SlideShare a Scribd company logo
CITY OF ALAMO HEIGHTS
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Council Members
FROM: Lety Hernandez, Director of Community Development Services
SUBJECT: Case No. 914F – 231 Encino Ave
Request of Lisa Nichols of Nic Abbey Homes, owner, for the significance review of the
existing main structure located at 231 Encino Ave in order to demolish 100% of the
existing single-family residence under Demolition Review Ordinance No. 1860 (April 12,
2010).
DATE: June 10, 2024
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
The property is zoned SF-A and is located on the east side of the street between Mayflower St
and Mary D Ave.
The Architectural Review Board considered the request at their January 16, 2024 meeting and
voted unanimously to declare the existing main structure as significant and recommended denial
of the demolition as requested.
City Council considered the board’s recommendation at their February 12, 2024 meeting and
voted to enact the 1st
90-day delay that would expire on May 12, 2024. City Council
reconsidered the case at their April 29, 2024 meeting and voted to enact a 2nd
delay for an
additional sixty (60) days resulting in a new expiration date of June 28, 2024.
POLICY ANALYSIS
 Chapter 5 – Buildings and Building Regulation, Article IX. – Demolition
Demolition shall mean any intentional or unintentional act of dismantling, pulling down,
destroying, removing, razing or moving a structure or any structural portion thereof, or
commencing the work of moving or of total or substantial destruction of a structure or portion
thereof. For the purposes of demolition review as described in article IX, demolition is defined
quantitatively as:
(1) Removal or encapsulation of more than twenty-five (25) percent of the framed structure
of exterior walls facing public streets, or a street-facing elevation if the tract of land is
landlocked; or,
(2) Removal or encapsulation of more than fifty (50) percent of the framed structure of all
exterior walls and/or roofs.
Exception: Minor repair and routine maintenance.
Demolition review shall mean the public process of presenting proposed demolition and/or
replacement projects to the Architectural Review Board and/or City Council.
Significant structure shall mean any structure or portion thereof that in whole or in part meets
one (1) or more criteria in section 5-134(h) and has been so determined by the city council.
Section 5-134(h): The architectural review board shall consider the following criteria when
determining the significance, as defined in this chapter, of existing structures:
(1) Was the structure designed by a noted architect?
(2) Has the structure been listed as having historic significance by any local, regional, state or
historic agency or society?
(3) Does the structure exhibit characteristics of a distinct architectural style?
(4) Does the structure belong to a distinctive set of buildings, such as a single structure
belonging to a row of similar structures?
(5) Is the structure a significant part of the fabric of the community due to its age, unique
architecture, historical significance or physical placement?
Section 5-135, Demolition Delay
(a) Where a demolition delay is determined necessary, the city council may delay the
issuance of the demolition permit for a maximum of ninety (90) days from the date of the
action designating the existing structure as significant. This delay may be extended by the
city council for an additional ninety (90) days at any time prior to expiration of the
original delay, but such extension shall occur only once, for a maximum delay not to
exceed one hundred eighty (180) days from the date of action designating the structure as
significant. If the city and property owner have not reached a mutual agreement on the
future of the structure, within said one hundred eighty (180) days, the demolition review
shall be approved.
(b) Where a demolition delay has been determined necessary, the community has the
opportunity to seek out persons who might be willing to purchase, preserve, rehabilitate
or restore such structure rather than demolish the structure, and to limit the detrimental
effect of demolition on the historical architectural resources of the city. Likewise, the
owner has the opportunity to resubmit a revised application to the city for review and
comment.
(c) Where a demolition delay has been determined necessary, the city shall post on the
property, and on the city's website, a public notice announcing the demolition delay. Such
notice shall be posted within three (3) business days of the city council’s action and shall
remain in place for the entire period of the demolition delay.
(d) Notwithstanding the designation of a structure as a significant structure, the director may
issue a demolition permit at any time after receipt of written advice from the city council
to the effect that the city is satisfied that there is no reasonable likelihood that either the
owner or some other person is willing to purchase, preserve, rehabilitate or restore such
structure, or when additional information warrants a termination of the demolition delay.
(e) In a case where the property owner or authorized agent desires only to have the
architectural review board make a determination of a structure's significance, the property
owner or authorized agent shall submit a request for such action along with a non-
refundable fee. The city and the property owner or authorized agent shall then follow in
similar manner the requirements set out in section 5-134. The city shall establish a date
after the end of the public comment period for the architectural review board to hear the
request for a determination from the property owner or authorized agent.
Section 5-136, Demolition review approval.
(a) Demolition review approval shall be granted for the following conditions:
(1) When a demolition delay has been established and the maximum delay period of one
hundred eighty (180) days has expired, or
(2) The existing structure proposed for demolition is not determined significant, as
defined in this chapter, and
(3) The replacement structure for any structure previously approved under demolition
review is determined to be compatible, as defined in this chapter.
(b) Once demolition review approval is granted by city council, the director shall have the
authority to issue a demolition permit per article IV of this chapter upon request by the
property owner or authorized agent.
A replacement structure is still not proposed at this time. Construction of a new single-family
residence would be subject to compatibility review by the ARB and approval by the City
Council.
Prior to the April 29, 2024 meeting, the applicant informed staff that they were actively
marketing the property since the initial delay. No additional updates have been provided.
The maximum amount of extensions was reached with the enactment of the 2nd
60-day delay.
Section 5-135(a) requires that the demolition review be approved.
FISCAL IMPACT
No projected fiscal impact from this project has been calculated.
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A – Web Packet
Attachment B – Response Cards
__________________________
Lety Hernandez
Director
__________________________
Buddy Kuhn
City Manager
CITY OF ALAMO HEIGHTS
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
6116 BROADWAY
SAN ANTONIO, TX 78209
210-826-0516
Architectural Review Board Meeting
January 16, 2024 – 5:30 P.M.
Take notice that a Regular Architectural Review Board meeting of the City of Alamo Heights will be held on Tuesday,
January 16, 2024 at 5:30pm in the City Council Chambers, located at 6116 Broadway St, San Antonio, Texas, 78209, to
consider and act upon any lawful subjects with may come before it.
INSTRUCTIONS FOR TELECONFERENCE: The City will make reasonable efforts to allow members of the public
to participate via audio by dialing 1-346-248-7799 and entering access number 86801845240#. If you would like to
speak on a particular item, when the item is considered, press *9 to “raise your hand”. Citizens will have three (3)
minutes to share their comments. The meeting will be recorded.
The City cannot guarantee participation by phone due to unforeseen technical difficulties or provide prior notice if
they occur; therefore, the City urges your in-person attendance if you require participation.
Case No. 914F – 231 Encino Ave
Request of Lisa Nichols of Nic Abbey Homes, owner, for the significance review of the existing main structure located at
231 Encino Ave in order to demolish 100% of the existing single-family residence under Demolition Review Ordinance
No. 1860 (April 12, 2010).
Chapter 5 of Code of Ordinances (Buildings and Building Regulations) requires City Council to consider the ARB’s
recommendation for all demolition/final design review applications. Please check the ARB posted results on the City’s website
after the ARB meeting to confirm any future meeting dates.
Plans are available for public viewing on the City’s website, with the exception of floor plans,
(http://www.alamoheightstx.gov/departments/planning-and-development-services/public-notices/) and at the Community
Development Services Department located at 6116 Broadway St, 2nd
floor. You may also contact Michelle Ramos
(mramos@alamoheightstx.gov) or Lety Hernandez (lhernandez@alamoheightstx.gov) by email or our office at (210) 826-0516
for additional information regarding this case.
Attachment A
Attachment A
Attachment A
Attachment A
Attachment A
Attachment A
Attachment A
Attachment A
Attachment A
Attachment B
Attachment B
The American Institute of Architects
AIA San Antonio
1344 South Flores Street, Ste. 102
San Antonio, Texas 78204
210-226-4979
www.aiasa.org
January 16, 2024
Architectural Review Board
City of Alamo Heights
6116 Broadway
San Antonio, Texas 78209
RE: 231 Encino Avenue
Dear Architectural Review Board Members,
On behalf of the Board of Directors of AIA San Antonio, the local chapter of The American Institute of
Architects, I write to urge that you find the property located at 231 Encino Avenue historically significant.
This Tudor Revival style home was designed by the firm of Adams & Adams in the early years of the 1920’s
for Mr. & Mrs. Frank Lewis. Located on a prominent lot in the heart of Alamo Heights, the home’s single-
story front façade features a Gothic arch entryway, tall/narrow windows, a prominent cross gable, ironwork
in the windows and lantern, and elaborate brink chimneys, crowned with decorative chimney pots. Its
charm is evident from the street, despite the neglect the home has suffered since its last owner passed
away more than a decade ago.
The detail found on the home’s front façade alludes to similar details found on the interior. Woodwork by
local craftspeople adorns the walls of the library. Hand-forged metal handrails, carved Italian marble
fireplace surrounds and other custom features all remain in a home thoughtfully designed by one of our
region’s most prominent architectural firms from long ago.
Losing a home of this importance will significantly impact the fabric of Alamo Heights. The lot on which the
home is sited is generous and deep like the properties that are immediately adjacent to it. The developer’s
proposal to infill the lot with four to five new homes will forever change the character of the street.
Local architects favor a more sustainable option. We advocate that the home not be demolished. City
leaders should support restoration and reimagination so that this neglected architectural treasure can
nurture the next generation just as it has for the last century.
Sincerely,
Torrey Stanley Carleton Hon. AIA
Executive Director
Attachment B
Attachment B
1
Lety Hernandez
Subject: FW: 231 Encino Ave demolition
From: Ted Flato < >
Sent: Saturday, January 13, 2024 4:22 PM
To: Elsa T. Robles <erobles@alamoheightstx.gov>
Subject: 231 Encino Ave demolition
Dear members of the architectural review board,
Our family has lived at 210 Encino Ave for close to 30 years and we are extremely distraught by the request to demolish 231
Encino, a significant architectural gem. Alamo Heights encompasses a wide and diverse style of homes. This section of Encino
Ave., with its gorgeous oak-covered landscapes, is a uniquely beautiful part of our neighborhood featuring many houses
designed by San Antonio’s best architects from the early 20th century (Adams and Adams, Harvey Page, etc.). Published in 1926
in Architecture (the premiere architectural magazine at the time), the residence at 231 is a critical part of the charm, character
and historical significance of the street. Houses like this are the backbone of what makes “Old Alamo Heights” unique and
attractive, and with their numbers dwindling significantly over the years, we cannot afford to lose this one.
As both a resident who has great fondness and admiration for our neighborhood and an architect who appreciates and
recognizes the importance of maintaining our architectural heritage, I strongly encourage you to not allow this significant house
to be demolished.
Sincerely,
Ted Flato
Sent from my iPhone
Ted Flato, FAIA
Partner
LAKE|FLATO ARCHITECTS
311 Third Street
San Antonio, Texas 78205
p 210.227.3335
********************
Attachment B
1
Lety Hernandez
Subject: Demo Review for 231 Encino Avenue, 78209
From: Fravell Family < >
Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2024 2:59 PM
To: Lety Hernandez <lhernandez@alamoheightstx.gov>
Subject: Demo Review for 231 Encino Avenue, 78209
To Whom It May Concern,
My husband, Mike Fravell, and I are sending this email to express our opposition to the demolition of the historical house at 231
Encino Avenue, San Antonio, Texas.
Our home is located adjacent to this property. We endured a very recent, long and arduous restoration project of our
home. Maintaining the character of our home, in keeping with its landmark location was of utmost importance throughout the
project. We modernized and invigorated the home for a large and active family while respecting the beauty and charm of its
locale.
Knowing that this kind of restoration would be very possible, we would support and welcome a project of this nature at 231
Encino Ave, San Antonio, Texas.
Katie and Mike Fravell
Attachment B
Attachment B
Attachment B
Attachment B
1
Lety Hernandez
Subject: 231 Encino
From: Chris Hill < >
Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2024 8:12 AM
To: Elsa T. Robles <erobles@alamoheightstx.gov>
Subject: 231 Encino
Dear Members of the Architectural Review Committee.
I strongly urge the committee to deny any variance application for the subdivision of the property at 231 Encino.
A mid block multi unit development along a solely single lot residential street would not only devalue the surrounding properties
and properties up and down the street, but it would also destroy the visual unity of single home lots along one of the more
beautiful streets in Alamo Heights.
Sincerely,
Christopher C. Hill
5111 Broadway
San Antonio, Texas 78209
O 1.210.8286565 ext 6
C 1.210.8617787
Attachment B
1
Lety Hernandez
Subject: 231 Encino additional letter
From: Chris Hill <>
Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2024 1:25 PM
To: Lety Hernandez <lhernandez@alamoheightstx.gov>; Elsa T. Robles <erobles@alamoheightstx.gov>
Subject: 231 Encino additional letter
Dear Members of the Architectural review Committee,
In addition to being opposed to the subdivision of the property known as 231 Encino, it has also come to my attention that the
house itself is historically significant as evidenced by several publications and leading architects within our community. I urge
the Committee to consider the architectural significance and contribution of the existing house at 231 Encino to the street and
the neighborhood as required by Alamo Heights code Article IX, 5-130 (3) and deny the permit for demolition to preserve and
protect the architectural heritage of Alamo Heights.
Sincerely,
Christopher C. Hill
5111 Broadway
San Antonio, Texas 78209
O 1.210.8286565 ext 6
C 1.210.8617787
Attachment B
1
Lety Hernandez
Subject: 231 Encino
-----Original Message-----
From: Ann Himoff <>
Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2024 4:47 PM
To: Lety Hernandez <lhernandez@alamoheightstx.gov>
Cc: Andrew Himoff < >
Subject: 231 Encino
To Whom it May Concern,
We are writing this letter in opposition of the beautiful, historic Alamo Heights at 231 Encino from being torn down and the lot
being developed into 4-5 lots. We live on Patterson Avenue, we walk by this house every single day and have long admired its
beautiful architecture, and have dreamed about what it would look like brought back to life. We live in a 1937 house, in which we
have taken great care of and gone to so much extra expense in order to keep the character of it alive. Both of our families have
lived in Alamo heights for 4 generations, and we care deeply about preserving the uniqueness and character of our city. These
new builds on zero lot lines will not age well. They are purely for making money. We could have torn our house down, but have
taken the care and spent a lot of money to restore and add on to an old home. The same could be done here! This home is
absolutely beautiful, and I personally know many families that would treasure the opportunity to buy this house and restore it.
Thank you so much for your taking the time to read this.
Sincerely,
Ann and Andrew Himoff
Attachment B
1
Lety Hernandez
Subject: 231 encino avenue
-----Original Message-----
From: Triana Grossman <>
Sent: Monday, January 15, 2024 6:22 PM
To: Elsa T. Robles <erobles@alamoheightstx.gov>
Cc: Brandon Grossman < >
Subject: 231 encino avenue
Dear Members of the Architectural Review Board,
I am writing to express my strong opposition to the proposed demolition of the historic house located at 231 Encino Avenue in
San Antonio, Texas. This architectural gem holds significant cultural and historical value for our community.
Preserving such structures is crucial in maintaining the unique character and identity of our city. The demolition of 231 Encino
Avenue would not only erase a piece of our heritage but also diminish the cultural richness that makes San Antonio special.
I urge the Architectural Review Board to reconsider this decision and explore alternative options for the property's development
that would allow the historic house to be retained and celebrated. Our shared history deserves protection, and I believe that with
thoughtful consideration, a balance can be struck between progress and preservation.
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
Sincerely,
Triana and Brandon Grossman
201 Argyle Avenue
San Antonio, TX. 78209
Attachment B
Attachment B
107 King William Street | San Antonio, Texas 78204-1312 | 210.224.6163 | SAconservation.org
January 9, 2024
Members of the Architectural Review Board, Mayor and City Council
City of Alamo Heights
Dear Mayor, Members of City Council, and Members of the Architectural Review Board:
The Conservation Society of San Antonio values the many beautiful historic homes that make the City of
Alamo Heights so desirable. Many have been honored with the Conservation Society’s Building Awards,
and many are listed on the National Register of Historic Places.
The Frank Lewis House, built in 1922 by the architects Adams and Adams, is going to be demolished for
a typically avaricious multi-unit project at 231 Encino in Alamo Heights. Lewis designed the
Brackenridge golf course and Adams and Adams designed many homes throughout the area as well as
the 1921 Woolworth Building on Alamo Plaza, which was on the World Monuments Fund 2020 Watch
List along with Notre Dame de Paris and Machu Picchu.
The Lewis House was of such note that it was featured in the November 1926 edition of Architecture
magazine, now Architectural Record. It was lovingly maintained for many years by our dear friend and
supporter Maggie Block. Due to the building’s clear and present architectural and historical significance,
we urge the Architectural Review Board, the Mayor and City Council to deny this demolition request.
Certainly, a creative and intelligent way can be found to improve the value of this property without
destroying a building of such stature and import.
We hope you will consider these items as you deliberate this substantial new project in the city.
Sincerely,
Kathy Krnavek, President
Attachment B
Architects of the San Antonio Zoo Adams & Adams
Many of the buildings and structures completed during the New Deal-era building program at the San Antonio
Zoo were completed by the San Antonio architectural firm Adams & Adams, including numerous quarry wall
exhibits, the old Zoo restrooms, the Commissary/Monkey House (Resource No. 5), the Elephant House
(Resource No. 42), the Hippo House (Resource No. 79), and the Baumberger Moats (Resource No. 54). W.C.
Thraikill was the contractor.137 Some of the buildings featured modest stylisfic elements, like the Spanish
Revival Commissary and Rusfic Moderne Hippo House, while others, like the Elephant House, were simply
Rusfic stone structures to house the animals. All these features ufilized the local limestone in their
construcfion, giving the zoo a cohesive, natural feeling that blended in with its surrounding environment.
Furthermore, the use of stone made these facilifies durable and easy to clean, while sfill being aesthefically
appealing to the visitor. Born in 1885 in Nebraska, Carleton Adams and his family moved to San Antonio in
1890. Adams went on to study architecture at Columbia University, graduafing in 1909 and returning to San
Antonio. Along with his uncle Carl C. Adams he co-founded the firm Adams & Adams. Adams & Adams were
key figures in the development and design of numerous residences in the Monte Vista neighborhood of north
San Antonio. 138 Carl Adams died in 1918 and Max C. Friedrich took over as associate of the firm with Carleton
Adams. The firm constructed numerous residences throughout San Antonio, although they specialized in large
commercial and public buildings. Adams was known to experiment with a variety of styles, but most popularly
the Spanish Colonial-Revival and later Art Deco styles, evident on some of the buildings at the zoo.139 They
also ufilized tenants of the Beaux Arts style of design, parficularly on their 1919 design for the San Antonio
Drug Company Building (NR). In the 1920s, the San Antonio Zoological Associafion (SAZA) retained Adams &
Adams to draw up designs for their barless, cageless zoo. After meefing with zoo consultant Heinrich
Hagenbeck, the firm designed plans for numerous new buildings and structures within the zoo, many of which
are extant in 2022. Several sources cite Gerard M. Baker as the chief designer working for Adams & Adams on
the zoo project. Although liftle appears to be known about Baker, one newspaper arficle indicates that he had
been previously employed construcfing cageless animal enclosures at the St. Louis Zoo.140
In the 1930s, much of Adams & Adams work was funded by the WPA, including the Thomas Jefferson High
School (1929-1932, NR 1983), a sprawling campus inspired by Spanish Renaissance (also known as Spanish
Colonial Revival) architecture, with hipped roofs of red file, elaborate cast stone details, carved wooden doors
and beams, and ornate auditorium. The school was featured in Life Magazine and Nafional Geographic for its
innovafive design and beauty.141 The firm also worked as the campus architect for Texas A&M University in
the 1940s, where Carleton Adams designed the Memorial Students Center. 142 The firm confinued operafing
unfil Carleton Adam’s sudden death of a heart aftack in 1964.143 Notable buildings designed by Adams &
Adams include: • Protestant Orphan’s Home, San Antonio • Nafional Bank of Commerce, San Antonio • F.W.
Woolworth Building (Alamo Plaza NR District 1977) • Trinity Methodist Church San Antonio (1920) • St. James
Methodist Episcopal Church, Waco (1924, NR 2019) • Great American Life Insurance Building, San Antonio
(1925) • Charles Baumberger House, San Antonio (1929) • G.A. Stowers House, San Antonio (1925) • Thomas
Jefferson High School (1929-1932, NR 1983) • Robert E. Lee Hotel, San Antonio (1938 Addifion, NR 1996) • San
Antonio Drug Company (1919, NR 1994) • State Highway Building, Ausfin (1932) • King Ranch Home “Santa
Gertrudis” Kingsville (1913-1917, NHL 1964) • Kerr County Courthouse, Kerrville • Sames-Moore Building,
Laredo • Nixon Office Building, Corpus Chrisfi • West Texas Ufilifies Building, San Angelo (NR • Texas State
Library and Archives Building, Ausfin (1958)
hftps://www.thc.texas.gov/public/upload/preserve/nafional_register/draft_nominafions/San%20Antonio%20Z
oo%20MPDF%20SBR%201.pdf
Attachment B
HOUSTON - OUTSIDE 200FT
Attachment B
Attachment B
Lewis House
231 Encino Avenue
Alamo Heights, Texas
Carleton Adams (1885-1964) was a San Antonio Architect whose eclectic country houses
had significant influence on the evolution of Texas architecture. His work was part of a
national movement in search of an Architectural language for the American Country
house.
The Lewis House at 231 Encino (c1925) in Alamo Heights was one of Adams more
restrained and elegant compositions. Though large, the simplicity of the façade is
unpretentious and welcoming. The exquisitely detailed Entry Portal, chimney and steep
roof pitch evoke an English or Norman Manor house in the village hamlet. The original
double hung windows with plank shutters, French Doors and deep porches are a uniquely
American vernacular. This is a rural Architecture that speaks directly to the bohemian
Artist cottages (131 Patterson) and English Craftsman houses (120 Westover) prevalent
in the neighborhood in the first two decades of the 20th
century.
The architecture and siting of the house was unique for the era and appears to have been
influenced by the work of H.T. Lindeberg, a New York contemporary of Adams. The
structure is nestled into the landscape rather than resting as an object on the hilltop site.
By placing the front door at a Landing where stairs descend to public rooms that connect
directly to the yard a low street profile was maintained. Bedrooms and sleeping porches
are tucked into the floor a few steps above street level.
Attachment B
MCDONALD - OUTSIDE 200FT
1
Lety Hernandez
Subject: FW: 231 Encino Ave
From: Judy Pesek <>
Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2024 9:57 PM
To: Elsa T. Robles <erobles@alamoheightstx.gov>
Subject: 231 Encino Ave
Dear Member of the Architecture Review Board,
It has come to my attention that the home at 231 Encino Ave is going to be demolished and new, denser residential built in its
place.
I have been traveling to San Antonio for many years, visiting with friends who live in Alamo Heights. One of my favorite things to
do is drive through Alamo Heights and admire the many beautiful older homes in this lovely neighborhood. I have always
admired the fact that the same mistake that has happened in other cities older neighborhoods, (i.e. the demolition and building
of McMansions), has not happened in San Antonio and Alamo Heights. So, imagine my utter disappointment when I learned that
the same trend is about to begin.
This home in Alamo Heights is of architectural significance and was published in Architecture Magazine in 1926! Adams and
Adams were the architect, a significant architect to the city. The architectural significance cannot be overstated!
There are many homes that would qualify as significant in any American City; however, San Antonio is as unique as cities come. I
would say the test that a home must pass to be significant would-be: a) It was constructed of local materials, b) Local craftsman
did the work, and c) Local known architect designed the home, and d) it is perfect contextually for San Antonio. This beautiful
home at 231 Encino passes all the test of being considered significant.
As I further investigated, I was shocked to learn that Alamo Heights has no historical district organization to stop this from
happening. It would be tragic to lose this historic and architecturally significant home, and have it be replaced with something
that is not compatible or with other homes in the neighborhood.
Judy Pesek, FIIDA, LEED AP
M 214.986.6817
Attachment B
1
Lety Hernandez
Subject: To: COAH Architectural Review Board
Importance: High
-----Original Message-----
From: Susan Straus < >
Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2024 2:12 PM
To: Lety Hernandez <lhernandez@alamoheightstx.gov>; Elsa T. Robles <erobles@alamoheightstx.gov>
Cc: Susan Straus < >
Subject: To: COAH Architectural Review Board
Importance: High
Dear Members of the Architectural Review Board,
My family moved into 511 Argyle Ave. when i was in high school, a beautiful home built in 1927. In 2009 I was lucky to buy a
bungalow at 232 Argyle Ave, built in 1924.
All these homes are so unique.... 231 Encino Ave. I pass by regularly, and always admire its character and irreplaceable charm.
231 Encino Ave. is a house of amazing stature. It is an architecturally significant house…..an important part of the texture of our
neighborhood.
I strongly oppose the demolition of this jewel.
Sincerely,
Susan Straus
Attachment B
1
Lety Hernandez
Subject: ARB Presentation
From: Mac White < >
Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2024 9:23 AM
To: Lety Hernandez <lhernandez@alamoheightstx.gov>
Subject: RE: ARB Presentation
Lety,
I have to be out of town for work this week and will not be able to attend. I have had several people voice concerns to me over
the proposed demolition on Encino. This house does have historical significance and this should be addressed as a part of the
review of this project. I am sorry I will not be able to be there to voice a concern in the meeting, but I would be against this if I
were there.
Mac
Mac White, AIA
Partner
MICHAEL G. IMBER, ARCHITECTS
111 WEST EL PRADO
SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 78212
PHONE 210.824.7703
CELL 210.410.4417
MICHAELGIMBER.COM
Facebook | Twitter | Pinterest | LinkedIn
Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail and any attachments contain information from the firm of Michael G. Imber Architects, and are intended solely for the use of the named
recipient or recipients. Any dissemination of this e-mail by anyone other than an intended recipient is strictly prohibited. If you believe you have received this e-mail in error,
notify the sender immediately and permanently delete the e-mail, any attachments, and all copies thereof from any drives or storage media and destroy any printouts of the
e-mail or attachment.
Attachment B
1
Lety Hernandez
Subject: FW: 321 Encino
Attachments: 231 Encino Avenue [19].pdf
From: Michael Imber <>
Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2024 4:39 PM
To: Lety Hernandez <lhernandez@alamoheightstx.gov>
Subject: 321 Encino
Lety,
I am a neighbor down the street from 321 Encino, which is slated for demolition review. I have submitted (along with others)
a letter of concern for losing a significant structure in our community. Nothing of this nature has been proposed before. It is
our hopes that, given the importance of this house and the architects, Adams & Adams, that designed it, that the City find it
appropriate to designate it “significant”.
Attached, is an article on the house in Architecture Magazine, a national publication at the time it was built. Few houses in
San Antonio have been recognized by a publication of this nature. Loosing this house would certainly be a loss to the
architectural heritage of Alamo Heights.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Michael G. Imber, FAIA
Michael G. Imber
Principal
MICHAEL G. IMBER ARCHITECTS
111 WEST EL PRADO
SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 78212
PHONE 210.824.7703
MICHAELGIMBER.COM | LinkedIn | Instagram
Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail and any attachments contain information from the
firm of Michael G. Imber Architects, and are intended solely for the use of the named
recipient or recipients. Any dissemination of this e-mail by anyone other than an
intended recipient is strictly prohibited. If you believe you have received this e-mail in
error, notify the sender immediately and permanently delete the e-mail, any
attachments, and all copies thereof from any drives or storage media and destroy any
printouts of the e-mail or attachment.
Attachment B
Attachment B
ARCHITECTURE
REG. U. S. PAT. OFFICE
THE PROFESSIONAL ARCHITECTURAL MONTHLY
VOLUME LIV
NUMBER 5
November 1926
CONTENTS
PAGE
PAGE
Frontispiece : Sketch in pencil and water -color
BY Otto R. Eggers 355
Measured Drawings of a Store Front .
The first of a series each of which will present a suc
cessful solution of an every -day problem
BY Gerald K. Geerlings
a
Using the Orders with Freedom
Illustrated with photographs
BY Aymar Embury, II
323
Measured Drawing of Lincoln Cathedral . 359
Arcade in South Nave Aisle
329 by Ernest Pickering
A Reproduction of the Hancock House
Illustrated with photographs and with measured
drawings made by the late John H. Sturgis , Architect
BY Elizabeth Tower
Everglades Club , Palm Beach , Fla .
ADDISON MIZNER , Architect
361
A Memorial Flagstaff in Brooklyn
Erected by the Trustees of Pratt Institute
WILLARD PADDOCK , Sculptor
337
Arc -Welded Steel Construction
Illustrated with photographs of tests
BY A. M. Candy
365
339
When the Gods Dwelt in France : Les Baux .
Illustrated with photographs and a sketch by the author
BY Gerald K. Geerlings
Architectural News in Photographs
A bird's-eye view of what is happening architecturally
that should be of interest to the profession
342
Pen -and -ink Drawing of the Cathedral ,
Avila, Spain
Photographed and enlarged to secure the effect of an
etching
BY Paul Hermann
367
Editorial Comment
343
Contacts : York & Sawyer's Office Code
Illustrated with photographs and office plan
368
Offices of Lewis Bowman , Architect , Bronx
ville , N. Y. .
LEWIS BOWMAN , Architect
344
Book Reviews and Announcements 370
347
A Symposium on Competitions
Expressions of opinion from members of the profes
sion upon a much -discussed problem . Further opin
ions will be welcomed
Residence of M. G. Thomas , Bearden , Tenn .
BARBER & McMURRY , Architects
371
Dormer Windows
The first of a series of portfolios illustrating architec .
tural features of varying design
349 Residence of Frank M. Lewis , San Antonio ,
Texas
ADAMS & ADAMS , Architects
373
ARCHITECTURE is published monthly , appearing on the 28th of the month preceding date of issue.
Price , mailed flat to any address in the United States , $ 10 per year , in advance ; in Canada , $ 11; in
foreign countries , $12. Single copies , $1. Advertising rates upon request . Entered as Second -class
Matter , March 30, 1900, at the Post -Office at New York , N. Y., under the Act of March 2, 1879 .
Copyright , 1926, by Charles Scribner's Sons . All rights reserved .
NEW YORK : 597 FIFTH AVENUE , AT 48TH STREET
W Y :
CH A R L ES SCRIBNER'S SONS , PUBLISHERS
Attachment B
373
NOVEMBER
,
1926
.
ARCHITECTURE
RESIDENCE
OF
FRANK M. LEWIS
,
SAN ANTONIO
,
Texas
.
ADAMS
&
ADAMS
,
ARCHITECTS
Attachment B
ARCHITECTURE
NOVEMBER
,
1926
.
SLEEPING PORCH
BOYS GIRLS
BOYS
ROOM
GIRLS ROOM
BALCONY
SITTING
ROOM
.
OWNER'S ROOM
GUEST
ROOM
DAM
BREAK
FAST
ROOM
KITCHEN
TERRACE
PORCH
ROOM DINING ROOM
HALL
HEATER ROOM
20
LIVING ROOM
TRUNKROOM
SOOKS DOOR
:
RESIDENCE OF FRANK M. LEWIS
,
SAN ANTONIO
,
TEXAS
ADAMS
&
ADAMS
,
ARCHITECTS
374
Attachment B
Attachment B
Dear Members of the Architectural Review Board,
Thank you for this opportunity to write a hastily composed letter to oppose the
demolition of 231 Encino Ave. This historically significant Romantic Revival Tudor
Cottage was built in 1925, in the center of old Alamo Heights. It is listed in the San
Antonio Registry, a collection of 300 houses that “express San Antonio’s climate,
cultures, and materials through architecture.” An article was also published in
Architecture Magazine in 1926.
The last occupant, my friend, Maggie Saunders Block, lived there until her death. Since
then, there has been great interest in the house as a potential remodel by many with
whom I have spoken, including a member of my own family, but unfortunately the
owner, a family member of Mrs. Block, was hard to find and until now, the house stood
vacant. People were hopeful it would go on the market.
Alamo Heights is special. I love the old homes laid out spaciously on meandering streets
that are sheltered under canopies of ancient trees that shade the runners and walkers, the
families out strolling their babies, the neighbors catching up with one another, and eager
dogs on leashes. I never anticipated that a developer would purchase one of our old
architectural gems to demolish and then build multiple McMansions in its place. The
house is stately, standing alongside a row of other multi-million-dollar homes on roomy
lots. 231 Encino Ave. is a grand dame that deserves all the attention a single family can
offer with updates and love.
This developer also built next to my family home. We are now packed into her
development like sardines. There is no privacy. She promised some sort of fencing and
separation between the properties, none of which was ever done. All the electrical is
displayed prominently with no fence facing our front yard. When I asked the developer if
she was going to do anything about the lack of privacy, she replied that she had already
spent too much on this project and wasn’t about to spend another dime because she might
lose money in the end. Destroying the character of my beautiful neighborhood with a
developer who has no regard for our tradition is risky business. The Architectural Review
Board is responsible for our future. Caution. Mistakes like this would be unacceptable.
Thank you, Jacqueline Beretta
Attachment B

More Related Content

Similar to Item # 7 - 231 Encino Ave. (sign. review)

Item # 4 - 301 Lamont Ave. ARB Case # 913F
Item # 4 - 301 Lamont Ave. ARB Case # 913FItem # 4 - 301 Lamont Ave. ARB Case # 913F
Item # 4 - 301 Lamont Ave. ARB Case # 913F
ahcitycouncil
 
Item # 5 - 222 Claiborne
Item # 5 - 222 Claiborne Item # 5 - 222 Claiborne
Item # 5 - 222 Claiborne
ahcitycouncil
 
Item # 6 218 Normandy
Item # 6  218 NormandyItem # 6  218 Normandy
Item # 6 218 Normandy
ahcitycouncil
 
Item # 4 - 240 Corona (Significance & Compatibility Review)
Item # 4 - 240 Corona (Significance & Compatibility Review)Item # 4 - 240 Corona (Significance & Compatibility Review)
Item # 4 - 240 Corona (Significance & Compatibility Review)
ahcitycouncil
 
Item # 5 - 233 Harrison Ave. Sig. Review
Item # 5 - 233 Harrison Ave. Sig. ReviewItem # 5 - 233 Harrison Ave. Sig. Review
Item # 5 - 233 Harrison Ave. Sig. Review
ahcitycouncil
 
Item # 5 - 233 Harrison Ave. Sig. Review
Item # 5 - 233 Harrison Ave. Sig. ReviewItem # 5 - 233 Harrison Ave. Sig. Review
Item # 5 - 233 Harrison Ave. Sig. Review
ahcitycouncil
 
Development Services Toolkit
Development Services ToolkitDevelopment Services Toolkit
Development Services Toolkit
ShandrianJarvisUgwok
 
Item #s 3.4 - Contractor Compliance Regulations
Item #s 3.4 - Contractor Compliance RegulationsItem #s 3.4 - Contractor Compliance Regulations
Item #s 3.4 - Contractor Compliance Regulations
ahcitycouncil
 
Item # 6 - 4821 Broadway ARB Case # 909F
Item # 6 - 4821 Broadway ARB Case # 909FItem # 6 - 4821 Broadway ARB Case # 909F
Item # 6 - 4821 Broadway ARB Case # 909F
ahcitycouncil
 
Item #s 8&9 -- Demolition Code Amendment
Item #s 8&9 -- Demolition Code AmendmentItem #s 8&9 -- Demolition Code Amendment
Item #s 8&9 -- Demolition Code Amendment
ahcitycouncil
 
Item # 4 - 434 College Boulevard (sign. review)
Item # 4 - 434 College Boulevard (sign.  review)Item # 4 - 434 College Boulevard (sign.  review)
Item # 4 - 434 College Boulevard (sign. review)
ahcitycouncil
 
Item # 4 - 271 Retama Place Significance Review
Item # 4 - 271 Retama Place Significance ReviewItem # 4 - 271 Retama Place Significance Review
Item # 4 - 271 Retama Place Significance Review
ahcitycouncil
 
Item # 4 -- 271 Retama Place Sig. Review
Item # 4 -- 271 Retama Place Sig. ReviewItem # 4 -- 271 Retama Place Sig. Review
Item # 4 -- 271 Retama Place Sig. Review
ahcitycouncil
 
Item # 5 - 117 Claywell (Significance & Compatibility Review)
Item # 5 - 117 Claywell (Significance & Compatibility Review)Item # 5 - 117 Claywell (Significance & Compatibility Review)
Item # 5 - 117 Claywell (Significance & Compatibility Review)
ahcitycouncil
 
Item # 4 - 259 Montclair
Item # 4 - 259 MontclairItem # 4 - 259 Montclair
Item # 4 - 259 Montclair
ahcitycouncil
 
Item # 4 - 440 Normandy Ave. compat. rev.
Item # 4 - 440 Normandy Ave. compat. rev.Item # 4 - 440 Normandy Ave. compat. rev.
Item # 4 - 440 Normandy Ave. compat. rev.
ahcitycouncil
 
Item # 4 -- 271 Retama Place Sig. Review
Item # 4 -- 271 Retama Place Sig. ReviewItem # 4 -- 271 Retama Place Sig. Review
Item # 4 -- 271 Retama Place Sig. Review
ahcitycouncil
 
Item # 4 -- 525 Argo Avenue ARB Case 926F
Item # 4 -- 525 Argo Avenue ARB Case 926FItem # 4 -- 525 Argo Avenue ARB Case 926F
Item # 4 -- 525 Argo Avenue ARB Case 926F
ahcitycouncil
 
Item # 5 - 5330 Broadway ARB Case # 930F
Item # 5 - 5330 Broadway ARB Case # 930FItem # 5 - 5330 Broadway ARB Case # 930F
Item # 5 - 5330 Broadway ARB Case # 930F
ahcitycouncil
 
Item # 7 - Katherine Ct (Final Review)
Item # 7 - Katherine Ct (Final Review)Item # 7 - Katherine Ct (Final Review)
Item # 7 - Katherine Ct (Final Review)
ahcitycouncil
 

Similar to Item # 7 - 231 Encino Ave. (sign. review) (20)

Item # 4 - 301 Lamont Ave. ARB Case # 913F
Item # 4 - 301 Lamont Ave. ARB Case # 913FItem # 4 - 301 Lamont Ave. ARB Case # 913F
Item # 4 - 301 Lamont Ave. ARB Case # 913F
 
Item # 5 - 222 Claiborne
Item # 5 - 222 Claiborne Item # 5 - 222 Claiborne
Item # 5 - 222 Claiborne
 
Item # 6 218 Normandy
Item # 6  218 NormandyItem # 6  218 Normandy
Item # 6 218 Normandy
 
Item # 4 - 240 Corona (Significance & Compatibility Review)
Item # 4 - 240 Corona (Significance & Compatibility Review)Item # 4 - 240 Corona (Significance & Compatibility Review)
Item # 4 - 240 Corona (Significance & Compatibility Review)
 
Item # 5 - 233 Harrison Ave. Sig. Review
Item # 5 - 233 Harrison Ave. Sig. ReviewItem # 5 - 233 Harrison Ave. Sig. Review
Item # 5 - 233 Harrison Ave. Sig. Review
 
Item # 5 - 233 Harrison Ave. Sig. Review
Item # 5 - 233 Harrison Ave. Sig. ReviewItem # 5 - 233 Harrison Ave. Sig. Review
Item # 5 - 233 Harrison Ave. Sig. Review
 
Development Services Toolkit
Development Services ToolkitDevelopment Services Toolkit
Development Services Toolkit
 
Item #s 3.4 - Contractor Compliance Regulations
Item #s 3.4 - Contractor Compliance RegulationsItem #s 3.4 - Contractor Compliance Regulations
Item #s 3.4 - Contractor Compliance Regulations
 
Item # 6 - 4821 Broadway ARB Case # 909F
Item # 6 - 4821 Broadway ARB Case # 909FItem # 6 - 4821 Broadway ARB Case # 909F
Item # 6 - 4821 Broadway ARB Case # 909F
 
Item #s 8&9 -- Demolition Code Amendment
Item #s 8&9 -- Demolition Code AmendmentItem #s 8&9 -- Demolition Code Amendment
Item #s 8&9 -- Demolition Code Amendment
 
Item # 4 - 434 College Boulevard (sign. review)
Item # 4 - 434 College Boulevard (sign.  review)Item # 4 - 434 College Boulevard (sign.  review)
Item # 4 - 434 College Boulevard (sign. review)
 
Item # 4 - 271 Retama Place Significance Review
Item # 4 - 271 Retama Place Significance ReviewItem # 4 - 271 Retama Place Significance Review
Item # 4 - 271 Retama Place Significance Review
 
Item # 4 -- 271 Retama Place Sig. Review
Item # 4 -- 271 Retama Place Sig. ReviewItem # 4 -- 271 Retama Place Sig. Review
Item # 4 -- 271 Retama Place Sig. Review
 
Item # 5 - 117 Claywell (Significance & Compatibility Review)
Item # 5 - 117 Claywell (Significance & Compatibility Review)Item # 5 - 117 Claywell (Significance & Compatibility Review)
Item # 5 - 117 Claywell (Significance & Compatibility Review)
 
Item # 4 - 259 Montclair
Item # 4 - 259 MontclairItem # 4 - 259 Montclair
Item # 4 - 259 Montclair
 
Item # 4 - 440 Normandy Ave. compat. rev.
Item # 4 - 440 Normandy Ave. compat. rev.Item # 4 - 440 Normandy Ave. compat. rev.
Item # 4 - 440 Normandy Ave. compat. rev.
 
Item # 4 -- 271 Retama Place Sig. Review
Item # 4 -- 271 Retama Place Sig. ReviewItem # 4 -- 271 Retama Place Sig. Review
Item # 4 -- 271 Retama Place Sig. Review
 
Item # 4 -- 525 Argo Avenue ARB Case 926F
Item # 4 -- 525 Argo Avenue ARB Case 926FItem # 4 -- 525 Argo Avenue ARB Case 926F
Item # 4 -- 525 Argo Avenue ARB Case 926F
 
Item # 5 - 5330 Broadway ARB Case # 930F
Item # 5 - 5330 Broadway ARB Case # 930FItem # 5 - 5330 Broadway ARB Case # 930F
Item # 5 - 5330 Broadway ARB Case # 930F
 
Item # 7 - Katherine Ct (Final Review)
Item # 7 - Katherine Ct (Final Review)Item # 7 - Katherine Ct (Final Review)
Item # 7 - Katherine Ct (Final Review)
 

More from ahcitycouncil

PPT Item # 10 - New student parking @ AHHS
PPT Item # 10 - New student parking @ AHHSPPT Item # 10 - New student parking @ AHHS
PPT Item # 10 - New student parking @ AHHS
ahcitycouncil
 
PPT Item # 9 - Ratify Ord. # 1326 3way stop
PPT Item # 9 - Ratify Ord. # 1326 3way stopPPT Item # 9 - Ratify Ord. # 1326 3way stop
PPT Item # 9 - Ratify Ord. # 1326 3way stop
ahcitycouncil
 
PPT Item # 8 - Advanced Water Well Technologies improv.
PPT Item # 8 - Advanced Water Well Technologies improv.PPT Item # 8 - Advanced Water Well Technologies improv.
PPT Item # 8 - Advanced Water Well Technologies improv.
ahcitycouncil
 
PPT Item # 7 - 4821 Broadway final design rev.
PPT Item # 7 - 4821 Broadway final design rev.PPT Item # 7 - 4821 Broadway final design rev.
PPT Item # 7 - 4821 Broadway final design rev.
ahcitycouncil
 
PPT Item # 6 - 318 Tuxedo Avenue compt. review
PPT Item # 6 - 318 Tuxedo Avenue compt. reviewPPT Item # 6 - 318 Tuxedo Avenue compt. review
PPT Item # 6 - 318 Tuxedo Avenue compt. review
ahcitycouncil
 
PPT Item # 5 - 434 College Boulevard compt. review
PPT Item # 5 - 434 College Boulevard compt. reviewPPT Item # 5 - 434 College Boulevard compt. review
PPT Item # 5 - 434 College Boulevard compt. review
ahcitycouncil
 
PPT Item # 4 - 440 Normandy Avenue compt. review
PPT Item # 4 - 440 Normandy Avenue compt. reviewPPT Item # 4 - 440 Normandy Avenue compt. review
PPT Item # 4 - 440 Normandy Avenue compt. review
ahcitycouncil
 
PPT Item # 2 -- Announcements Powerpoint
PPT Item # 2 -- Announcements PowerpointPPT Item # 2 -- Announcements Powerpoint
PPT Item # 2 -- Announcements Powerpoint
ahcitycouncil
 
Item # 10 -- New Student Parking at AHHS
Item # 10 -- New Student Parking at AHHSItem # 10 -- New Student Parking at AHHS
Item # 10 -- New Student Parking at AHHS
ahcitycouncil
 
Item # 9 - Ratify Ord. # 1326 3-way Stop
Item # 9 - Ratify Ord. # 1326 3-way StopItem # 9 - Ratify Ord. # 1326 3-way Stop
Item # 9 - Ratify Ord. # 1326 3-way Stop
ahcitycouncil
 
Item # 8 - Advanced Water Well Technologies improv.
Item # 8 - Advanced Water Well Technologies improv.Item # 8 - Advanced Water Well Technologies improv.
Item # 8 - Advanced Water Well Technologies improv.
ahcitycouncil
 
Item # 7 - 4821 Broadway Final Design Review
Item # 7 - 4821 Broadway Final Design ReviewItem # 7 - 4821 Broadway Final Design Review
Item # 7 - 4821 Broadway Final Design Review
ahcitycouncil
 
Item # 6 - 318 Tuxedo Ave. compat. review
Item # 6 - 318 Tuxedo Ave. compat. reviewItem # 6 - 318 Tuxedo Ave. compat. review
Item # 6 - 318 Tuxedo Ave. compat. review
ahcitycouncil
 
Item # 5 - 434 College Blvd. compat. review
Item # 5 - 434 College Blvd. compat. reviewItem # 5 - 434 College Blvd. compat. review
Item # 5 - 434 College Blvd. compat. review
ahcitycouncil
 
Item # 1b - June 13, 2024 SAP WS Minutes
Item # 1b - June 13, 2024 SAP WS MinutesItem # 1b - June 13, 2024 SAP WS Minutes
Item # 1b - June 13, 2024 SAP WS Minutes
ahcitycouncil
 
Item # 1a - June 10, 2024 CC Meeting Minutes
Item # 1a - June 10, 2024 CC Meeting MinutesItem # 1a - June 10, 2024 CC Meeting Minutes
Item # 1a - June 10, 2024 CC Meeting Minutes
ahcitycouncil
 
PPT Item # 8&9 - Demolition Code Amendments
PPT Item # 8&9 - Demolition Code AmendmentsPPT Item # 8&9 - Demolition Code Amendments
PPT Item # 8&9 - Demolition Code Amendments
ahcitycouncil
 
PPT Item # 7 - 231 Encino Avenue (sign. review)
PPT Item # 7 - 231 Encino Avenue (sign. review)PPT Item # 7 - 231 Encino Avenue (sign. review)
PPT Item # 7 - 231 Encino Avenue (sign. review)
ahcitycouncil
 
PPT Item # 5 - 318 Tuxedo Ave. (sign. review)
PPT Item # 5 - 318 Tuxedo Ave. (sign. review)PPT Item # 5 - 318 Tuxedo Ave. (sign. review)
PPT Item # 5 - 318 Tuxedo Ave. (sign. review)
ahcitycouncil
 
PPT Item # 4 - 434 College Blvd. (sign. review)
PPT Item # 4 - 434 College Blvd. (sign. review)PPT Item # 4 - 434 College Blvd. (sign. review)
PPT Item # 4 - 434 College Blvd. (sign. review)
ahcitycouncil
 

More from ahcitycouncil (20)

PPT Item # 10 - New student parking @ AHHS
PPT Item # 10 - New student parking @ AHHSPPT Item # 10 - New student parking @ AHHS
PPT Item # 10 - New student parking @ AHHS
 
PPT Item # 9 - Ratify Ord. # 1326 3way stop
PPT Item # 9 - Ratify Ord. # 1326 3way stopPPT Item # 9 - Ratify Ord. # 1326 3way stop
PPT Item # 9 - Ratify Ord. # 1326 3way stop
 
PPT Item # 8 - Advanced Water Well Technologies improv.
PPT Item # 8 - Advanced Water Well Technologies improv.PPT Item # 8 - Advanced Water Well Technologies improv.
PPT Item # 8 - Advanced Water Well Technologies improv.
 
PPT Item # 7 - 4821 Broadway final design rev.
PPT Item # 7 - 4821 Broadway final design rev.PPT Item # 7 - 4821 Broadway final design rev.
PPT Item # 7 - 4821 Broadway final design rev.
 
PPT Item # 6 - 318 Tuxedo Avenue compt. review
PPT Item # 6 - 318 Tuxedo Avenue compt. reviewPPT Item # 6 - 318 Tuxedo Avenue compt. review
PPT Item # 6 - 318 Tuxedo Avenue compt. review
 
PPT Item # 5 - 434 College Boulevard compt. review
PPT Item # 5 - 434 College Boulevard compt. reviewPPT Item # 5 - 434 College Boulevard compt. review
PPT Item # 5 - 434 College Boulevard compt. review
 
PPT Item # 4 - 440 Normandy Avenue compt. review
PPT Item # 4 - 440 Normandy Avenue compt. reviewPPT Item # 4 - 440 Normandy Avenue compt. review
PPT Item # 4 - 440 Normandy Avenue compt. review
 
PPT Item # 2 -- Announcements Powerpoint
PPT Item # 2 -- Announcements PowerpointPPT Item # 2 -- Announcements Powerpoint
PPT Item # 2 -- Announcements Powerpoint
 
Item # 10 -- New Student Parking at AHHS
Item # 10 -- New Student Parking at AHHSItem # 10 -- New Student Parking at AHHS
Item # 10 -- New Student Parking at AHHS
 
Item # 9 - Ratify Ord. # 1326 3-way Stop
Item # 9 - Ratify Ord. # 1326 3-way StopItem # 9 - Ratify Ord. # 1326 3-way Stop
Item # 9 - Ratify Ord. # 1326 3-way Stop
 
Item # 8 - Advanced Water Well Technologies improv.
Item # 8 - Advanced Water Well Technologies improv.Item # 8 - Advanced Water Well Technologies improv.
Item # 8 - Advanced Water Well Technologies improv.
 
Item # 7 - 4821 Broadway Final Design Review
Item # 7 - 4821 Broadway Final Design ReviewItem # 7 - 4821 Broadway Final Design Review
Item # 7 - 4821 Broadway Final Design Review
 
Item # 6 - 318 Tuxedo Ave. compat. review
Item # 6 - 318 Tuxedo Ave. compat. reviewItem # 6 - 318 Tuxedo Ave. compat. review
Item # 6 - 318 Tuxedo Ave. compat. review
 
Item # 5 - 434 College Blvd. compat. review
Item # 5 - 434 College Blvd. compat. reviewItem # 5 - 434 College Blvd. compat. review
Item # 5 - 434 College Blvd. compat. review
 
Item # 1b - June 13, 2024 SAP WS Minutes
Item # 1b - June 13, 2024 SAP WS MinutesItem # 1b - June 13, 2024 SAP WS Minutes
Item # 1b - June 13, 2024 SAP WS Minutes
 
Item # 1a - June 10, 2024 CC Meeting Minutes
Item # 1a - June 10, 2024 CC Meeting MinutesItem # 1a - June 10, 2024 CC Meeting Minutes
Item # 1a - June 10, 2024 CC Meeting Minutes
 
PPT Item # 8&9 - Demolition Code Amendments
PPT Item # 8&9 - Demolition Code AmendmentsPPT Item # 8&9 - Demolition Code Amendments
PPT Item # 8&9 - Demolition Code Amendments
 
PPT Item # 7 - 231 Encino Avenue (sign. review)
PPT Item # 7 - 231 Encino Avenue (sign. review)PPT Item # 7 - 231 Encino Avenue (sign. review)
PPT Item # 7 - 231 Encino Avenue (sign. review)
 
PPT Item # 5 - 318 Tuxedo Ave. (sign. review)
PPT Item # 5 - 318 Tuxedo Ave. (sign. review)PPT Item # 5 - 318 Tuxedo Ave. (sign. review)
PPT Item # 5 - 318 Tuxedo Ave. (sign. review)
 
PPT Item # 4 - 434 College Blvd. (sign. review)
PPT Item # 4 - 434 College Blvd. (sign. review)PPT Item # 4 - 434 College Blvd. (sign. review)
PPT Item # 4 - 434 College Blvd. (sign. review)
 

Recently uploaded

VIP Nagpur Girls Call Service Nagpur 0X0000000X Independent Service Available...
VIP Nagpur Girls Call Service Nagpur 0X0000000X Independent Service Available...VIP Nagpur Girls Call Service Nagpur 0X0000000X Independent Service Available...
VIP Nagpur Girls Call Service Nagpur 0X0000000X Independent Service Available...
sukaniyasunnu
 
2024: The FAR - Federal Acquisition Regulations, Part 47
2024: The FAR - Federal Acquisition Regulations, Part 472024: The FAR - Federal Acquisition Regulations, Part 47
2024: The FAR - Federal Acquisition Regulations, Part 47
JSchaus & Associates
 
Canadian Immigration Tracker - Key Slides - May 2024.pdf
Canadian Immigration Tracker - Key Slides - May 2024.pdfCanadian Immigration Tracker - Key Slides - May 2024.pdf
Canadian Immigration Tracker - Key Slides - May 2024.pdf
Andrew Griffith
 
safe*(+971524843957 **effective abortion pills in Dubai, We have mifepristone...
safe*(+971524843957 **effective abortion pills in Dubai, We have mifepristone...safe*(+971524843957 **effective abortion pills in Dubai, We have mifepristone...
safe*(+971524843957 **effective abortion pills in Dubai, We have mifepristone...
talabernila6767
 
Proper education is birth rights of all the girls
Proper education is birth rights of all the girlsProper education is birth rights of all the girls
Proper education is birth rights of all the girls
SERUDS INDIA
 
Day care centers for poor children kurnool
Day care centers for poor children kurnoolDay care centers for poor children kurnool
Day care centers for poor children kurnool
SERUDS INDIA
 
Celebrity Girls Call Navi Mumbai 🎈🔥9920725232 🔥💋🎈 Provide Best And Top Girl S...
Celebrity Girls Call Navi Mumbai 🎈🔥9920725232 🔥💋🎈 Provide Best And Top Girl S...Celebrity Girls Call Navi Mumbai 🎈🔥9920725232 🔥💋🎈 Provide Best And Top Girl S...
Celebrity Girls Call Navi Mumbai 🎈🔥9920725232 🔥💋🎈 Provide Best And Top Girl S...
bellared2
 
New Girls Call Mumbai 👀 9820252231 👀 Cash Payment With Room DeliveryDelivery
New Girls Call Mumbai 👀 9820252231 👀 Cash Payment With Room DeliveryDeliveryNew Girls Call Mumbai 👀 9820252231 👀 Cash Payment With Room DeliveryDelivery
New Girls Call Mumbai 👀 9820252231 👀 Cash Payment With Room DeliveryDelivery
87tomato
 
Constituency wise Sand Prices in andhra pradesh
Constituency wise Sand Prices in andhra pradeshConstituency wise Sand Prices in andhra pradesh
Constituency wise Sand Prices in andhra pradesh
PradeepReddy206216
 
CBO’s Economic Forecast: Understanding Productivity Growth
CBO’s Economic Forecast: Understanding Productivity GrowthCBO’s Economic Forecast: Understanding Productivity Growth
CBO’s Economic Forecast: Understanding Productivity Growth
Congressional Budget Office
 
Girls Call Noida 9873940964 Provide Best And Top Girl Service And No1 in City
Girls Call Noida 9873940964 Provide Best And Top Girl Service And No1 in CityGirls Call Noida 9873940964 Provide Best And Top Girl Service And No1 in City
Girls Call Noida 9873940964 Provide Best And Top Girl Service And No1 in City
AK47 AK47
 
VIP Bangalore Girls Call Bangalore 0X0000000X Doorstep High-Profile Girl Serv...
VIP Bangalore Girls Call Bangalore 0X0000000X Doorstep High-Profile Girl Serv...VIP Bangalore Girls Call Bangalore 0X0000000X Doorstep High-Profile Girl Serv...
VIP Bangalore Girls Call Bangalore 0X0000000X Doorstep High-Profile Girl Serv...
satpalsheravatmumbai
 
3, Burak Yardimci OECD_Path to Economic Resilience_10JULY2024.pptx
3, Burak Yardimci OECD_Path to Economic Resilience_10JULY2024.pptx3, Burak Yardimci OECD_Path to Economic Resilience_10JULY2024.pptx
3, Burak Yardimci OECD_Path to Economic Resilience_10JULY2024.pptx
OECDregions
 
DDOT Bicyclist Advisory Committee Presentation
DDOT Bicyclist Advisory Committee PresentationDDOT Bicyclist Advisory Committee Presentation
DDOT Bicyclist Advisory Committee Presentation
communityengagement4
 
Summer 2024 Issue of Newtown News of Interest
Summer 2024 Issue of Newtown News of InterestSummer 2024 Issue of Newtown News of Interest
Summer 2024 Issue of Newtown News of Interest
JohnMackNewtown
 
ケニア留学最終プレゼン白鳥「SDGsとKENYA VISION2030との比較」
ケニア留学最終プレゼン白鳥「SDGsとKENYA VISION2030との比較」ケニア留学最終プレゼン白鳥「SDGsとKENYA VISION2030との比較」
ケニア留学最終プレゼン白鳥「SDGsとKENYA VISION2030との比較」
Katsuya Shiratori
 
VIP Ludhiana Girls Call Ludhiana 0X0000000X Doorstep High-Profile Girl Servic...
VIP Ludhiana Girls Call Ludhiana 0X0000000X Doorstep High-Profile Girl Servic...VIP Ludhiana Girls Call Ludhiana 0X0000000X Doorstep High-Profile Girl Servic...
VIP Ludhiana Girls Call Ludhiana 0X0000000X Doorstep High-Profile Girl Servic...
shalvikaprincessparv
 
Summary of Senior (65+) Perceptions from 2023 Metro Atlanta Speaks
Summary of Senior (65+) Perceptions from 2023 Metro Atlanta SpeaksSummary of Senior (65+) Perceptions from 2023 Metro Atlanta Speaks
Summary of Senior (65+) Perceptions from 2023 Metro Atlanta Speaks
ARCResearch
 
3What is Standing Deposit Facility (SDF)?
3What is Standing Deposit Facility (SDF)?3What is Standing Deposit Facility (SDF)?
Rapport 2024 sur la richesse mondiale (UBS)
Rapport 2024 sur la richesse mondiale (UBS)Rapport 2024 sur la richesse mondiale (UBS)
Rapport 2024 sur la richesse mondiale (UBS)
bernarddetre2022
 

Recently uploaded (20)

VIP Nagpur Girls Call Service Nagpur 0X0000000X Independent Service Available...
VIP Nagpur Girls Call Service Nagpur 0X0000000X Independent Service Available...VIP Nagpur Girls Call Service Nagpur 0X0000000X Independent Service Available...
VIP Nagpur Girls Call Service Nagpur 0X0000000X Independent Service Available...
 
2024: The FAR - Federal Acquisition Regulations, Part 47
2024: The FAR - Federal Acquisition Regulations, Part 472024: The FAR - Federal Acquisition Regulations, Part 47
2024: The FAR - Federal Acquisition Regulations, Part 47
 
Canadian Immigration Tracker - Key Slides - May 2024.pdf
Canadian Immigration Tracker - Key Slides - May 2024.pdfCanadian Immigration Tracker - Key Slides - May 2024.pdf
Canadian Immigration Tracker - Key Slides - May 2024.pdf
 
safe*(+971524843957 **effective abortion pills in Dubai, We have mifepristone...
safe*(+971524843957 **effective abortion pills in Dubai, We have mifepristone...safe*(+971524843957 **effective abortion pills in Dubai, We have mifepristone...
safe*(+971524843957 **effective abortion pills in Dubai, We have mifepristone...
 
Proper education is birth rights of all the girls
Proper education is birth rights of all the girlsProper education is birth rights of all the girls
Proper education is birth rights of all the girls
 
Day care centers for poor children kurnool
Day care centers for poor children kurnoolDay care centers for poor children kurnool
Day care centers for poor children kurnool
 
Celebrity Girls Call Navi Mumbai 🎈🔥9920725232 🔥💋🎈 Provide Best And Top Girl S...
Celebrity Girls Call Navi Mumbai 🎈🔥9920725232 🔥💋🎈 Provide Best And Top Girl S...Celebrity Girls Call Navi Mumbai 🎈🔥9920725232 🔥💋🎈 Provide Best And Top Girl S...
Celebrity Girls Call Navi Mumbai 🎈🔥9920725232 🔥💋🎈 Provide Best And Top Girl S...
 
New Girls Call Mumbai 👀 9820252231 👀 Cash Payment With Room DeliveryDelivery
New Girls Call Mumbai 👀 9820252231 👀 Cash Payment With Room DeliveryDeliveryNew Girls Call Mumbai 👀 9820252231 👀 Cash Payment With Room DeliveryDelivery
New Girls Call Mumbai 👀 9820252231 👀 Cash Payment With Room DeliveryDelivery
 
Constituency wise Sand Prices in andhra pradesh
Constituency wise Sand Prices in andhra pradeshConstituency wise Sand Prices in andhra pradesh
Constituency wise Sand Prices in andhra pradesh
 
CBO’s Economic Forecast: Understanding Productivity Growth
CBO’s Economic Forecast: Understanding Productivity GrowthCBO’s Economic Forecast: Understanding Productivity Growth
CBO’s Economic Forecast: Understanding Productivity Growth
 
Girls Call Noida 9873940964 Provide Best And Top Girl Service And No1 in City
Girls Call Noida 9873940964 Provide Best And Top Girl Service And No1 in CityGirls Call Noida 9873940964 Provide Best And Top Girl Service And No1 in City
Girls Call Noida 9873940964 Provide Best And Top Girl Service And No1 in City
 
VIP Bangalore Girls Call Bangalore 0X0000000X Doorstep High-Profile Girl Serv...
VIP Bangalore Girls Call Bangalore 0X0000000X Doorstep High-Profile Girl Serv...VIP Bangalore Girls Call Bangalore 0X0000000X Doorstep High-Profile Girl Serv...
VIP Bangalore Girls Call Bangalore 0X0000000X Doorstep High-Profile Girl Serv...
 
3, Burak Yardimci OECD_Path to Economic Resilience_10JULY2024.pptx
3, Burak Yardimci OECD_Path to Economic Resilience_10JULY2024.pptx3, Burak Yardimci OECD_Path to Economic Resilience_10JULY2024.pptx
3, Burak Yardimci OECD_Path to Economic Resilience_10JULY2024.pptx
 
DDOT Bicyclist Advisory Committee Presentation
DDOT Bicyclist Advisory Committee PresentationDDOT Bicyclist Advisory Committee Presentation
DDOT Bicyclist Advisory Committee Presentation
 
Summer 2024 Issue of Newtown News of Interest
Summer 2024 Issue of Newtown News of InterestSummer 2024 Issue of Newtown News of Interest
Summer 2024 Issue of Newtown News of Interest
 
ケニア留学最終プレゼン白鳥「SDGsとKENYA VISION2030との比較」
ケニア留学最終プレゼン白鳥「SDGsとKENYA VISION2030との比較」ケニア留学最終プレゼン白鳥「SDGsとKENYA VISION2030との比較」
ケニア留学最終プレゼン白鳥「SDGsとKENYA VISION2030との比較」
 
VIP Ludhiana Girls Call Ludhiana 0X0000000X Doorstep High-Profile Girl Servic...
VIP Ludhiana Girls Call Ludhiana 0X0000000X Doorstep High-Profile Girl Servic...VIP Ludhiana Girls Call Ludhiana 0X0000000X Doorstep High-Profile Girl Servic...
VIP Ludhiana Girls Call Ludhiana 0X0000000X Doorstep High-Profile Girl Servic...
 
Summary of Senior (65+) Perceptions from 2023 Metro Atlanta Speaks
Summary of Senior (65+) Perceptions from 2023 Metro Atlanta SpeaksSummary of Senior (65+) Perceptions from 2023 Metro Atlanta Speaks
Summary of Senior (65+) Perceptions from 2023 Metro Atlanta Speaks
 
3What is Standing Deposit Facility (SDF)?
3What is Standing Deposit Facility (SDF)?3What is Standing Deposit Facility (SDF)?
3What is Standing Deposit Facility (SDF)?
 
Rapport 2024 sur la richesse mondiale (UBS)
Rapport 2024 sur la richesse mondiale (UBS)Rapport 2024 sur la richesse mondiale (UBS)
Rapport 2024 sur la richesse mondiale (UBS)
 

Item # 7 - 231 Encino Ave. (sign. review)

  • 1. CITY OF ALAMO HEIGHTS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT CITY COUNCIL AGENDA MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council Members FROM: Lety Hernandez, Director of Community Development Services SUBJECT: Case No. 914F – 231 Encino Ave Request of Lisa Nichols of Nic Abbey Homes, owner, for the significance review of the existing main structure located at 231 Encino Ave in order to demolish 100% of the existing single-family residence under Demolition Review Ordinance No. 1860 (April 12, 2010). DATE: June 10, 2024 BACKGROUND INFORMATION The property is zoned SF-A and is located on the east side of the street between Mayflower St and Mary D Ave. The Architectural Review Board considered the request at their January 16, 2024 meeting and voted unanimously to declare the existing main structure as significant and recommended denial of the demolition as requested. City Council considered the board’s recommendation at their February 12, 2024 meeting and voted to enact the 1st 90-day delay that would expire on May 12, 2024. City Council reconsidered the case at their April 29, 2024 meeting and voted to enact a 2nd delay for an additional sixty (60) days resulting in a new expiration date of June 28, 2024.
  • 2. POLICY ANALYSIS  Chapter 5 – Buildings and Building Regulation, Article IX. – Demolition Demolition shall mean any intentional or unintentional act of dismantling, pulling down, destroying, removing, razing or moving a structure or any structural portion thereof, or commencing the work of moving or of total or substantial destruction of a structure or portion thereof. For the purposes of demolition review as described in article IX, demolition is defined quantitatively as: (1) Removal or encapsulation of more than twenty-five (25) percent of the framed structure of exterior walls facing public streets, or a street-facing elevation if the tract of land is landlocked; or, (2) Removal or encapsulation of more than fifty (50) percent of the framed structure of all exterior walls and/or roofs. Exception: Minor repair and routine maintenance. Demolition review shall mean the public process of presenting proposed demolition and/or replacement projects to the Architectural Review Board and/or City Council. Significant structure shall mean any structure or portion thereof that in whole or in part meets one (1) or more criteria in section 5-134(h) and has been so determined by the city council. Section 5-134(h): The architectural review board shall consider the following criteria when determining the significance, as defined in this chapter, of existing structures: (1) Was the structure designed by a noted architect? (2) Has the structure been listed as having historic significance by any local, regional, state or historic agency or society? (3) Does the structure exhibit characteristics of a distinct architectural style? (4) Does the structure belong to a distinctive set of buildings, such as a single structure belonging to a row of similar structures? (5) Is the structure a significant part of the fabric of the community due to its age, unique architecture, historical significance or physical placement? Section 5-135, Demolition Delay (a) Where a demolition delay is determined necessary, the city council may delay the issuance of the demolition permit for a maximum of ninety (90) days from the date of the action designating the existing structure as significant. This delay may be extended by the city council for an additional ninety (90) days at any time prior to expiration of the original delay, but such extension shall occur only once, for a maximum delay not to exceed one hundred eighty (180) days from the date of action designating the structure as significant. If the city and property owner have not reached a mutual agreement on the future of the structure, within said one hundred eighty (180) days, the demolition review shall be approved. (b) Where a demolition delay has been determined necessary, the community has the opportunity to seek out persons who might be willing to purchase, preserve, rehabilitate or restore such structure rather than demolish the structure, and to limit the detrimental effect of demolition on the historical architectural resources of the city. Likewise, the owner has the opportunity to resubmit a revised application to the city for review and comment. (c) Where a demolition delay has been determined necessary, the city shall post on the property, and on the city's website, a public notice announcing the demolition delay. Such notice shall be posted within three (3) business days of the city council’s action and shall remain in place for the entire period of the demolition delay.
  • 3. (d) Notwithstanding the designation of a structure as a significant structure, the director may issue a demolition permit at any time after receipt of written advice from the city council to the effect that the city is satisfied that there is no reasonable likelihood that either the owner or some other person is willing to purchase, preserve, rehabilitate or restore such structure, or when additional information warrants a termination of the demolition delay. (e) In a case where the property owner or authorized agent desires only to have the architectural review board make a determination of a structure's significance, the property owner or authorized agent shall submit a request for such action along with a non- refundable fee. The city and the property owner or authorized agent shall then follow in similar manner the requirements set out in section 5-134. The city shall establish a date after the end of the public comment period for the architectural review board to hear the request for a determination from the property owner or authorized agent. Section 5-136, Demolition review approval. (a) Demolition review approval shall be granted for the following conditions: (1) When a demolition delay has been established and the maximum delay period of one hundred eighty (180) days has expired, or (2) The existing structure proposed for demolition is not determined significant, as defined in this chapter, and (3) The replacement structure for any structure previously approved under demolition review is determined to be compatible, as defined in this chapter. (b) Once demolition review approval is granted by city council, the director shall have the authority to issue a demolition permit per article IV of this chapter upon request by the property owner or authorized agent. A replacement structure is still not proposed at this time. Construction of a new single-family residence would be subject to compatibility review by the ARB and approval by the City Council. Prior to the April 29, 2024 meeting, the applicant informed staff that they were actively marketing the property since the initial delay. No additional updates have been provided. The maximum amount of extensions was reached with the enactment of the 2nd 60-day delay. Section 5-135(a) requires that the demolition review be approved. FISCAL IMPACT No projected fiscal impact from this project has been calculated. ATTACHMENTS Attachment A – Web Packet Attachment B – Response Cards __________________________ Lety Hernandez Director __________________________ Buddy Kuhn City Manager
  • 4. CITY OF ALAMO HEIGHTS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT 6116 BROADWAY SAN ANTONIO, TX 78209 210-826-0516 Architectural Review Board Meeting January 16, 2024 – 5:30 P.M. Take notice that a Regular Architectural Review Board meeting of the City of Alamo Heights will be held on Tuesday, January 16, 2024 at 5:30pm in the City Council Chambers, located at 6116 Broadway St, San Antonio, Texas, 78209, to consider and act upon any lawful subjects with may come before it. INSTRUCTIONS FOR TELECONFERENCE: The City will make reasonable efforts to allow members of the public to participate via audio by dialing 1-346-248-7799 and entering access number 86801845240#. If you would like to speak on a particular item, when the item is considered, press *9 to “raise your hand”. Citizens will have three (3) minutes to share their comments. The meeting will be recorded. The City cannot guarantee participation by phone due to unforeseen technical difficulties or provide prior notice if they occur; therefore, the City urges your in-person attendance if you require participation. Case No. 914F – 231 Encino Ave Request of Lisa Nichols of Nic Abbey Homes, owner, for the significance review of the existing main structure located at 231 Encino Ave in order to demolish 100% of the existing single-family residence under Demolition Review Ordinance No. 1860 (April 12, 2010). Chapter 5 of Code of Ordinances (Buildings and Building Regulations) requires City Council to consider the ARB’s recommendation for all demolition/final design review applications. Please check the ARB posted results on the City’s website after the ARB meeting to confirm any future meeting dates. Plans are available for public viewing on the City’s website, with the exception of floor plans, (http://www.alamoheightstx.gov/departments/planning-and-development-services/public-notices/) and at the Community Development Services Department located at 6116 Broadway St, 2nd floor. You may also contact Michelle Ramos (mramos@alamoheightstx.gov) or Lety Hernandez (lhernandez@alamoheightstx.gov) by email or our office at (210) 826-0516 for additional information regarding this case. Attachment A
  • 15. The American Institute of Architects AIA San Antonio 1344 South Flores Street, Ste. 102 San Antonio, Texas 78204 210-226-4979 www.aiasa.org January 16, 2024 Architectural Review Board City of Alamo Heights 6116 Broadway San Antonio, Texas 78209 RE: 231 Encino Avenue Dear Architectural Review Board Members, On behalf of the Board of Directors of AIA San Antonio, the local chapter of The American Institute of Architects, I write to urge that you find the property located at 231 Encino Avenue historically significant. This Tudor Revival style home was designed by the firm of Adams & Adams in the early years of the 1920’s for Mr. & Mrs. Frank Lewis. Located on a prominent lot in the heart of Alamo Heights, the home’s single- story front façade features a Gothic arch entryway, tall/narrow windows, a prominent cross gable, ironwork in the windows and lantern, and elaborate brink chimneys, crowned with decorative chimney pots. Its charm is evident from the street, despite the neglect the home has suffered since its last owner passed away more than a decade ago. The detail found on the home’s front façade alludes to similar details found on the interior. Woodwork by local craftspeople adorns the walls of the library. Hand-forged metal handrails, carved Italian marble fireplace surrounds and other custom features all remain in a home thoughtfully designed by one of our region’s most prominent architectural firms from long ago. Losing a home of this importance will significantly impact the fabric of Alamo Heights. The lot on which the home is sited is generous and deep like the properties that are immediately adjacent to it. The developer’s proposal to infill the lot with four to five new homes will forever change the character of the street. Local architects favor a more sustainable option. We advocate that the home not be demolished. City leaders should support restoration and reimagination so that this neglected architectural treasure can nurture the next generation just as it has for the last century. Sincerely, Torrey Stanley Carleton Hon. AIA Executive Director Attachment B
  • 17. 1 Lety Hernandez Subject: FW: 231 Encino Ave demolition From: Ted Flato < > Sent: Saturday, January 13, 2024 4:22 PM To: Elsa T. Robles <erobles@alamoheightstx.gov> Subject: 231 Encino Ave demolition Dear members of the architectural review board, Our family has lived at 210 Encino Ave for close to 30 years and we are extremely distraught by the request to demolish 231 Encino, a significant architectural gem. Alamo Heights encompasses a wide and diverse style of homes. This section of Encino Ave., with its gorgeous oak-covered landscapes, is a uniquely beautiful part of our neighborhood featuring many houses designed by San Antonio’s best architects from the early 20th century (Adams and Adams, Harvey Page, etc.). Published in 1926 in Architecture (the premiere architectural magazine at the time), the residence at 231 is a critical part of the charm, character and historical significance of the street. Houses like this are the backbone of what makes “Old Alamo Heights” unique and attractive, and with their numbers dwindling significantly over the years, we cannot afford to lose this one. As both a resident who has great fondness and admiration for our neighborhood and an architect who appreciates and recognizes the importance of maintaining our architectural heritage, I strongly encourage you to not allow this significant house to be demolished. Sincerely, Ted Flato Sent from my iPhone Ted Flato, FAIA Partner LAKE|FLATO ARCHITECTS 311 Third Street San Antonio, Texas 78205 p 210.227.3335 ******************** Attachment B
  • 18. 1 Lety Hernandez Subject: Demo Review for 231 Encino Avenue, 78209 From: Fravell Family < > Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2024 2:59 PM To: Lety Hernandez <lhernandez@alamoheightstx.gov> Subject: Demo Review for 231 Encino Avenue, 78209 To Whom It May Concern, My husband, Mike Fravell, and I are sending this email to express our opposition to the demolition of the historical house at 231 Encino Avenue, San Antonio, Texas. Our home is located adjacent to this property. We endured a very recent, long and arduous restoration project of our home. Maintaining the character of our home, in keeping with its landmark location was of utmost importance throughout the project. We modernized and invigorated the home for a large and active family while respecting the beauty and charm of its locale. Knowing that this kind of restoration would be very possible, we would support and welcome a project of this nature at 231 Encino Ave, San Antonio, Texas. Katie and Mike Fravell Attachment B
  • 22. 1 Lety Hernandez Subject: 231 Encino From: Chris Hill < > Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2024 8:12 AM To: Elsa T. Robles <erobles@alamoheightstx.gov> Subject: 231 Encino Dear Members of the Architectural Review Committee. I strongly urge the committee to deny any variance application for the subdivision of the property at 231 Encino. A mid block multi unit development along a solely single lot residential street would not only devalue the surrounding properties and properties up and down the street, but it would also destroy the visual unity of single home lots along one of the more beautiful streets in Alamo Heights. Sincerely, Christopher C. Hill 5111 Broadway San Antonio, Texas 78209 O 1.210.8286565 ext 6 C 1.210.8617787 Attachment B
  • 23. 1 Lety Hernandez Subject: 231 Encino additional letter From: Chris Hill <> Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2024 1:25 PM To: Lety Hernandez <lhernandez@alamoheightstx.gov>; Elsa T. Robles <erobles@alamoheightstx.gov> Subject: 231 Encino additional letter Dear Members of the Architectural review Committee, In addition to being opposed to the subdivision of the property known as 231 Encino, it has also come to my attention that the house itself is historically significant as evidenced by several publications and leading architects within our community. I urge the Committee to consider the architectural significance and contribution of the existing house at 231 Encino to the street and the neighborhood as required by Alamo Heights code Article IX, 5-130 (3) and deny the permit for demolition to preserve and protect the architectural heritage of Alamo Heights. Sincerely, Christopher C. Hill 5111 Broadway San Antonio, Texas 78209 O 1.210.8286565 ext 6 C 1.210.8617787 Attachment B
  • 24. 1 Lety Hernandez Subject: 231 Encino -----Original Message----- From: Ann Himoff <> Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2024 4:47 PM To: Lety Hernandez <lhernandez@alamoheightstx.gov> Cc: Andrew Himoff < > Subject: 231 Encino To Whom it May Concern, We are writing this letter in opposition of the beautiful, historic Alamo Heights at 231 Encino from being torn down and the lot being developed into 4-5 lots. We live on Patterson Avenue, we walk by this house every single day and have long admired its beautiful architecture, and have dreamed about what it would look like brought back to life. We live in a 1937 house, in which we have taken great care of and gone to so much extra expense in order to keep the character of it alive. Both of our families have lived in Alamo heights for 4 generations, and we care deeply about preserving the uniqueness and character of our city. These new builds on zero lot lines will not age well. They are purely for making money. We could have torn our house down, but have taken the care and spent a lot of money to restore and add on to an old home. The same could be done here! This home is absolutely beautiful, and I personally know many families that would treasure the opportunity to buy this house and restore it. Thank you so much for your taking the time to read this. Sincerely, Ann and Andrew Himoff Attachment B
  • 25. 1 Lety Hernandez Subject: 231 encino avenue -----Original Message----- From: Triana Grossman <> Sent: Monday, January 15, 2024 6:22 PM To: Elsa T. Robles <erobles@alamoheightstx.gov> Cc: Brandon Grossman < > Subject: 231 encino avenue Dear Members of the Architectural Review Board, I am writing to express my strong opposition to the proposed demolition of the historic house located at 231 Encino Avenue in San Antonio, Texas. This architectural gem holds significant cultural and historical value for our community. Preserving such structures is crucial in maintaining the unique character and identity of our city. The demolition of 231 Encino Avenue would not only erase a piece of our heritage but also diminish the cultural richness that makes San Antonio special. I urge the Architectural Review Board to reconsider this decision and explore alternative options for the property's development that would allow the historic house to be retained and celebrated. Our shared history deserves protection, and I believe that with thoughtful consideration, a balance can be struck between progress and preservation. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Sincerely, Triana and Brandon Grossman 201 Argyle Avenue San Antonio, TX. 78209 Attachment B
  • 27. 107 King William Street | San Antonio, Texas 78204-1312 | 210.224.6163 | SAconservation.org January 9, 2024 Members of the Architectural Review Board, Mayor and City Council City of Alamo Heights Dear Mayor, Members of City Council, and Members of the Architectural Review Board: The Conservation Society of San Antonio values the many beautiful historic homes that make the City of Alamo Heights so desirable. Many have been honored with the Conservation Society’s Building Awards, and many are listed on the National Register of Historic Places. The Frank Lewis House, built in 1922 by the architects Adams and Adams, is going to be demolished for a typically avaricious multi-unit project at 231 Encino in Alamo Heights. Lewis designed the Brackenridge golf course and Adams and Adams designed many homes throughout the area as well as the 1921 Woolworth Building on Alamo Plaza, which was on the World Monuments Fund 2020 Watch List along with Notre Dame de Paris and Machu Picchu. The Lewis House was of such note that it was featured in the November 1926 edition of Architecture magazine, now Architectural Record. It was lovingly maintained for many years by our dear friend and supporter Maggie Block. Due to the building’s clear and present architectural and historical significance, we urge the Architectural Review Board, the Mayor and City Council to deny this demolition request. Certainly, a creative and intelligent way can be found to improve the value of this property without destroying a building of such stature and import. We hope you will consider these items as you deliberate this substantial new project in the city. Sincerely, Kathy Krnavek, President Attachment B
  • 28. Architects of the San Antonio Zoo Adams & Adams Many of the buildings and structures completed during the New Deal-era building program at the San Antonio Zoo were completed by the San Antonio architectural firm Adams & Adams, including numerous quarry wall exhibits, the old Zoo restrooms, the Commissary/Monkey House (Resource No. 5), the Elephant House (Resource No. 42), the Hippo House (Resource No. 79), and the Baumberger Moats (Resource No. 54). W.C. Thraikill was the contractor.137 Some of the buildings featured modest stylisfic elements, like the Spanish Revival Commissary and Rusfic Moderne Hippo House, while others, like the Elephant House, were simply Rusfic stone structures to house the animals. All these features ufilized the local limestone in their construcfion, giving the zoo a cohesive, natural feeling that blended in with its surrounding environment. Furthermore, the use of stone made these facilifies durable and easy to clean, while sfill being aesthefically appealing to the visitor. Born in 1885 in Nebraska, Carleton Adams and his family moved to San Antonio in 1890. Adams went on to study architecture at Columbia University, graduafing in 1909 and returning to San Antonio. Along with his uncle Carl C. Adams he co-founded the firm Adams & Adams. Adams & Adams were key figures in the development and design of numerous residences in the Monte Vista neighborhood of north San Antonio. 138 Carl Adams died in 1918 and Max C. Friedrich took over as associate of the firm with Carleton Adams. The firm constructed numerous residences throughout San Antonio, although they specialized in large commercial and public buildings. Adams was known to experiment with a variety of styles, but most popularly the Spanish Colonial-Revival and later Art Deco styles, evident on some of the buildings at the zoo.139 They also ufilized tenants of the Beaux Arts style of design, parficularly on their 1919 design for the San Antonio Drug Company Building (NR). In the 1920s, the San Antonio Zoological Associafion (SAZA) retained Adams & Adams to draw up designs for their barless, cageless zoo. After meefing with zoo consultant Heinrich Hagenbeck, the firm designed plans for numerous new buildings and structures within the zoo, many of which are extant in 2022. Several sources cite Gerard M. Baker as the chief designer working for Adams & Adams on the zoo project. Although liftle appears to be known about Baker, one newspaper arficle indicates that he had been previously employed construcfing cageless animal enclosures at the St. Louis Zoo.140 In the 1930s, much of Adams & Adams work was funded by the WPA, including the Thomas Jefferson High School (1929-1932, NR 1983), a sprawling campus inspired by Spanish Renaissance (also known as Spanish Colonial Revival) architecture, with hipped roofs of red file, elaborate cast stone details, carved wooden doors and beams, and ornate auditorium. The school was featured in Life Magazine and Nafional Geographic for its innovafive design and beauty.141 The firm also worked as the campus architect for Texas A&M University in the 1940s, where Carleton Adams designed the Memorial Students Center. 142 The firm confinued operafing unfil Carleton Adam’s sudden death of a heart aftack in 1964.143 Notable buildings designed by Adams & Adams include: • Protestant Orphan’s Home, San Antonio • Nafional Bank of Commerce, San Antonio • F.W. Woolworth Building (Alamo Plaza NR District 1977) • Trinity Methodist Church San Antonio (1920) • St. James Methodist Episcopal Church, Waco (1924, NR 2019) • Great American Life Insurance Building, San Antonio (1925) • Charles Baumberger House, San Antonio (1929) • G.A. Stowers House, San Antonio (1925) • Thomas Jefferson High School (1929-1932, NR 1983) • Robert E. Lee Hotel, San Antonio (1938 Addifion, NR 1996) • San Antonio Drug Company (1919, NR 1994) • State Highway Building, Ausfin (1932) • King Ranch Home “Santa Gertrudis” Kingsville (1913-1917, NHL 1964) • Kerr County Courthouse, Kerrville • Sames-Moore Building, Laredo • Nixon Office Building, Corpus Chrisfi • West Texas Ufilifies Building, San Angelo (NR • Texas State Library and Archives Building, Ausfin (1958) hftps://www.thc.texas.gov/public/upload/preserve/nafional_register/draft_nominafions/San%20Antonio%20Z oo%20MPDF%20SBR%201.pdf Attachment B HOUSTON - OUTSIDE 200FT
  • 31. Lewis House 231 Encino Avenue Alamo Heights, Texas Carleton Adams (1885-1964) was a San Antonio Architect whose eclectic country houses had significant influence on the evolution of Texas architecture. His work was part of a national movement in search of an Architectural language for the American Country house. The Lewis House at 231 Encino (c1925) in Alamo Heights was one of Adams more restrained and elegant compositions. Though large, the simplicity of the façade is unpretentious and welcoming. The exquisitely detailed Entry Portal, chimney and steep roof pitch evoke an English or Norman Manor house in the village hamlet. The original double hung windows with plank shutters, French Doors and deep porches are a uniquely American vernacular. This is a rural Architecture that speaks directly to the bohemian Artist cottages (131 Patterson) and English Craftsman houses (120 Westover) prevalent in the neighborhood in the first two decades of the 20th century. The architecture and siting of the house was unique for the era and appears to have been influenced by the work of H.T. Lindeberg, a New York contemporary of Adams. The structure is nestled into the landscape rather than resting as an object on the hilltop site. By placing the front door at a Landing where stairs descend to public rooms that connect directly to the yard a low street profile was maintained. Bedrooms and sleeping porches are tucked into the floor a few steps above street level. Attachment B MCDONALD - OUTSIDE 200FT
  • 32. 1 Lety Hernandez Subject: FW: 231 Encino Ave From: Judy Pesek <> Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2024 9:57 PM To: Elsa T. Robles <erobles@alamoheightstx.gov> Subject: 231 Encino Ave Dear Member of the Architecture Review Board, It has come to my attention that the home at 231 Encino Ave is going to be demolished and new, denser residential built in its place. I have been traveling to San Antonio for many years, visiting with friends who live in Alamo Heights. One of my favorite things to do is drive through Alamo Heights and admire the many beautiful older homes in this lovely neighborhood. I have always admired the fact that the same mistake that has happened in other cities older neighborhoods, (i.e. the demolition and building of McMansions), has not happened in San Antonio and Alamo Heights. So, imagine my utter disappointment when I learned that the same trend is about to begin. This home in Alamo Heights is of architectural significance and was published in Architecture Magazine in 1926! Adams and Adams were the architect, a significant architect to the city. The architectural significance cannot be overstated! There are many homes that would qualify as significant in any American City; however, San Antonio is as unique as cities come. I would say the test that a home must pass to be significant would-be: a) It was constructed of local materials, b) Local craftsman did the work, and c) Local known architect designed the home, and d) it is perfect contextually for San Antonio. This beautiful home at 231 Encino passes all the test of being considered significant. As I further investigated, I was shocked to learn that Alamo Heights has no historical district organization to stop this from happening. It would be tragic to lose this historic and architecturally significant home, and have it be replaced with something that is not compatible or with other homes in the neighborhood. Judy Pesek, FIIDA, LEED AP M 214.986.6817 Attachment B
  • 33. 1 Lety Hernandez Subject: To: COAH Architectural Review Board Importance: High -----Original Message----- From: Susan Straus < > Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2024 2:12 PM To: Lety Hernandez <lhernandez@alamoheightstx.gov>; Elsa T. Robles <erobles@alamoheightstx.gov> Cc: Susan Straus < > Subject: To: COAH Architectural Review Board Importance: High Dear Members of the Architectural Review Board, My family moved into 511 Argyle Ave. when i was in high school, a beautiful home built in 1927. In 2009 I was lucky to buy a bungalow at 232 Argyle Ave, built in 1924. All these homes are so unique.... 231 Encino Ave. I pass by regularly, and always admire its character and irreplaceable charm. 231 Encino Ave. is a house of amazing stature. It is an architecturally significant house…..an important part of the texture of our neighborhood. I strongly oppose the demolition of this jewel. Sincerely, Susan Straus Attachment B
  • 34. 1 Lety Hernandez Subject: ARB Presentation From: Mac White < > Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2024 9:23 AM To: Lety Hernandez <lhernandez@alamoheightstx.gov> Subject: RE: ARB Presentation Lety, I have to be out of town for work this week and will not be able to attend. I have had several people voice concerns to me over the proposed demolition on Encino. This house does have historical significance and this should be addressed as a part of the review of this project. I am sorry I will not be able to be there to voice a concern in the meeting, but I would be against this if I were there. Mac Mac White, AIA Partner MICHAEL G. IMBER, ARCHITECTS 111 WEST EL PRADO SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 78212 PHONE 210.824.7703 CELL 210.410.4417 MICHAELGIMBER.COM Facebook | Twitter | Pinterest | LinkedIn Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail and any attachments contain information from the firm of Michael G. Imber Architects, and are intended solely for the use of the named recipient or recipients. Any dissemination of this e-mail by anyone other than an intended recipient is strictly prohibited. If you believe you have received this e-mail in error, notify the sender immediately and permanently delete the e-mail, any attachments, and all copies thereof from any drives or storage media and destroy any printouts of the e-mail or attachment. Attachment B
  • 35. 1 Lety Hernandez Subject: FW: 321 Encino Attachments: 231 Encino Avenue [19].pdf From: Michael Imber <> Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2024 4:39 PM To: Lety Hernandez <lhernandez@alamoheightstx.gov> Subject: 321 Encino Lety, I am a neighbor down the street from 321 Encino, which is slated for demolition review. I have submitted (along with others) a letter of concern for losing a significant structure in our community. Nothing of this nature has been proposed before. It is our hopes that, given the importance of this house and the architects, Adams & Adams, that designed it, that the City find it appropriate to designate it “significant”. Attached, is an article on the house in Architecture Magazine, a national publication at the time it was built. Few houses in San Antonio have been recognized by a publication of this nature. Loosing this house would certainly be a loss to the architectural heritage of Alamo Heights. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Michael G. Imber, FAIA Michael G. Imber Principal MICHAEL G. IMBER ARCHITECTS 111 WEST EL PRADO SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 78212 PHONE 210.824.7703 MICHAELGIMBER.COM | LinkedIn | Instagram Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail and any attachments contain information from the firm of Michael G. Imber Architects, and are intended solely for the use of the named recipient or recipients. Any dissemination of this e-mail by anyone other than an intended recipient is strictly prohibited. If you believe you have received this e-mail in error, notify the sender immediately and permanently delete the e-mail, any attachments, and all copies thereof from any drives or storage media and destroy any printouts of the e-mail or attachment. Attachment B
  • 37. ARCHITECTURE REG. U. S. PAT. OFFICE THE PROFESSIONAL ARCHITECTURAL MONTHLY VOLUME LIV NUMBER 5 November 1926 CONTENTS PAGE PAGE Frontispiece : Sketch in pencil and water -color BY Otto R. Eggers 355 Measured Drawings of a Store Front . The first of a series each of which will present a suc cessful solution of an every -day problem BY Gerald K. Geerlings a Using the Orders with Freedom Illustrated with photographs BY Aymar Embury, II 323 Measured Drawing of Lincoln Cathedral . 359 Arcade in South Nave Aisle 329 by Ernest Pickering A Reproduction of the Hancock House Illustrated with photographs and with measured drawings made by the late John H. Sturgis , Architect BY Elizabeth Tower Everglades Club , Palm Beach , Fla . ADDISON MIZNER , Architect 361 A Memorial Flagstaff in Brooklyn Erected by the Trustees of Pratt Institute WILLARD PADDOCK , Sculptor 337 Arc -Welded Steel Construction Illustrated with photographs of tests BY A. M. Candy 365 339 When the Gods Dwelt in France : Les Baux . Illustrated with photographs and a sketch by the author BY Gerald K. Geerlings Architectural News in Photographs A bird's-eye view of what is happening architecturally that should be of interest to the profession 342 Pen -and -ink Drawing of the Cathedral , Avila, Spain Photographed and enlarged to secure the effect of an etching BY Paul Hermann 367 Editorial Comment 343 Contacts : York & Sawyer's Office Code Illustrated with photographs and office plan 368 Offices of Lewis Bowman , Architect , Bronx ville , N. Y. . LEWIS BOWMAN , Architect 344 Book Reviews and Announcements 370 347 A Symposium on Competitions Expressions of opinion from members of the profes sion upon a much -discussed problem . Further opin ions will be welcomed Residence of M. G. Thomas , Bearden , Tenn . BARBER & McMURRY , Architects 371 Dormer Windows The first of a series of portfolios illustrating architec . tural features of varying design 349 Residence of Frank M. Lewis , San Antonio , Texas ADAMS & ADAMS , Architects 373 ARCHITECTURE is published monthly , appearing on the 28th of the month preceding date of issue. Price , mailed flat to any address in the United States , $ 10 per year , in advance ; in Canada , $ 11; in foreign countries , $12. Single copies , $1. Advertising rates upon request . Entered as Second -class Matter , March 30, 1900, at the Post -Office at New York , N. Y., under the Act of March 2, 1879 . Copyright , 1926, by Charles Scribner's Sons . All rights reserved . NEW YORK : 597 FIFTH AVENUE , AT 48TH STREET W Y : CH A R L ES SCRIBNER'S SONS , PUBLISHERS Attachment B
  • 38. 373 NOVEMBER , 1926 . ARCHITECTURE RESIDENCE OF FRANK M. LEWIS , SAN ANTONIO , Texas . ADAMS & ADAMS , ARCHITECTS Attachment B
  • 39. ARCHITECTURE NOVEMBER , 1926 . SLEEPING PORCH BOYS GIRLS BOYS ROOM GIRLS ROOM BALCONY SITTING ROOM . OWNER'S ROOM GUEST ROOM DAM BREAK FAST ROOM KITCHEN TERRACE PORCH ROOM DINING ROOM HALL HEATER ROOM 20 LIVING ROOM TRUNKROOM SOOKS DOOR : RESIDENCE OF FRANK M. LEWIS , SAN ANTONIO , TEXAS ADAMS & ADAMS , ARCHITECTS 374 Attachment B
  • 41. Dear Members of the Architectural Review Board, Thank you for this opportunity to write a hastily composed letter to oppose the demolition of 231 Encino Ave. This historically significant Romantic Revival Tudor Cottage was built in 1925, in the center of old Alamo Heights. It is listed in the San Antonio Registry, a collection of 300 houses that “express San Antonio’s climate, cultures, and materials through architecture.” An article was also published in Architecture Magazine in 1926. The last occupant, my friend, Maggie Saunders Block, lived there until her death. Since then, there has been great interest in the house as a potential remodel by many with whom I have spoken, including a member of my own family, but unfortunately the owner, a family member of Mrs. Block, was hard to find and until now, the house stood vacant. People were hopeful it would go on the market. Alamo Heights is special. I love the old homes laid out spaciously on meandering streets that are sheltered under canopies of ancient trees that shade the runners and walkers, the families out strolling their babies, the neighbors catching up with one another, and eager dogs on leashes. I never anticipated that a developer would purchase one of our old architectural gems to demolish and then build multiple McMansions in its place. The house is stately, standing alongside a row of other multi-million-dollar homes on roomy lots. 231 Encino Ave. is a grand dame that deserves all the attention a single family can offer with updates and love. This developer also built next to my family home. We are now packed into her development like sardines. There is no privacy. She promised some sort of fencing and separation between the properties, none of which was ever done. All the electrical is displayed prominently with no fence facing our front yard. When I asked the developer if she was going to do anything about the lack of privacy, she replied that she had already spent too much on this project and wasn’t about to spend another dime because she might lose money in the end. Destroying the character of my beautiful neighborhood with a developer who has no regard for our tradition is risky business. The Architectural Review Board is responsible for our future. Caution. Mistakes like this would be unacceptable. Thank you, Jacqueline Beretta Attachment B