San Antonio Building Standards Board orders demolition or repair for five hazardous properties

The San Antonio Building Standards Board on March 12 ordered demolition or repair actions for multiple hazardous properties across the city, voting 5–0 on several demolition orders and approving a reset for one property while directing staff to verify repair plans.

The board approved staff recommendations to declare 115 Allsup Street, 172 North San Felipe Avenue, 839 Potomac and 4238 Nogales Street public nuisances and ordered demolition and securing of those sites within 30 days. For 212 Go Forth Drive the board found the main structure feasible to repair, reset the case to allow staff review of a scope of work, timeline and proof of financial ability, and ordered demolition of the accessory structure within 30 days.

Why it matters: Board action leads to city abatement or owner-required repairs and may reduce neighborhood safety risks cited by staff and residents; several properties are near schools or have repeated evidence of vagrancy and criminal complaints.

Staff presentations and public testimony

Crystal Town, a Dangerous Premises Officer with the City of San Antonio Development Services Department, recommended demolition for 115 Allsup Street after a DART (Dangerous Assessment Response Team) inspection found exposed, rotted structural members, missing foundation elements and interior conditions unsafe for habitation. Town told the board the property “is in violation of City code Article 8, Chapter 6” and staff recommended demolition.

San Antonio Police Officer Anthony Pena testified that 115 Allsup had generated narcotics complaints and violent disturbances. “This property came to, came to our attention, for the complaints of narcotics,” Pena said, and told the board that six people were arrested during the DART execution and that Child Protective Services removed a child found inside the house. After staff and police testimony the board voted to demolish and secure 115 Allsup within 30 days (motion adopted 5–0).

On 172 North San Felipe Avenue Dangerous Premises Officer Jared Collins presented photos showing missing rafters, exposed interior framing and roof failure. Collins said no scope of work, permits or financial proof had been submitted. Family members appeared: Richard Gonzales, who said he is the grandson of the owner and holds power of attorney, told the board he planned to demolish and rebuild and that he is a licensed contractor; he said he had begun cleanup. “I agree with the demolition of the property because I was gonna knock it down anyways,” Gonzales said. Relatives asked the board for time to resolve probate and title; the board nevertheless voted to order demolition within 30 days (5–0).

At 212 Go Forth Drive, Officer John Garza recommended repair of the main house but demolition of a 400‑square‑foot accessory structure because of extensive interior and roof damage and evidence of vagrancy. Lisa Bustos, the daughter of one of the heirs and a family representative, said she had contacted a general contractor and title company and asked the board for 90–120 days to assemble a scope, timeline and financing. The board discussed limits created by lack of clear title and recessed briefly to consult legal counsel in executive session (no action taken there). The board then reset the main‑structure case to allow staff review of required paperwork (scope, timeline, proof of financial ability) and ordered demolition of the accessory structure; the motion passed 4–1, with one dissent.

Cynthia Santana, Dangerous Premises Officer, recommended demolition of 839 Potomac after staff found missing siding, exposed studs, repeated break‑ins and no active permits. Maria Navarro, who identified herself as representing Kiavi, the foreclosing lender, said the company had boarded and secured the property and asked about 60 days to determine whether to rehab or demolish. The board ordered demolition within 30 days, vacating and securing the site (5–0).

Jaime Hasso presented 4238 Nogales Street, documenting sinking foundation, exposed subfloor and repeated abatements; a representative of the Los Arvinas Homeowners Association described neighborhood safety concerns from vacant properties. The board ordered demolition within 30 days (5–0).

What the board ordered and next steps

- 115 Allsup Street: declared a public nuisance; demolition ordered within 30 days; property to be vacated, secured, utilities cut and debris removed (vote 5–0). - 172 N. San Felipe Ave.: declared a public nuisance; demolition ordered for main and accessory within 30 days; vacate/secure/utilities cut (vote 5–0). - 212 Go Forth Drive: main structure found feasible to repair; case reset to require a scope of work, timeline and proof of financial ability for staff review; accessory structure ordered demolished within 30 days (vote 4–1). - 839 Potomac: declared a public nuisance; demolition ordered within 30 days; vacate/secure/utilities cut (vote 5–0). - 4238 Nogales Street: declared a public nuisance; demolition ordered within 30 days; vacate/secure/utilities cut (vote 5–0).

Several speakers emphasized constraints on owners and heirs: Lisa Bustos told the board she could access financing and estimated accessory demolition costs of $7,000–$12,000 and main‑structure stabilization at roughly $15,000–$30,000 but said probate and title transfer remain unresolved; the board required documented scope, timeline and proof of funds before resetting or allowing repairs to proceed.

Administrative notes

Staff announced the BSB full board meeting was rescheduled from May 21 to May 28, reminded members of an April 1 financial report deadline, and noted pending reappointment memos for several board members. The board adjourned by unanimous consent.

Reporting notes and attribution

Quotes and direct statements in this story come from the meeting transcript and are attributed to the speaker who made them in the hearing. Where ownership, title or timeline remained unresolved at the hearing, the board either ordered demolition or required staff review of submitted documentation before granting more time.

(For provenance and a list of motions, vote tallies and evidence segments supporting each decision, see the meeting actions and provenance fields attached to this package.)