If you didn’t see the case, you really should, it’s online here: https://sanantoniotx.new.
What happened:
- Adelman/Barclay had a hearing for an appeal to overturn the Historic and Design Review Commission (HDRC) decision to deny demolition of two buildings, the Rich Book (900 West Houston Street and 118 North Medina Street exactly) in Cattleman’s Square.
- Three factors were required of Adelman/Barclay to request a demolition under economic hardship by the Historic and Design Review Commission (HDRC).
- The criteria for establishing unreasonable economic hardship are listed in UDC Section 35-614 (b)(3). The applicant must prove by a preponderance of the evidence.
- The City of San Antonio determined Adelman/Barclay had met all three requirements put forth under the UDC.
- The Historic and Design Review Commission (HDRC) denied approval, 9-2, for demolition based on economic hardship, even though there was nothing that Adelman/Barclay had not met according to the UDC.
- The City of San Antonio Zoning sided with the Historic Board for denial, because they stated “we usually side with the HDRC”. No reasonable argument was given and they fully admit that Adelman/Barclay had met all requirements of the city under the UDC.
- The Board of Adjustments reviewed the information and decided in Denial, 6 to 5, against overturning the Historic Board’s decision, even though the BoA recognized there was no requirement in the UDC that was not met, meaning, no reason to not approve the appeal. This would not have guaranteed demolition for Adelman/Barclay, only that they would have the opportunity to apply for demolition, and there would still be at least 18 months to negotiate and work with the public.
- Gardendale Neighborhood Association was in approval of the appeal, with voicemails giving approval and over 40+ signed forms approving the appeal.
Players:
- Historic and Design Review Commission (HDRC)
- Board of Adjustment for San Antonio
- Adelman and Barclay, developer for the Rich Book project in Cattleman’s Square
- Graciela Sanchez
- Director of Esperanza Peace and Justice Center – They want to buy the property but don’t want to pay for it. They claim the city values it at $100. It is valued at over $2 million.
- Key member of the Historic West Side Preservation Alliance leadership
- Historic West Side Preservation Alliance (HWSPA) – Brings activists outside of the area to speak, yet they do not live here. A person as far as Connecticut called in. This shouldn’t be allowed.
- HWSPA works from within the Esperanza Peace and Justice Center. The activists do not bring facts, only feelings and general comments. What they bring is numbers, so it looks like they are the public when there is no public informed to be an opposition. People called in from Monte Vista, King William, Districts 1, 7, 10, Tobin Hill, but NONE are living within Gardendale, the actual affected area and people.
- City of San Antonio Zoning
- Case managers are not answering questions regarding zoning for Gardendale Neighborhood, nor are they sending out notifications in a timely manner if at all. Weeks can pass by without a response.
- Case managers are not informing the public on what they should expect. For example, if a date for a hearing is moved because a continuance is granted, the prior emails, voicemails, and signatures gathered in favor or opposition for a project are not taken into account, reviewed, or played during the next meeting. It makes it look like there is no opposition or favor by the community. It allows activists to show up and “represent” the community, even though they do not live here.
- Gardendale Neighborhood Association – The neighborhood where Cattleman’s Square exists within. GNA are the only people that live in the actual area affected. A member of the Board of Adjustments asked if there was a lot of crime down here, which shows people on the board do not actually know what the area is like currently.
What should have happened:
- The Board of Adjustment should have looked at the information presented and decided in favor of the appeal proposed by Adelman/Barclay over the demolition of the Rich Book (900 West Houston Street and 118 North Medina Street exactly) in Cattleman’s Square, because the City of San Antonio had already determined Adelman/Barclay had met all three requirements put forth under the UDC.
- There was no evidence or data that showed that the Historic and Design Review Commission (HDRC) denied the demolition request based on not meeting the City’s criteria under the UDC (code) of San Antonio.
Appealing the City’s Historic Preservation Officer’s denial of a Certificate of Appropriateness
As a member of leadership for Gardendale Neighborhood Association, my opinion on this case is to approve the request of appeal for the developer of 900 West Houston Street and 118 North Medina Street, to allow for a Certificate of Appropriateness, which will allow the developer to demolish the Rich Book building and properties in order to allow for a new mixed use housing project.
Anything that services the development of the inner West Side, that further promotes living, working, learning (UTSA downtown), I approve of. In this case the proposed idea is that of demolishing a derelict building that has caused blight in the area of the Inner Westside, Gardendale Neighborhood.
If we do not support positive development, we are only blocking attempts at building a thriving city environment for future generations.
The idea that gentrification and displacement will affect the area are drudged up every time new development is mentioned on the Inner West Side to the detriment of the people living here. It means that positive development is not created, and we’re saddled with being allowed low income housing or, city-use of the area such as the Bexar County Jail and Haven for Hope, which lowers the overall attraction and value of our community while raising crime and displacement with long term generational residents fleeing over the years.
The real gentrification and displacement is already happening within Gardendale Neighborhood, by way of converting single family homes into Quadplexes, “Rooms for Rent”, allowing mechanic shops to grab hold of half of a residential block, and allowing drug-money backed developers to build high density building construction within our single family residence streets. These types of issues point to a failure on a city level of not paying attention to what is happening with construction projects in neighborhoods, while focusing on higher profile “newsworthy” and politically backed projects.
Why not build high density housing where it would better fit, in an area that is already a high traffic location, that has the correct infrastructure? This would make more sense than allowing the destruction and degradation of our neighborhood in Gardendale.
Where are the activist groups to fight for the ACTUAL residents that live here when these zoning changes come up?
Nowhere to be seen, because these groups do not actually care about what happens in MY neighborhood. They only show up to help promote a specific agenda, without actual care for the people living here, or how projects like the Rich Book are denied and end up continuing to blight the area. These activists by and large do not actually live here in Gardendale.
Instead of development of our area for future generations, we have derelict buildings that draw vagrants, high drug trafficking/usage, and violent crime. All of this within walking distance of young people that are educating themselves at UTSA, the people that will one day run various institutions in our city, state, and country.
Why can we as the Inner Westside not have something that could possibly include housing, retail/business? Such models have been done and used in many other locations and cities. Our very own Government Hill has gone through these changes to the benefit of the city and area around The Pearl. These types of projects are allowed in other areas of the city, but the Inner Westside is controlled by the Historic Board. If the Historic Board wants to keep a stranglehold on the development in the area, they should be made accountable and responsible for FUNDING projects to meet requirements of preservation. It’s too easy to wave a magic wand and claim “Historic reasons”, denying a whole community of development for decades on end.
The past can be kept alive in many ways. The plans presented in the past by the developer showed a similar facade to what it currently has. When talking to an architect from A&M who comes from a family of architects, he explained that the cost of upkeep is absolutely unsustainable and that the style of the building is nothing special other than what materials were available at the time, while the construction is of no particular rare architectural movement. Given that, and the history of cost of upkeep and crime associated with attempting to keep the building up and running (drug bust from rentals back 2018 along with a fire from vagrants), it really looks ridiculous to claim historic significance over a building that was used as a “clothing and department store”. That’s akin to keeping a Montgomery Wards building standing even if it is causing public and city rot in a neighborhood, just because it was once a department store made out of brick.
There is much that can be done to preserve the past without continuing to use the excuse of “preservation of the past” to block positive development. I guarantee students at UTSA let alone the majority of the city do not know what these buildings are, let alone would with a clear conscience and compassionate mind, say “yes, regardless of the issues being caused to the community over years, we will keep these derelicts standing, no matter the cost to the generations that must live through the issues created by them.”
Perhaps the Historic Board should be responsible for cleanup and security around these buildings they are so fond of ruling on from afar. I live a few blocks away. Where do they live? Where do these activists actually live?
Prove the phrase wrong that, “the Inner Westside is the dumping grounds of the City of San Antonio”, by allowing development as would be allowed in other areas, such as Government Hill which also used to be known as a crime and drug riddled area.
If we do not support positive development, we are only blocking attempts at building a thriving city environment for future generations.
The idea that gentrification and displacement will affect the area are drudged up every time new development is mentioned on the Inner West Side to the detriment of the people living here. It means that positive development is not created, and we’re saddled with being allowed low income housing or, city-use of the area such as the Bexar County Jail and Haven for Hope, which lowers the overall attraction and value of our community while raising crime and displacement with long term generational residents fleeing over the years.
The real gentrification and displacement is already happening within Gardendale Neighborhood, by way of converting single family homes into Quadplexes, “Rooms for Rent”, allowing mechanic shops to grab hold of half of a residential block, and allowing drug-money backed developers to build high density building construction within our single family residence streets. These types of issues point to a failure on a city level of not paying attention to what is happening with construction projects in neighborhoods, while focusing on higher profile “newsworthy” and politically backed projects.
Why not build high density housing where it would better fit, in an area that is already a high traffic location, that has the correct infrastructure? This would make more sense than allowing the destruction and degradation of our neighborhood in Gardendale.
Where are the activist groups to fight for the ACTUAL residents that live here when these zoning changes come up?
Nowhere to be seen, because these groups do not actually care about what happens in MY neighborhood. They only show up to help promote a specific agenda, without actual care for the people living here, or how projects like the Rich Book are denied and end up continuing to blight the area. These activists by and large do not actually live here in Gardendale.
Instead of development of our area for future generations, we have derelict buildings that draw vagrants, high drug trafficking/usage, and violent crime. All of this within walking distance of young people that are educating themselves at UTSA, the people that will one day run various institutions in our city, state, and country.
Why can we as the Inner Westside not have something that could possibly include housing, retail/business? Such models have been done and used in many other locations and cities. Our very own Government Hill has gone through these changes to the benefit of the city and area around The Pearl. These types of projects are allowed in other areas of the city, but the Inner Westside is controlled by the Historic Board. If the Historic Board wants to keep a stranglehold on the development in the area, they should be made accountable and responsible for FUNDING projects to meet requirements of preservation. It’s too easy to wave a magic wand and claim “Historic reasons”, denying a whole community of development for decades on end.
The past can be kept alive in many ways. The plans presented in the past by the developer showed a similar facade to what it currently has. When talking to an architect from A&M who comes from a family of architects, he explained that the cost of upkeep is absolutely unsustainable and that the style of the building is nothing special other than what materials were available at the time, while the construction is of no particular rare architectural movement. Given that, and the history of cost of upkeep and crime associated with attempting to keep the building up and running (drug bust from rentals back 2018 along with a fire from vagrants), it really looks ridiculous to claim historic significance over a building that was used as a “clothing and department store”. That’s akin to keeping a Montgomery Wards building standing even if it is causing public and city rot in a neighborhood, just because it was once a department store made out of brick.
There is much that can be done to preserve the past without continuing to use the excuse of “preservation of the past” to block positive development. I guarantee students at UTSA let alone the majority of the city do not know what these buildings are, let alone would with a clear conscience and compassionate mind, say “yes, regardless of the issues being caused to the community over years, we will keep these derelicts standing, no matter the cost to the generations that must live through the issues created by them.”
Perhaps the Historic Board should be responsible for cleanup and security around these buildings they are so fond of ruling on from afar. I live a few blocks away. Where do they live? Where do these activists actually live?
Prove the phrase wrong that, “the Inner Westside is the dumping grounds of the City of San Antonio”, by allowing development as would be allowed in other areas, such as Government Hill which also used to be known as a crime and drug riddled area.
Apparently, not the Westside though. We’re not allowed nice things, only public housing, senior apartments, homeless shelters, and as many illegally run “non-profit churches” that get away with operating within our neighborhoods, bringing even more people to our area that should be serviced by Haven for Hope.
This is bigger than “200 ft.” from the building. This affects the entire city, the Inner Westside, and Gardendale Neighborhood directly. Cleaning up the area of Cattleman’s Square would show people that it is NOT ok to just put a mat over the mess the City of San Antonio has allowed to fester and grow on the Inner Westside. We are people that live here, we don’t deserve anything more or less than anyone else or any other area in the city, and yet we are constantly not taken seriously, or being overruled by outside groups falsely speaking of “compassion.”
We have not received notifications of these events from the Board of Adjustments or Zoning. We had to read about it in the paper, contact the developer, and have their lawyer send us a copy of the updated case. The Board of Adjustments Schedule also does not display June 17th cases on it’s main page, and in fact only shows July 1st, so we couldn’t even look up the information. You have to know that there is another section of the SA GOV site where the schedule exists. We do not get answers from case managers in a timely manner, if at all.
This is going to change. The city cannot allow these projects to continue from being determined by others without transparency to the public that actually live in the area. Calling in activists from other parts of the city to represent the community is not valuable or quality information gathered, and shouldn’t be presented to the public as if we in Gardendale agree with these special interest groups.
It’s shameful, and disgraceful, and it needs to change.
It’s shameful, and disgraceful, and it needs to change.