Speaker numbers apply only to this recording. Names come from transcript evidence. “Possibly” marks uncertain attribution.
The Historic and Design Review Commission met on Wednesday, October 21, 2026, at 3:01 PM, with Commissioner Jeffrey Fetzer serving as Acting Chair. A quorum was present. The meeting covered the approval of previous minutes, a consent agenda for routine approvals, and a major discussion on a certificate of appropriateness case for 326 Garfield.
The commission unanimously approved the meeting minutes from October 7, 2026. The consent agenda, comprising items 1 and 3 through 8 (item 2 at 3331 Roosevelt was withdrawn by the applicant and will return at a future date), was approved unanimously with all staff stipulations. Approved projects included River Walk improvements from East Houston to Lexington, 518 North Hackberry, 504 North Hackberry, 1232 Virginia Boulevard, 1020 Burnett, 502 North Cherry, and 340 East Walsh.
No public speakers signed up for any items on the agenda.
Case HDRC-2026-272: 326 Garfield The applicant, Susan Haime of J Construction and Design, along with owner Mr. Carlos and architect Marisela La Casanova, requested a Certificate of Appropriateness for a project involving three components: 1) repair and maintenance scopes (composite siding, front door, composite shingle roof, and painting); 2) modification of the historic structure's roof form by removing the original side-gabled profile; and 3) construction of a rear addition with two- and three-story elements.
The applicant argued that the surrounding neighborhood context has significantly changed with new two-story and four-story developments across the street, and that the proposal would allow a long-vacant historic property to become a functional family home. They presented two designs: a preferred design and an alternative design developed in response to staff concerns.
Staff recommended approval of item 1 with stipulations regarding the siding finish and door profile, but recommended denial of items 2 and 3 based on guidelines requiring preservation of historic roof forms and subordinate additions. Staff confirmed the rear addition that was constructed circa 2011 is non-original and will be removed.
Commissioners expressed various concerns. Commissioner Velasquez noted the renderings did not align with submitted drawings. Commissioner Garcia emphasized the historic structure was sufficiently intact to merit preservation and that the addition should respect its scale, describing the house as a little gem. Commissioner Group raised questions about roof transitions, lot lines, and specific door placement. Commissioner Galloway inquired if the alternative design resolved staff's objections, but staff stated they had not yet formally reviewed it.
Commissioner Group moved to refer the case to the Design Review Committee (DRC) for further discussion and refinement. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously (8-0). This referral allows the applicant to work in a smaller setting with staff and commissioners to develop a proposal that meets preservation guidelines. No final decision was made on the application; the case must return to the full commission for a vote.
It's now 301. I call to order the Historic and Design Review Commission for Wednesday, October 21st, 2026. Mammon Garcia Velazquez. Here. Galloway. Muzuka Guevara. Here. Group? Here. Trevioso. Here. Holland Davis. Here. And Fetzer. Here. We have a quorum. Translation services, please. Hello, good afternoon. See, buenas tardes. Las personas can necessiten a service de interpretación a l'Espagnol, favor de passar por su equipo a la cabina de atrás. Muchas gracias. Thank you. Thank you. The Historic and Design Review Commission is an advisory board appointed by the City Council. I am Jeffrey Fetzer, Acting Chair. It is the function of the Commission to advise the city manager in all relevant city departments concerning all applications for permits for properties in historic districts for landmarks on city property in the river improvement overlay and for demolitions. And considering whether to recommend approval or disapproval of an application for a certificate 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 an 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 the agenda. You will be called on as the case is called. Case representatives will be given no more than 15 minutes to present their case with an additional two minutes to respond to public comments. Speakers for or opposed to a case will be limited to two minutes each. Speakers may also sign up to yield their two minutes to another speaker who has signed up. Anyone who is yielding their time must be present at the time the speaker is called upon. Speakers will be called upon in the order in which they are signed up. Following public testimony, any commissioner may call upon any speaker to respond to further questions. Approval by the commission does not take the place of any type of permit. 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 of appropriateness has been issued by the Office of Historic Preservation. At this time, please silence your cell phones. Good afternoon, everyone. First item is approval of the meeting minutes from October 7th. Mr. Chair, I make motion to approve uh previous meeting minutes as described.