Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Historic Preservation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
City Council upholds denial of demolition request for 231 West Beauregard
Summary
The San Angelo City Council voted 7-0 to uphold the Design and Historic Review Commission’s denial of a demolition request for a mid‑century building at 231 West Beauregard, saying the commission should review any proposed replacement and protect the visual continuity of the downtown corridor.
San Angelo City Council on Tuesday voted 7-0 to uphold the Design and Historic Review Commission’s (DHRC) decision denying demolition of the structure at 231 West Beauregard.
The council’s action maintains DHRC’s direction that the site be considered holistically before removal, and that any demolition be tied to approval of replacement plans. Aaron Vannoy, director of planning and development services, told the council DHRC denied the demolition because commissioners wanted to review what would replace the building and how a new use would fit into the downtown corridor. Vannoy said staff had recommended approval with two conditions: that any demolition be conditioned on DHRC approval of elevation renderings for this lot and the adjacent lot owned by the same property owner, and that required building permits and inspections be obtained.
“Staff did struggle with this, but we did recommend approval at DHRC for the demolition, and we do recommend for the demolition with two conditions today,” Aaron Vannoy said.
Several council members said the visual character of downtown and the number of vacant parking lots at primary intersections weighed in favor of preserving the structure until a concrete redevelopment plan exists. Mayor Bridal Gunther told the council she “strongly support[ed] DHRC’s deny to demolish,” saying empty corners and parking lots make primary intersections look inactive in the evening and discourage visits to the historic district. Councilmember Harry Thomas made the motion to deny the appeal; it was seconded by Councilmember Karen (last name not specified in transcript) and passed unanimously.
Councilmembers and staff noted that the building had been classified in the city’s 2021 historic survey as a medium contributor to mid‑century architectural character and that nearby parcels include nationally and locally recognized historic resources. Council discussion emphasized that DHRC retains authority over design, colors and materials for any future redevelopment on the site because the property sits within the downtown overlay district.
The decision does not require the property owner to redevelop; staff said the owner could retain the building, pursue sale, or propose a new development, but any demolition or new construction would be subject to DHRC review and the city’s permitting process. If the building later deteriorates to the point of being a dangerous structure, the city’s fire prevention team can pursue enforcement under building and safety codes.
Votes at a glance: The motion to deny the appeal (thereby upholding DHRC’s denial of demolition) was moved by Harry Thomas, seconded by Karen (surname not specified), and passed 7-0.
Council members signaled interest in discouraging additional surface parking on key downtown corners and in seeing redevelopment proposals that activate the street at night.
The DHRC’s denial and the council’s vote preserve the current structure while leaving the door open for design‑reviewed redevelopment, subject to DHRC and permitting approvals.
