Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Historic Preservation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Conservation Society urges city to preserve midcentury San Antonio Airport ID building
Summary
The Conservation Society of San Antonio left a voicemail urging the Historic and Design Review Commission and city officials to preserve the midcentury Airport Badge and ID Building (1322) and to use the Section 106 review process to find creative ways to retain the structure during terminal work.
The Conservation Society of San Antonio asked the Historic and Design Review Commission on July 2 to find a way to preserve the midcentury Airport Badge and ID Building (1322) at San Antonio International Airport.
In a voicemail read into the record, Betty Boucher, speaking on behalf of the society and signed by Louis Vetter, the society’s president, said the small, midcentury modern building features "an exquisitely designed wave like folded plate roof" and that its design recalls the years when San Antonio emerged as a major American city. "We urge the city to find a way to retain this historic structure to allow the public to enjoy its important design," the voicemail said.
The society told the commission that, because the building is small and adjacent to terminal work, it may be reasonable to incorporate into new terminal plans. The voicemail also referenced Section 106 review as a framework that "instructs applicants to be flexible and seek creative solutions that meet project needs while avoiding minimizing impacts to historic property." The recording was entered during the consent-item public comment period.
Chair Jay Maurice Gibbs acknowledged the comment and staff noted the item was on the consent agenda. The consent agenda was approved without items being pulled; the commission notified the public that certificates of appropriateness or action letters will be emailed within 10 days.
The Conservation Society’s comments were entered as public testimony only; the commission did not take separate action on the matter during this meeting. The society’s voicemail is included in the meeting record for city staff and the applicant teams to review during subsequent permit or design work.
