Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Historic Preservation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
San Antonio preservation panel approves addition, calls for site visit on window and door changes at 838 E. Magnolia Ave.
Summary
The Historic Preservation Commission approved a certificate of appropriateness for an addition at 838 East Magnolia Avenue with conditions, recommended a site visit to review windows and doors, and asked the applicant to work with staff on design details and a lower roof profile.
Get email alerts on the Historic Preservation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The San Antonio Historic Preservation Commission on July 2 approved a certificate of appropriateness for an addition at 838 East Magnolia Avenue while directing staff and the applicant to clarify details on proposed window replacements and the removal of a secondary front door.
The commission voted in favor of the staff recommendation to approve the 650-square-foot addition with stipulations that the new work be subordinate in height to the existing roofline and that any cement-facing siding on the addition be finished to remain distinguishable from the historic structure. Commissioners also requested a site visit to examine the property’s windows and the pair of front doors before the applicant returns with final drawings.
The applicant, represented by contractor Al González and homeowner Michael Salazar, said the project aims to restore the house “as historically as possible” while using newer double‑pane aluminum windows for improved energy efficiency. González and Salazar told the commission the proposed windows are similar to products previously approved in other historic districts and that the design would set window trim in a way intended to minimize visibility from the street.
Staff reported a June 24 site inspection and said many original wood window elements are in repairable condition, though some require patching. Staff recommended repairing existing wood windows where feasible and expressed reservations about wholesale replacement with aluminum systems. Commissioners noted the front façade historically included two doors and said that, while interior sealing and nonoperable closure are possible, preserving the exterior appearance is preferable when evidence suggests the doors are original.
During discussion commissioners asked about the age of a small front‑facing addition on a neighbor’s property (834 E. Magnolia) and the condition of roof volumes. One commissioner encouraged the applicant and designer to lower the proposed addition’s roof volume so it better matches the original roofline and to integrate siding in a way that does not emphasize the addition as a separate element.
The commission moved to schedule a site visit focused on the front doors and the windows, to review each window proposed for replacement, and to work with staff on alternative window designs that could better match historical sightlines. The motion carried; commissioners directed staff to coordinate the visit and the applicant to return with revised plans.
The commission also heard written support from the Magnolia Avenue neighborhood historic committee, which endorsed staff recommendations and thanked staff for their work on conservation guidelines.
The commission’s action requires the applicant to coordinate with staff on final details. If approved by staff and the commission after the site visit and submission of revised drawings, a certificate of appropriateness will be prepared and emailed to the applicant within 10 days, according to staff remarks at the meeting.
