Historic-design panel approves relocation of utility building and added trees for Broadway lot

On May 6 the San Antonio Historic and Design Review Commission approved a substitute motion requiring the relocation of Building 1 to the west/alley side of the lot at 31611 Broadway and adding perimeter landscaping, including additional trees. The action followed extended discussion about the placement of what several commissioners called "utilitarian" structures on a prominent Broadway corner.

The applicant, Lorena Gomez Farias of KPNJ, told the commission the restroom and other small buildings were placed to serve seasonal events in the center of the site and to connect to Broadway. "The restroom building needs to be situated by the CPS pool that's coming up from Broadway," Gomez Farias said, and she noted the team had "added a trellis" and a mural so the structures "really don't look like a utilitarian building." She also said the owner had expressed resistance to moving Building 1 back from its proposed location.

Commissioners focused on two themes: utility constraints (sewer and electrical connections) and the site's landscape quality. "I still have concerns about the siting of the two, what are generally I see as utilitarian buildings on main thoroughfares, on Broadway and on Newell," said a commissioner who raised the initial siting questions. Another commissioner pressed that the absence of trees made the proposed slab feel like a "heat sink": "It has no trees," the commissioner said, urging more interior and perimeter landscaping.

After debate the commission moved in stages. An initial motion to approve with standard staff stipulations resulted in a split vote and failed. A subsequent substitute motion — moved on the floor and amended to require additional landscaping and relocation of Building 1 to the alley — carried on roll call. The transcript records multiple roll-call entries by name; the substitute motion passed on a recorded roll call with a majority in favor (motion carries). Staff will work with the applicant to document the relocated Building 1 plan and the required landscaping before staff issues a certificate of appropriateness.

The applicant told commissioners she would report back to the owner about the required changes; she also said the owner had previously told her he would not move the building. "He already told me he wouldn't move the building," Gomez Farias said in the hearing, a statement commissioners noted while describing their options if the owner declines to accept the stipulations. Staff said OHP would advise the applicant on next steps and enforcement options if required.

The commission's motion does not itself grant a permit; staff reiterated that issuance of a certificate of appropriateness and any building permits remain conditional on staff review of the updated documents and stipulations being met. The commission asked staff to continue working with the applicant ahead of the next meetings and to confirm coordination with CPS on pole and transformer locations where feasible.