Historic Preservation Commission - Regular Meeting

Regular meeting of the historic preservation commission. It is Thursday, April 9 at 6PM. May we have a roll call, please?

Yes. Commissioner Rogers? Here. Commissioner Baker? Here. Commissioner Dedek?

Here.

Commissioner Rivas? Commissioner Speed? Commissioner Hayes?

Here.

And Commissioner James? Here. We have a quorum.

Thank you. I'd like to welcome everybody to tonight's meeting. At this time, please be sure your cell phone is on silent. Tonight's agenda includes a citizen comment period at the beginning of the meeting. You are welcome to speak on any topic.

Please be advised, however, if the topic you speak about is not on tonight's agenda. Commission members cannot respond due to requirements of the Texas Open Meetings Act, which requires the topics of discussion by the commission be posted seventy two hours in advance of the meeting. If the topic you wish to speak about is listed as a public hearing, you are welcome to speak for or against the item during the public hearing. If you speak during the citizen comment period about a public hearing topic on tonight's agenda, I ask that you not repeat the same comments again during the public hearing on the same topic. When speaking either during the citizen comment period or during a public hearing, you will approach the podium if in person or unmute yourself if virtual.

State your name and address. You are allowed to speak up to three minutes. When you begin speaking, the timer will start. When it turns yellow, you will hear a bell and have twenty seconds left. A bell will ring, and the timer will turn red when your time is up. Is there anyone signed up for the citizen comment period?

No one has signed up, but if anyone in the audience wishes to speak, they are welcome to.

Okay. Alright. Is there anybody in the audience that would like to speak during public comment period? Okay. So we'll move on to item number one, consider approval by motion of the 03/05/2026 regular meeting minutes. Is there a motion?

Move to approve.

And a second? I second. All right. Any discussion? Okay. May we have a roll call, please? Yes. Commissioner Baker?

Yes. Commissioner Dedek?

Yes.

Commissioner Hayes?

Yes.

Commissioner James? Yes. And Commissioner Rogers?

Yes. Alright. That passes. Alright. Moving on to item number two, HPC twenty six dash zero three, five one six West Hopkins Street. Hold a public hearing and consider a request for a certificate of appropriateness by Ryan Hildebrand on behalf of Britney Ferguson to allow the installation of a six foot tall wooden French Gothic style side yard fences. May we put have the staff presentation, please?

Yes. Good evening, commissioners. Allison Break, historic preservation officer. This property is located, within the Hopkins Street Historic District. It's South of Moore Street. It is a recorded Texas historic landmark, and it was listed on the National Register of Historic Places in 1984. It was evaluated in our historic resources survey with a high preservation priority. And the structure itself served as the first American Lutheran church. Then it was the Pentecostal Holiness Church through the mid twentieth century. And it still retains its church form.

In the 90s, it was converted to office and residential space. And it is architecturally and historically significant for its style and association with early Presbyterian church congregations in the community. The property lacks a traditional backyard, and the applicants are looking to create usable outdoor space for guests and provide increased privacy by installing these six foot tall fences along both of those side yards. Following the March 5 meeting, the applicant resubmitted a request for the installation of these two side yard fences using six foot tall French Gothic style pickets to create this outdoor space. A fence permit is required to be submitted for review prior to the installation of these fences, and it must meet the requirements set out in the land development code.

Nothing about the location has changed from the previous meeting, so the site plan still remains the same. Wood is a common fence material within the Hopkins Street Historic District, and there are several of these types of fences within the proximity to the subject property. Both of these fences are proposed to be located at or behind the front plane of the structure, which is recommended by our historic design guidelines. And the renderings show that the pickets have been spaced slightly wider than those of a traditional privacy fence, which helps it to feel less imposing. The fencing material could be easily removed in the future without impairing the essential form or integrity of the property.

The applicant has chosen a French Gothic style picket as recommended at the last meeting during its more complimentary to the building's architectural style, and there's another property within the Hopkins Street Historic District at 1104 West Hopkins that includes the same type of six foot tall picket. There were some drainage concerns that were spoken about at the last meeting, and the applicant or the property owner has since rerouted the storm gutters to pass behind the building instead of in the front. This will allow the water to drain entirely onto the subject property, and they have prevented anyone from being able to move a corrugated hose over a concrete wall into the adjacent driveway. Staff finds a request consistent with section four five two one I one g of the San Marcos development code and standards one, three, five, nine, and ten of the secretary of the interiors standards for rehabilitation. Excuse me.

Staff finds the request neutral regarding section four five two one I one e of the development code and standard number two of the secretary of the interior standards for rehabilitation. The applicant is present tonight if you have questions, but that concludes my presentation. Thank you.

Okay. Thank you. Would the applicant like to make a presentation?

Good evening, commissioners, neighbors. My name is Ryan Hildebrand, and I am the owner of 516 West Hopkins alongside my wife, Britney, who was who was unable to make it tonight. Before we discuss the design, I want to share that my wife, Britney, and I have a deep personal stake in this property. While rising property taxes and extenuating circumstances required our family to move our primary residence outside of San Marcos, we refused to sell the abbey. We aren't just owners.

We are neighbors in spirit who are invested in the city for the long haul. Being a good neighbor is a practice, not a phrase. At our last meeting, a neighbor voiced a concern regarding a drainage issue. I wanna update the commission that we took that feedback seriously and had the issue fully mitigated and resolved within the week. We bring that same level of care and professional responsiveness to every aspect of this property's management.

Another concern raised previously was that a fence might feel closed off for a former church. I'd like to offer a different perspective. Most of the historic homes on West Hopkins are private residences. The downtown Abbey is unique. It is one of the only buildings on the street that members of the public can actually visit, stay in, and experience.

However, to operate this asset safely, we needed to find boundary. This fence isn't meant to close off the church. It is the infrastructure that allows to keep it open and viable as a public facing landmark. Regarding the concern about the rhythm of the street, I believe Alison mentioned earlier that there are several French Gothic style fences along the street. And I feel like while the Downtown Abbey is unique in that it is large and is is a landmark of the neighborhood, I do think that this style of fence with the vertical cadence will complement the French Gothic design of the church as it was originally intended.

I also own and operate a contracting and design company, and we will be personally overseeing this custom build. We aren't looking for the easiest path, but for the right one. I ask for your approval tonight to install a fence that respects the craftsmanship of the past, the needs of our neighbors, and the continued public life of the downtown Abbey. Thank you.

Great thank you very much. Right do we have any public speakers for this agenda item.

Hello, esteemed committee members. Thanks for having us here. My name is Elizabeth Emberson. My family and I reside at 503 Harvey Street. First, I'd like to apologize for the last meeting.

I'm used to coming into these chambers to speak at city council meetings on water usage in our town and other subjects I have a great passion for. I am also passionate about historic preservation, but listening to your helpful comments, I've learned that this is a space for factual items in regard to historic preservation. Thank you all so much for your gentle guidance through this forum and the important work that you undertake with the historic preservation of our town. Not a day goes by that I don't walk around the neighborhood and I'm thankful for the important work that y'all do. I'm here to speak today on agenda item number two, the request for approval of the installation of a fence in front of 516 West Hopkins.

This property is one of, if not the most recognizable historic properties in the town. It's also recognized nationally and registered in the National Register of Historic Places, as you all well know. It is absolutely stunning in its architecture and the level to which it has been restored and maintained by the Kesters for all those years and now its new owners. I know it is this committee's goal to honor and maintain that standard for this and all of our historic buildings. I wanted to do some research of my own to find out what adhering to that standard looks like in our city for such unique property.

So I got into the car and drove around town to every church I could find both in and out of the historic districts within a few mile radius. I have submitted photos of these 10 surrounding churches, both actively churches and decommissioned for your review this evening. What I noticed each of these properties had in common was a complete absence of any type of fence with the exception of one temporary fence for construction purposes, fencing surrounding children's playgrounds for their safety, and the occasional exterior HVAC unit, but just like a little tiny one around that. There is also one church that appears to have a small corral space behind it for horses, very Texas of them. In addition to the complete absence of permanent fencing for anything other than an occasional playground, I noticed that even those fences did not typically touch the structure of the building and were located behind the buildings.

I thought that may give you some food for thought while you are considering this request to significantly alter the face of one of San Marcos' and our nation's most iconic historic properties. Thank you for your time.

Thank you. Do we have anyone else that would like to speak on this topic? All right. I will now close the public hearing. Oh, I think Oh, I'm sorry. Never mind. Hearing is still open.

I'm sorry. My name is Donnie Walt. I live at 524 West Hopkins next to the church. And first, I'd like to thank the owner for mitigating the water drainage issues so that now it's no longer running down our driveway. So I appreciate that.

At the same time, I happen to drive around San Marcos within the two mile area and noticed the same thing as Elizabeth. That is, there aren't any fences by the sides of churches. When they bought this property, they knew that there wasn't a backyard. They knew that there wasn't space there. And so now to come in and try to, if you will, artificially create some kind of space like that, when there wasn't any in the first place, think takes away from the structure.

And I think because it is a church, and most churches have this open look, that that would impede that. I think it takes away from the structure itself, whether it's Gothic pointed or not. A six foot high privacy fence is just that. It's a six foot high privacy fence. And it doesn't fit the character of any of the churches nearby, and this one in particular, because of its historic significance and the fact that hundreds, if not thousands, of people drive back and forth past it all the time.

Thank you.

Thank you. Is there anyone else that would like to speak on this? Please go ahead.

Good evening. I'm Jan Emberson, and I also live next door to the property at 524 West Hopkins Street. And, you know, first of all, I just wanted to say, we've been here two and a half years, and I'm just real appreciative of y'all coming up here and taking such time to really care for the charm of the city. I I haven't ever lived in a town where this was the case. So I do appreciate that.

The the main thing I have as far as an issue with this fence, and I won't repeat what they said. I agree with that. But, really, I wanna emphasize the height of it. The height is is not congruent, I don't believe, with this historic building. Thank you.

Thank you. Is there anyone else? Alright. We will now close the public hearing. Is there a motion?

I'll make a motion to pass, for the purpose of discussion.

Is there a second?

Second.

Alright. We are now open for discussion.

I think that this this fence is a lot better than the last one. The last one would have upset the rhythm of the street because it was just there's a thing called massing that, you know, it would have been just a solid thing of wood across. This gives a little space in between. It's lighter feeling. It's it's correct. It may be a little bit tall, but, you know, we have, got to we've got to, you know, make these make these buildings transition into the next, you know, 100 years. This is over a 100 years old. You know, we've got to make it usable. It also, the fence will not be a permanent structure. No fence like that is ever a permanent structure.

So it will not affect permanently the the structure itself. So that's my opinion. I do not believe that this would affect affect the rhythm of the street like the last one. The last one would have been pretty rough. Yeah.

I have a question for the applicant. I just wanna if this the fence is representative as being white in the images here. Will it be white? Can

you come

to the podium, please? Thank you.

I I think the I think the white would make the most sense, but I'm open if you wanna talk about different colors, I'm totally fine with changing that.

Okay. I'm just gonna I was yeah. I just would prefer be a color. I mean, it can be white for in my opinion. But that it be not be just a wood color. You know? Because the wood color, you see those fences all over, but they're usually around newer newer houses, and they're kind of the dog ear. And they have a particular look to them that's very, I'd say, nonhistoric. So I think that the white or, you know, a similar color that kind of works with the building is much better. I mean, just looking at that image, I can tell that it's much more in keeping with the building.

I have a question about placement of the forward fence on the left hand side. So on your site plan, it shows that it's further back by what I think is the AC unit on the left hand side. But this picture right here, it feels like the fence is at the very forward plane of the house. And so I I just wanna make sure that you're where is it supposed to be represented?

Sure. So I will say my ability to create rendered images is is subpar at best. But I'm I'm I'm definitely getting there. So where where it's placed now is actually it's about six feet behind the most frontal face of the building. It

it will move kind

of behind the the turret as it as it stands.

Can you bring a picture up of the whole building?

Is this better or worse? It's like the eye it's like

the eye doctor. Okay. So you're talking about on that left hand

oh. Sorry.

On that left hand side, that turret being behind that section?

Right. This section being on the left hand side being just on the other side of that turret, which there's another corner that if there's another picture kind of on the left hand side, you might be able to see it.

So that second corner behind the turret?

Yeah. Yeah.

I think that's on page site plan at right before the site plan on page 45.

Yeah. I think that's it.

Yeah. Do you see kind of where that sidewalk right there is? And that's behind the turret.

I know. And the not the last time, but the time before you were here. I'm glad that you've changed the the fencing style, but I had asked about moving the fence back even further to where right about that that first AC unit where you're right in front of it just to kinda keep it further back from the the front plane in helping it not seem so obtrusive. Is that something you would consider?

That's absolutely something I would consider.

We'll have more discussion, and then we can make it. Alright.

Would that require a new application if he was to

No. Back down?

I think the commission could

amend it. The commission could approve with the a condition that the fence is located, you know

In front.

In front of I don't know the exact I don't know how far back that is from the front, but, you know, within as as noted in front of the AC unit or some sort of conditional approval. There's no need to make an amendment to the approval. You could just make a conditional approval.

Right. Any more Would that require a new motion, or do we

I don't think so. Doug, would that

Female

I'll make the motion if you want. You want me to

cancel the other one and start No.

Just a second. I want us to finish having the discussion, you know, so everybody has an option to voice their opinion.

I appreciate you coming back after I suggested a different picket. It looks much more appropriate, and I echo what commissioner, Baker said. And also, I as a personal preference, I would like to see the fence painted white, just not a raw wood, so it would tie in better and seem more purposeful with the church.

So I will ask of, Mr. Montgomery is our legal counsel tonight. Would we need to they've made a motion to approve. Do they need to make an Withdraw the and make another with the conditional approval.

Well you could vote to deny the motion to approve and then you can make another motion to approve with conditions. I believe you could make an amendment to the motion. Okay. Also be voted on first. Right. Might be cleaner just to to deny the first motion and make a new motion.

Okay. We can do that. Alright. So right now, we have a motion to approve. Approve as, presented. As presented? Yes. And a yes means yes, and a no means no. Correct.

K. So I'm going to now take a roll call vote, and I will start with, commissioner Hayes. No. Commissioner James. No. Commissioner Dedek. No. Commissioner Baker. No. And Commissioner Rogers? No. Okay. So that motion is deny or doesn't pass. We'll need another motion.

Okay. I guess I can, if it's alright Sure. Propose a motion that we approve the installation of the fence as described, but in addition, that it be painted white to match the trim of the building. And second is that it's moved back to within five feet of the exterior AC unit visible in the image there on the left hand side of the building facing the building.

I'll second that.

Any discussion on that? Okay. Can we get a roll call, please? Yes. Commissioner Baker?

Yes.

Commissioner Hayes?

Yes.

Commissioner James? Yes.

Did I say Baker? Commissioner Didek?

Yes.

Okay. And commissioner Rogers? Yes. Okay. That passes. Alright. Thank you very much. Moving on to item number three. Public hearing HPC 26Dash041114WestHopkinsStreet. Hold a public hearing. Consider a request for a certificate of appropriateness by Sean DuPont to allow the replacement of the existing fiber cement skirting with stucco. May we have the staff presentation?

Yes. Allison Brake, historic preservation officer. This property is also located within the Hopkins Street Historic District. It is South Of Johnson Avenue. It is not a recorded Texas historic landmark, and it is not on the national register.

It was evaluated with a high preservation priority in the- recent historic resources survey it's noted for its high degree of integrity. Which in reflects early twentieth century neighborhood development. The intact craftsman style bungalow includes clipped gabled ends, original wood siding, wood windows, and the original wood original front door, along with its craftsman style porch supports. The brick brick piers at the porch steps are also noted within the database. And it does show up on the 19 I wanna say that was 1930.

Yeah, nineteen thirties sandboard map. The applicant is proposing to replace the existing fiber cement skirting material with stucco. He cites significant deterioration of the current material along with the desire for a more durable alternative. Historic design guidelines state that skirting should be repaired or replaced if missing or deteriorated and should match the original and design in detail. The existing material is fiber cement and was installed in the late nineteen nineties.

Solid materials like brick and stucco are discouraged due to ventilation concerns along with visual impact, but the applicant has indicated that the new skirting will include venting and will have a smooth a finish as possible to lessen that visual impact. The existing landscaping that you see in the front will also help lessen that visual impact that will help screen that. There are several examples of stucco skirts within the well, not just Hopkins Street, but also the San Antonio Street Historic District. The house at 816 West Hopkins Street was just approved for stucco last year. The new skirting will be differentiated from the old and will not destroy features and the spatial relationships and could be replaced in the future without impairing the historic integrity of the structure.

Staff finds the request consistent with sections with the following standards one, two, three, nine, and 10 of the secretary of the interior standards and neutral against section four five two one I one g of the development code and standard number six of the secretary of the interior standards for rehabilitation. The applicant is present tonight, and that concludes my presentation.

Thank you. Would the applicant like to make a presentation?

Good evening, commissioners. Sean DuPont, 1114 West Hopkins. I just wanna spruce up the house I've owned for twenty three years. Fiber cement or hardy backer, people call it, is broken all around, and it was added in the night nineties. And I just wanna make the house look a little better. That's it. Alright. Any questions? I'm here. Thank you.

Thank you.

Alright. Is there anyone, any public speakers for this agenda item? All right. We will now close the public hearing. Is there a motion?

I'll make a motion to pass as presented. Is

there a second? Any discussion?

Yeah. I have no problem approving this. I mean, if the current state of it was put in the nineties, that's seems like replacing it would not damage the integrity of the property. I think it's fine.

Alright. Commissioner Adita? Do you have anything you want to say?

I mean, as long as the new material looks similar to the old material, which it appears to in the images, then I don't see a problem with it.

Okay. Alright. Can we get a roll call, please? Yes. Commissioner Hayes?

Yes. Commissioner Dedek?

Yes. Commissioner Baker? Yes. Commissioner James? Yes. Commissioner Rogers?

Yes. Alright. That passes.

Alright. Moving on to item number four, public hearing, HPC 26 Dash 05 of 909 West Hopkins Street. Hold a public hearing and consider a request for a certificate of appropriateness by Pat Tons on behalf of David Pritchard to allow the replacement of the existing composite shingle roof with a five v crimp metal roof. May we please have the staff presentation?

Yes. Allison Break, historic preservation officer. This property is also located within the Hopkins Street Historic District. It's South Of Travis Street, North Of Mitchell Avenue. Again, not a recorded Texas historic landmark.

It's not on the national register. It was evaluated with a medium preservation priority in the 2019 research historic resources survey, and it was noted as a fair example of style. The property owner is proposing to replace his shingled roof with a metal five v crimp roof, and that's the type that uses the exposed fasteners. The roof itself sustained significant hail damage, I think, in the last hailstorm that we had. And so they are looking for a more durable replacement material.

The minimal traditional style residence has vinyl siding. The original wood, light windows, and there is a bay window on the front facade. There is a historic aged garage that is connected to the house by a covered breezeway. And the historic resources survey notes that the structure was constructed around 1950. However, it does appear on the nineteen forties or the 1944 Sanborn map.

So from '44 to '50. There are other metal roofs within this hop or within Hopkins Street and other districts. It is a common material for this for roofs. The property that is adjacent to and across the street from this particular subject property, you can throw a stone and you'll find a a metal roof. The roof shape will be retained, and there's no indication that the composition shingle roofing material is original to the home.

The changing of the material will not destroy historic features, materials, or spatial relationships, and again, is compatible with historic materials within the district. Staff finds a request consistent with sections four, five, two, and I one g and four, five, two, one, I one h of the development code and standards one, two, three, five, nine, and nine of the secretary of the interior standards for rehabilitation. And staff finds a request neutral regarding standards four and six of the secretary of the interior standards for rehabilitation. The applicant is present, and that concludes my presentation. Thank you.

The applicant like to make a presentation? Thank you.

Thank you, commissioners. I appreciate the opportunity to come before you. Pat Tons is my contractor, and he's having surgery today. So I'm the homeowner at 909 West Hopkins Street, David Pritchard. I just wanna say she was correct.

The hailstorms a couple years ago destroyed the roof, which was very old anyway. I have decided to pay additional money over my insurance to get a metal roof that fits in with the neighborhood and provides more, I would say, permanent coverage on my roof. And I think it adheres to many of the roofs in the neighborhood around me. And so I appreciate y'all's consideration, and I'll be happy to answer any questions. Thank you.

Alright. Thank you very much. Is there anyone here to speak of public comments on this hearing item? Okay. Seeing none, can we get a motion? You have to close the public hearing. Oh, I'm sorry. I will now close the public hearing. Now can we get a motion?

I move to approve.

I second Anybody

can.

Any discussion?

I just have a quick question. It going to what color is it going to be? Is there going to be, like, just the metal or

Yes, sir, the gray metal.

Okay.

Any more discussion or questions? Okay. We have a motion and a second. Can we get a roll call, please?

Yes. Commissioner James? Yes. Commissioner Baker? Yes. Commissioner Hayes?

Yes.

Commissioner Dedek?

Yes.

Commissioner Rogers?

Yes. Okay. That motion passes.

Alright. We are now moving on to item number five, updates. Any updates on the agenda?

The only update that I have is that phase two of the Dumber School Home Economics building is completed. There's just some touch up paint around the door, but it has all new windows, a new new set of doors, new siding, new roof, new foundation, new skirting. It looks great. I'm working for preservation month is next month, and I'm working on trying to set up some sort of rededication of that structure. So once I have details, I will hopefully have you all come out and be a part of Yeah, that celebrate.

Yeah. So It's exciting. Mhmm. All right. Anything else? All right. So we'll move to question and answer session with the press and public. This is an opportunity for the press and public and the audience to ask questions related to only items on this agenda. Is there anyone in the audience who wishes to ask a question? No one online? All right. Seeing, hearing none, we'll move to the next item, which is adjournment.

We'll need a motion.

Can we

get a move a motion?

I'll make a motion to adjourn.

Can we get a second?

I'll second.

Alright. And a roll call vote, please? Yes. Commissioner Diedek?

Yes.

Commissioner Hayes?

Yes.

Commissioner James? Yes. Commissioner Baker? Yes. Commissioner Rogers?

Yes.

Alright. We are adjourned at 06:34. Thank you all.