Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Historic Preservation topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Galveston commission approves infill of historic Clark & Courts elevator openings with recessed brick

5528685 · August 4, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Galveston Landmark Commission approved a certificate of appropriateness allowing the Clark & Courts Building to infill former elevator door openings with recessed brick to reflect the building's history, after debate over using stucco versus brick.

The Galveston Landmark Commission approved a certificate of appropriateness on Aug. 4 allowing the Clark & Courts Building to infill former elevator door openings with recessed brick to reflect the building's historic appearance.

The application sought to enclose exterior elevator door openings on the building's west facade. Daniel, Landmark Commission staff, told the commission that the applicant's submittal proposed a stucco veneer inset about 2 inches from the historic brick facade and noted that staff found the request did not conform to the commission's design standards. "Design standards call specifically for building materials that are compatible with the surrounding context," Daniel said during the staff report. He added the predominant materials in the area are brick, stone and genuine stucco and that the proposed change would be visible to pedestrians and could create abrupt material transitions.

An applicant representative said the elevator openings are deteriorated and that the National Park Service and Secretary of the Interior guidelines recommend infill be set back roughly 2 inches to differentiate later work from historic fabric. That speaker also said the elevator shaft is about 113 years old and argued the shaft openings "provide a more historic context than returning to a blank wall." John McNatt of McNatt Contracting, the prime contractor on the project, told commissioners the openings and their back sides are in poor condition and said construction logistics required maintaining a 7- to 8-foot garage-height opening during demolition and rebuild to allow equipment access, which affected long-term maintenance access for any retained doors.

Commissioners debated whether to allow stucco infill as submitted or to require brick. An initial motion to approve the applicant's stucco proposal failed for lack of a lasting second. The commission then considered staff's recommendation of denial (based on nonconformance with design standards) in order to discuss options. After public comment and applicant clarification that the shaft earlier had shingle siding and the applicant's willingness to use brick, a motion passed to approve 25LC031 with the condition that the openings be infilled using brick and be recessed to reflect the history of the building.

The final approval was recorded after commissioners voted in favor; no individual roll-call vote with named tallies was read aloud during the record other than the chair's call for those in favor. The staff report recorded that 66 public notices were sent and 19 were returned, all in favor.

Commission staff also noted Galveston building code now requires galvanized steel headers and stainless steel brick ties to address past failures where unprotected steel headers rusted and caused brick veneer separation; staff said the elevator openings did not incorporate steel headers and that rust-jacking would not be an issue if antique brick were used together with required stainless steel ties.

The commission's approval allows the applicant to proceed with brick infill recessed from the historic brick face, subject to standard staff conditions for certificates of appropriateness.