The City of San Antonio Compliance and Technical Advisory Board (a city-appointed advisory body) on March 21 reviewed several historic-district cases, referring a contentious roof-replacement matter at 507 Ford Drive for further study and approving or conditioning multiple other applications, including fence and parking requests.

The board referred the 507 Ford Drive case after public testimony from neighborhood association representatives and an exchange between commissioners, the property owner and the contractor about unpermitted work, material options and cost barriers. Neighbors urged restoration of original clay tiles; the owner and contractor said replacement materials and costs were a concern. After a motion to accept staff recommendations failed, commissioners voted to refer the matter to a working committee and schedule a site visit to gather more information.

Why it matters: The referral pauses an immediate decision on whether the existing replacement roofing material is acceptable for the Monticello Park historic district and directs staff and commissioners to study alternatives, costs and compliance steps before a final certificate of appropriateness is issued.

Key outcomes
- The board referred the 507 Ford Drive roof-replacement case to a working committee for further study and a site visit. The referral followed disagreement among commissioners over whether the current replacement material preserves the house’s historic character.
- The board approved a fence decision at 808 N. Pine Street with a condition limiting fence and gate heights (gates to not exceed 4 feet 6 inches) and removing certain arched entry elements where they exceed the height limit.
- The board required 50% front-yard landscaping and limited the extent of gravel/parking in front of 125 Paso Hondo (case 2025-058), denying the applicant’s full proposal for parking in the front yard.
- For a commercial/residential property on Harding Boulevard (case 2024-354), staff and the applicant agreed to repair or selectively replace 15 wooden windows, follow established replacement standards and avoid stucco cladding where not recommended in the guidelines; the board concurred and directed staff to continue consultations with the owner.
- The board approved a fence at 133 West Craig Place in the Montevista Historic District, subject to payment of a $500 fee before issuance of the certificate of appropriateness.

507 Ford Drive (roof replacement)
Neighborhood association representatives said the house at 507 Ford Drive is an architecturally significant property in Monticello Park and argued the original clay tiles were removed without a certificate of appropriateness and that the replacement is a low-cost simulation that degrades the home’s historic character. A representative identified themselves as Pan Carpender of the Monticello neighborhood association; association members emphasized the roof’s historic value and asked that it be restored to original clay tile.

City staff recounted prior enforcement attempts dating to early 2024, noting contractors performed work without the required permits and certificates. The owner told commissioners she had not been approached with assistance programs and said she relied on her contractor’s advice. The contractor said the substitute product has been used elsewhere but acknowledged it does not perfectly match the original clay profile.

Commissioners expressed concern about both historic integrity and the practical barriers to an expensive clay-tile replacement. After staff read recommendations and commissioners debated, a motion to accept staff recommendations failed. Commissioners then moved to refer the case to a working committee for further study and to arrange a site visit; staff said a city representative (Brian) would coordinate the visit.

Fence and gate at 808 N. Pine Street (HDRC case 2025-041)
Applicant Marco Ramírez sought approval for a front yard fence and an arched pedestrian entry. Staff recommended approval with stipulations limiting the overall fence height to four feet and restricting gate/arch elements. Commissioners approved the recommendation with a motion that set a 4-foot limit on fences and a 4-foot-6-inch limit on gates and vehicle-access openings; the motion passed on a roll call vote.

125 Paso Hondo (HDRC case 2025-058) — parking/gravel in front yard
The applicant for 125 Paso Hondo requested wider vehicle access and front-yard parking. Staff and the historic-review committee recommended limiting paved/gravel parking to preserve a minimum of 50% front-yard landscaping. Commissioners adopted staff recommendations, denying the full front-yard parking request and directing the owner to replace a damaged sidewalk and to limit gravel to meet the 50% landscaping guideline.

310 Harding Boulevard (case 2024-354) — windows and cladding
The property owner, represented by René Lapuente, said many wood windows in the commercial/residential block behind a nearby Walmart are severely deteriorated and not salvageable. Staff recommended repair of a specified number of wood windows, following established standards for replacement when required, and recommended against stucco replacement of existing cladding. The board concurred and asked staff to work with the owner on acceptable window and cladding solutions.

133 West Craig Place (case 2025-601) — fence in Montevista district
A property owner sought approval for an iron security fence after reporting thefts and security concerns. The board approved the fence with staff stipulations and required payment of a $500 fee prior to issuance of a certificate of appropriateness. The applicant’s representative described recent criminal activity motivating the installation and told commissioners that structural changes to the fence would be costly.

Consent agenda and administrative notes
The board approved consent agenda items (including cases listed in the meeting packet as items 2, 3 and 4) by roll call. Staff reminded applicants that approvals do not replace required building permits and that certificates of appropriateness will be mailed within 10 days. The board reiterated that work cannot begin until all required permits and certificates are issued.

What’s next
The working committee will investigate alternative roofing materials, cost implications and potential funding or incentives; staff will schedule a site visit and provide commissioners with further materials. Applicants with approved conditions must meet those stipulations before certificates of appropriateness are issued.

Reported by the City of San Antonio Compliance and Technical Advisory Board meeting on March 21, 2025.