Airbnb and the durability of turf. After debate, Commissioner Spiller made a motion to approve with staff recommendations; it passed unanimously (9-0). The board urged the applicant to work with staff on a compliant landscape plan.
Item 3 – 2026-219 (1008 South Alamo Street) – Violation case – The applicant constructed a large wooden deck (approx. 625 sq ft) and a three-foot fence without approvals. Staff recommended removal of the deck and approval of the fence. No one appeared for the applicant. The board approved staff’s recommendations unanimously (9-0).
Item 4 – 2026-195 (1115 South St. Mary’s / Mustard Seed Academy) – The applicant, Christina Medrano, requested a six-foot wrought iron fence for a preschool, citing child safety. Staff recommended a five-foot height. Several commissioners expressed concern about precedent, noting that guidelines call for a four-foot fence on the front property line. After discussion, a motion to approve staff’s original recommendation of a four-foot fence (with two vehicular gates and one pedestrian gate) was made and seconded. The motion carried 7-2 (Davis, Spiller, Ziga, and Pollock voted ‘nay’; Garcia, Fullerton, Speeds, Vasquez, and Sepulveda voted ‘aye’).
Item 5 – 2026-203 (250 Fur Drive) – Applicant Marquez White requested a standing seam metal roof on a Tudor Revival home in Monticello Park. Staff recommended replacement in kind with composition shingles. The applicant argued metal is appropriate under the guidelines and cited examples of metal roofs on Tudor homes in the district. The neighborhood association opposed, noting that less than 1% of homes in Monticello Park have metal roofs. Commissioner Vasquez noted that Tudor revivals historically do not have metal roofs and that the home had maintenance issues. A motion to support staff’s recommendation carried unanimously (9-0).
The board adjourned after the last case.
Good morning everyone. I'd like to call to order the Historic Compliance and Technical Advisory Board for August the 21st, 2026 at 9 a.m. The compliance and technical board is an advisory board appointed by the city council. Oh, I'd like to do roll call first. Thank you so much. Davis. Here. Garcia, here. Regard. Spiller. Here. Zega? Here. Fullerton? Here. Pollock? Here. Speeds? Here. Vasquez? Here. And Sapulvada. Here. We have a quorum. Thank you. At this time, translation services. Good morning. Gracias. Thank you. Thank you. Translation Services. The compliance technical advisory board is an advisory board appointed by the city council. I am Juanita Sepulveda, Chairwoman, and the Vice Chair is Jason Vasquez. It is the function of the board to advise the city manager and all relevant city department concerning certain applications for permits for properties in the historic district and landmarks. In considering whether to recommend approval or disapproval of an applicant for a certificate of appropriateness. The board shall be guided by the city's unified development codes and design guidelines and standards that have been adopted by the City Council. An appeal of a decision by an administrative official can be filed in accordance with the city's unified development code. If any person present wishes to speak in favor or in opposition to any item in today's agenda, please sign up on the public comment sheet. It is not necessary to sign up if you are the owner or our representative for a project on the agenda. You will be called on the case if it is it 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 comment. Speakers for opposed to a case will be limited to two minutes each. Speakers may also sign up to yield their two minutes to another speaker who has signed up. Anyone who is yielding their time must be present at the time the speaker is called upon. Speakers will be called upon in the order in which they are signed up. Following public comment testimony, any commissioner may call upon any speaker to respond for further questions. Approval by the board 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 board will be emailed to you within 10 days. No work of any type is to be started without obtaining the appropriate certific city's permits after a certificate of appropriateness has been issued by the Office of Historic Preservations.