[{"_1":2,"_99":-5,"_100":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6509342,"mediaKeyId","5429385-65c782abf4d57ffa68c413824f0f0c85","parentId",5429385,"title","Board allows simulated shake and architectural shingle options for Fulton Avenue Tudor roof","audioSeconds",2165,"startMs",1873000,"endMs",4038000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5429385-65c782abf4d57ffa68c413824f0f0c85&start=1873&end=4038","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5429385-65c782abf4d57ffa68c413824f0f0c85/thumbnail_1873000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6509342/San-Antonio/Bexar-County/Texas/Board-allows-simulated-shake-and-architectural-shingle-options-for-Fulton-Avenue-Tudor-roof","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6509342-134e6acca7352f9fe69cbc1bdc0450db/orig.mp4?Expires=1771149140&Signature=hiWZRLBnNzMeeRB95po4yvrCs1ErK7pLFEYj7kXXvyCEj~qN1cLxy1lMxroLrJwSE3Qa9QS7JQuBaO5IqXvjf9428KKnqxKS-ZTq3JvhlSmWgkr3Oj7jNb8xUGTlnjO2eviMG-rWeAlCrRsMyPZT~OTqIZ7rSSHYqY6-DBgtTdq98HQzPvhYOYdjyc80RCPqipEyvx3XGxqO~Voj5HXTmItbdTi5CUVgqzKyU5W7rVIcgBm1jykxw7UstSvz3dA8MP8htaT1pQU7QmmT32A~qUY8TAa9r2rkRisuYPYdPhrAtifO1Zq8W~45Z9c7IETSfG3X69~TU8IhctRv68DbKQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","San Antonio","date","2025-07-18T00:00:00Z","article","The Compliance and Technical Advisory Board approved staff recommendations Friday allowing replacement of the existing wood shake roof at 1320 Fulton Avenue with a material that matches the original in scale, color, texture, profile and dimension, including simulated cedar-shake products and some architectural asphalt shingles presented to the board.

Homeowner Valerie Baez told commissioners the wood shake was the principal aesthetic reason her family purchased the Tudor-style house in 2003, but that the roof is old, leaking light into the attic and allowing entry by animals. Baez said she has received multiple estimates for replacement and that full wood shake replacement could exceed $100,000. She presented a range of bids for alternative materials: an out‑of‑state estimate of about $57,000 for a synthetic shake product (provided as an “eagle‑eye” estimate without a site visit), a Fry Roofing in‑person estimate of $70,000–$80,000 for a simulated product, a Precision Construction estimate near $34,000 for a Grand Sequoia product, a Timberland product estimate around $45,000, and lower architectural-shingle bids from local contractors in the $21,000–$31,000 range.

Staff told the board the city’s guidelines do not require maintaining cedar shake where it is not feasible and that synthetic products that replicate shadow lines and dimensionality have been approved in other cases. Staff recommended the board accept replacement with a material that matches the existing roof in scale, color, profile and dimension while giving the applicant flexibility to pursue the product that best meets those criteria. The board’s motion approved staff’s recommendation with the stipulation that replacement material match the listed attributes; the motion also explicitly allowed consideration of the product samples and options presented during the hearing.

Board members and staff discussed life‑span and weight differences among materials. A staff member said a 50‑year expected service life was associated with some synthetic shake products; commissioners noted that asphalt architectural shingles typically do not carry a “lifetime” manufacturer warranty and advised Baez to verify warranties, weight and structural decking requirements with contractors. Several commissioners recommended that Baez also check with her insurer, noting recent storm and flooding claims and that an insurance claim could affect the replacement cost net of a deductible.

Baez asked whether any city financial assistance might be available; staff said the city does not provide direct roofing grants, but local nonprofits such as the Conservation Society offer building grants in the fall and the city’s substantial rehabilitation tax incentive may provide long‑term property tax relief for qualifying investments.

Vote: the motion passed 7–1 (Commissioner Garcia voted no). The board directed the applicant to work with staff on color selection and permitting and authorized staff to process permits consistent with the board’s approved criteria.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","San Antonio - Historic Compliance and Technical Advisory Board Jul 18, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","The Compliance and Technical Advisory Board approved staff recommendations Friday allowing replacement of the wood shake roof at 1320 Fulton Avenue with materials that match the original in scale, texture and profile, including simulated shake and some architectural asphalt products.","taxTitle","San Antonio, Bexar County, Texas","taxId",2771,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6509344,"San Antonio advisory board backs staff call to retain historic wood windows at Lowellwood house",1592,256000,1848000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5429385-65c782abf4d57ffa68c413824f0f0c85&start=256&end=1848","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5429385-65c782abf4d57ffa68c413824f0f0c85/thumbnail_256000.jpg","/articles/6509344/San-Antonio/Bexar-County/Texas/San-Antonio-advisory-board-backs-staff-call-to-retain-historic-wood-windows-at-Lowellwood-house","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6509344-ed3162ed1020dd432b71d3488c90dd8f/orig.mp4?Expires=1771149140&Signature=arznInyCUzs5FtPPdG5lLjRnw2JjhNzczqsrX5v8tQnboRccUHYdcU7M6Fbm~ab~2ItTR~vpkRkTDuiEVeZ8qNsmLFTvOunYSt7v6nF55O~9th4SCOEmSrlRZKJybueacKLIRBTBaZ9SC1obRSLF77V8vxp09JHzr-H7xrpu6ferkIXXO3hp9PS1sh5rX0w6aq5mInx0jYzQxwsZunrRhHFFMUNWhsVLeeH-UJ4aB0vm6e5eEJpF~8ypk-zdF-7E947v2OravIKK-IeHOS~qnEBPETcuINZnZ39xLn3haUbeDPPY77GjccE~-xP0w99goErEAXMvIX8gD9fRKDWKEw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Compliance and Technical Advisory Board voted Friday to support staff recommendations that 12 original wood windows at 135 West Lowellwood be repaired rather than replaced, and that three nonhistoric windows be replaced under staff stipulations.

The decision followed a presentation by homeowner and applicant Ron Alon, who asked the board to allow replacement of 15 windows — 12 original wood windows and three nonhistoric windows — with custom-fit Ply Gem vinyl windows. Alon's presentation noted cost and scheduling concerns with full restoration and offered to donate the removed original windows to local reuse organizations.

Staff recommended against wholesale replacement. An Office of Historic Preservation staff member explained that the board’s guidelines favor repairing original wood windows and allowing replacement in kind only when repair is not feasible; staff said the historic integrity of the original wood windows is the basis for the recommendation. After commissioners’ questions and discussion, Chair Juanita Sepulveda moved to support staff’s recommendation; the motion carried unanimously.

Alon told the board the house is a 1928 Spanish Revival in the Monte Vista Historic District and said the Ply Gem windows would be installed within the existing framing and would be visually indistinguishable from the originals. He said full restoration quotes he has been given verbally were “around the same price” as the Ply Gem replacement but that contractors were backed up and restoration could take months. Alon said Ply Gem replacements would cost about $5,800 compared with $36,000 for Pella wood windows and that refurbishing was “nearly the same price” as high-end replacement.

Board members and staff pressed Alon to obtain written restoration estimates from qualified preservation contractors and noted capacity constraints in the local preservation trades. An Office of Historic Preservation representative who inspected the property said the sash and frame still have substantial original fabric and appear repairable; staff said windows approved for replacement typically do not have the level of intact structure seen at 135 West Lowellwood.

Alon also said he plans to remove and donate the original windows to the Material Innovation Center or Habitat for Humanity and to restore an original wood entry door currently covered by a metal panel.

The board’s action: support staff’s recommendation that the 12 historic wood windows (identified by staff as windows numbered 4–15) be repaired and that the three existing nonhistoric windows (windows 1–3) be replaced subject to staff stipulations. The board asked the applicant to work with staff on next steps and follow the Office of Historic Preservation’s approval process for any replacement windows.

The vote was unanimous.","The Compliance and Technical Advisory Board voted to support staff guidance that 12 original wood windows at 135 West Lowellwood be repaired and only three already nonhistoric windows be replaced, rejecting the applicant's request to replace all 15 with vinyl units.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6509336,"Board approves modified front-yard gate on narrow lot at 528/530 Lee Street with 4‑foot height limit",1048,4156000,5204000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5429385-65c782abf4d57ffa68c413824f0f0c85&start=4156&end=5204","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5429385-65c782abf4d57ffa68c413824f0f0c85/thumbnail_4156000.jpg","/articles/6509336/San-Antonio/Bexar-County/Texas/Board-approves-modified-front-yard-gate-on-narrow-lot-at-528530-Lee-Street-with-4foot-height-limit","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6509336-fd007a2d1714cf09f5acd1addb8399e6/orig.mp4?Expires=1771149140&Signature=EADwouvZq~CUQy-ggZjRd-yr4UX53VSpTHEg3~Bkt-8Civ2WMOA7s5VkN0bOhKqZAxDdjBHcJ3xGUBY9Dg9FlBVLHRwqKNoYcMKy6H-oAFHPInHJjLB-LCJIt80hGdHLP3KTuZglzTDkkEvKjxfeRTUcG09RlY3LCvgoyF5q0F-VLLj-qQUu9fFNnYoW-ZURKwXh69s2jOc2I7poFCuQc4qCTYyJLf72gRgpeaSmFWeU03uDlt-tWkx7p-rQT0OJ00V4z6~aOPpO36Pz8ksKkTmwr36M5d~bn~u7wkleOyarzeleWX3fy6ItJ87trotNgtBKoIXFeOLR3qCKPxT6fw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Compliance and Technical Advisory Board approved a front-yard fence and gate configuration Friday for a unique lot with two houses at 528/530 Lee Street, permitting a design that projects to a porch column provided the height is limited to 4 feet and includes both a vehicle gate and a separate pedestrian gate.

Applicant Troy Najar presented a proposal for a 6-foot wood privacy car gate between two houses on a single lot; the two structures are staggered, with the second house set back from the street. Staff said a six‑foot privacy fence placed behind the front wall plane would be eligible for administrative approval, but a privacy fence projecting in front of the front wall plane is atypical and the board would need to consider the unusual lot pattern.

During discussion Najar said he plans to live in both structures and sought a configuration that would allow a vehicle to enter between the houses while keeping a separate pedestrian gate so he would not need to open the vehicle gate each time he entered or exited on foot. Commissioners noted the city code typically limits front‑yard fences visible from the street to 4 feet, and staff clarified the guidelines allow 6‑foot privacy fences only when the fence is behind the front wall plane of the street‑facing historic façade.

After discussion the board approved a motion to permit the proposed configuration with the stipulation that both the side pedestrian gate and the vehicle gate be 4 feet high. The motion passed with a single dissenting vote by Chair Juanita Sepulveda; other members voted aye. Staff and the applicant were instructed to work together on next steps and permitting.

Board members referenced a prior unusual case in King William where a similar configuration had been considered and said that while the proposal is unorthodox, allowing the lower 4‑foot projection with careful design is an acceptable compromise. Staff reminded the applicant that a 6‑foot privacy fence that does not project forward of the front wall plane would be eligible for administrative approval without board review.

Vote: motion carried (majority). The applicant was told to coordinate with Office of Historic Preservation staff for details and issuance of the certificate of appropriateness.","The Compliance and Technical Advisory Board approved a front-yard fence and gate configuration at 528/530 Lee Street with a 4-foot height in the configuration presented, allowing a pedestrian side gate and a vehicle drive gate set at 4 feet; the chair voted no.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Board allows simulated shake and architectural shingle options for Fulton Avenue Tudor roof

San Antonio advisory board backs staff call to retain historic wood windows at Lowellwood house

Board approves modified front-yard gate on narrow lot at 528/530 Lee Street with 4‑foot height limit