The controversial, gated apartment complex proposed for the blighted St. John’s Catholic Seminary site next to Mission Concepción received unanimous final approval from the Historic and Design Review Commission (HDRC) on Wednesday.
After the required permitting process and archaeological digs slated for November, the development team expects it will take 18-20 months to complete the more than $30 million project, which will see three historic buildings renovated and erect seven new structures. Other non-contributing structures and two homes will be demolished. The 12.15-acre parcel is owned by the Archdiocese of San Antonio. Part of the redevelopment plan includes new office and community meeting space for the Catholic church, in addition to more than 240 market rate apartments.
Preliminary site plans, which were approved by HDRC in 2014, had called for three-story structures closer to the mission that would have been more visible from the mission’s grounds. Preservation advocates cried foul. The plans approved today shortened several structures to two stories in order to comply with viewshed protection restrictions put in place in anticipation of the World Heritage designation in July 2015.
(Read more: Apartments at Mission Concepción Could Violate Height Restrictions)
Rather than seek an exemption to the viewshed overlay, design team members from 210 Development Group and B&A Architects reworked the plan to avoid the need for any exceptions.
“We felt, based on stakeholder input, this would be the best direction to go,” said 210 Development Group President Michael Wibracht after the vote. “There are some (people) that will never agree to (any development). We wanted to come through here with final approval.”
Alliance for San Antonio Missions spokesperson Carroll Brown was pleased with the plan, now that it complies with the viewshed rules, but said the rules themselves need to be more restrictive.
“Wherever visitors go they shouldn’t be able to see (new construction),” Brown said in a phone interview after the meeting. “We’re basically happy with the outcome that no exemptions were granted because it could have started a very bad precedent. … If they (developers) try something like that next to the next three missions, we’ll be up in arms.”
Several citizens signed up to speak against the development, including members of the Alliance and several descendants of Native American tribes indigenous to the area. They expressed concerns that the development will disturb the remains of indigenous people as well the aesthetics and culture of the surrounding Southside neighborhoods.
Lance Aaron, a member of the Alliance, accused the HDRC of “institutional corruption” and said that the project and public process surrounding developments near the Missions are “embarrassments.”
Maria Torres, tribal chairwoman for the Pacuache Indian Tribe First Nation of Texas, suggested that the former seminary become a public center for World Heritage events and include a museum.
Other neighbors welcome the Villa Concepción apartment complex that will bring people and activity back to the historic site. Candie Beltran, who lives in the Roosevelt Park neighborhood located next to Mission Concepción, said she would rather not see a gated community there, but it’s better than leaving the site vacant for vandals, stray dogs, and vagrants to hang out in.
“The neighbors are afraid of what goes on in there,” Beltran said. “If you see the property as it is now, it is not anything that (indigenous people) would be proud to hold their beloved deceased people to.”
Al Arreola, president and CEO of the South San Antonio Chamber of Commerce, also spoke in favor of the “responsible” development as it will bring more customers to local businesses.
Some of the comments made by opponents led HDRC Vice Chair Michael Connor to believe some people were voicing concerns in the wrong forum.
“Institutional corruption and so forth – that’s a bit outside of Historic Design Review’s purview. We’re the design police,” he said. “We don’t go after cases of corruption. That would be the Police Department. The thing we do police is the appropriateness of a design in a given situation or given location.”
Because the staff has found that the proposed development meets the planning, zoning, and viewshed restrictions and requirements, Connor said, “the design looks appropriate to me.”
HDRC Chair Michael Guarino agreed, adding that the City’s viewshed ordinance is strong yet simple.
“This is the first major test of that and these gentlemen have conformed to it,” he said.
As for why it has to be a “gated” community, Wibracht said, “It has to be. We can’t finance an un-gated community. … You want to build a project that’s going to feel secure to a single mom.”
The fences that surround the property will be tasteful, he added. Most units will have yards and the site plan includes plenty of greenspace.
The Alliance for San Antonio Missions will host a public meeting this Sunday to discuss the progress – or lack thereof – in managing growth and preservation around the Missions. “World Heritage Designation One Year Later: WHERE ARE WE?” will take place at the Mission Branch Library, 3134 Roosevelt Ave., from 3:30-5 p.m.
The City of San Antonio’s World Heritage Office will host two public input sessions on Sept. 20 and 24 to collect community feedback on land use plan amendments for the neighborhoods surrounding the Missions in the wake of the World Heritage designation. Preliminary feedback was gathered at the City’s public symposiums and through a 30-day open house program at public libraries. Comments can still be made online here or by calling the World Heritage Office at 210-207-2111.
- Tuesday, Sept. 20 at 6-8 p.m. at Stinson Municipal Airport, 8535 Mission Rd.
- Saturday, Sept. 24 at 10 a.m.-12 p.m. at Mission Branch Library, 3134 Roosevelt Ave.
“We want to make sure that people know about this and have an opportunity to provide their feedback,” said World Heritage Director Colleen Swain. Ultimately, the land use plan amendments will require City Council approval.
Top image: Looking northeast out over Mission Concepción. Photo by Scott Ball.
Related Stories:
Apartments at Mission Concepción Could Violate Height Restrictions
History, Culture, Celebration to Collide at Inaugural World Heritage Festival
Mission San José Neighbors: Apartments Too Close For Comfort
Remember our Mission’s and the enduring historical reminder of what happened to our people that is still relevant now in the way developers have coerced with power and control institutions that are allowing these apartments to make a few rich. A land that should have been offered by the San Antonio Archdioces to our National Historical Park system as an enduring legacy, and heritage for the future, and not a quick profit for the Country Club few.
This is a shameless act by all involved by silencing a community that has protested these apartments, and set a dangerous president for the rest of our Missions. Now the same developers Henry Cisneros and his 210 Development with Senator Carlos Uresti are proposing to do apartments at Mission San Jose. Again! A huge three story complex that would forever erase a cherished view from the San Antinio River to Mission San Jose.
Our world heritage sites need a better view shed protection plan, especially as it relates to structures between the river, and our Missions. District 3 Councilwoman Rebecca Viagrand promised changes, and we are still waiting. It should not be acceptable that large green open areas be reduced to large security gates, and imposing structures as proposed by Henry Cisneros and 210 Development.
This is about heritage, and the people here, already, and the needs of a marginalized people that deserve a better quality of life. The Missions as important historical icons need to be protected for future generations, including all associated lands around it. The threat of dense development threatens a quality of life, and a World Heritage culture as we know it, and more needs to be done to protect this from happening. The growth of crime of violence has flowed into the community faround Mission San Jose by the concentration of low income, and ethnic segregated housing. This is anticipated to grow with the current apartments that do not offer the local community enduring educational, health, and wellness programs to address current social needs.
A stronger Mission view shed beyond the heavily developer one the City uses is critical if places like the San Antonio Mission Reach is to keep its green beauty, and not look like an overdeveloped roofline. The cultural relevance between our Mission’s, and the San Antonio River is a powerful one, and is the only reason why the Mission’s exist where they do, including our World Heritage People that have a World view our local elected officials need to understand.
Shame on the archdiocese for not taking care of their property and for becoming a for profit developer/landlord. Both the archdiocese and the City serve the people of San Antonio first yet developers have more voice and power than the voters. Bottom line there should not be apartments right next to the Missions and any new development should have strict guidelines on height, proximity, and use. Why? To protect our Missions, offer an authentic experience to visitors, and to protect and enrich the quality of life for our neighborhoods (no gentrification).
I continue to believe that an Archdiocesan-leased COLUMBARIUM (total funeral/burial/mausoleum facility managed by contractors) would be a far more appropriate, profitable for the Chancery, and neighbor-esteemed re-use for the dilapidated Seminary… but who listens to me! A “graveyard” is its own best security and solemnity… kills 3 birds with one stone! The Chapel should be given over to the Mission/St. Cecilia’s for “expansion” and used for funeral Masses and Rosaries locally at the Columbarium…. Lots of parking to boot!