Developers present concept for six‑story Front Street apartments; neighbors raise traffic and scale concerns

Developers seeking to replace the existing “Swiss chalet” building at 1036 South Front Street presented a conceptual plan June 18 to the Historic Resources Commission for a six‑story apartment building with ground‑floor residential entries and a partly submerged parking garage. No formal demolition or construction approvals were requested or taken; staff and the commission treated the session as conceptual review to help the applicant refine designs.

The applicant’s legal counsel, Craig Moncrief, said the team had revised the design after early feedback: “the goal for tonight’s meeting is to hopefully finalize the discussion on the demolition” and to return with a full application for demolition and new construction. The design team told the commission it has filed variance requests for vision clearance, ground‑floor depth and a parking setback needed by the site layout, and that the project does not seek variances for height.

Neighbors and residents urged the commission to press for changes to the proposal before any demolition. Alyssa Evans, who lives across the street, said the scale of the plan and its parking proposal would harm nearby homes and green space: “The current proposal stands to destroy all of that,” Evans said, listing concerns about height, traffic and headlight glare into adjacent residences. Another resident, Tamla Cole, said the building as shown felt like a “monstrosity” and asked the commission to demand design changes that respect the district’s character.

Commission members and staff focused their discussion on massing, relationships to adjacent contributing buildings, and the package of supporting materials they expect to see in a future formal submission. Commissioners asked for clearer sections showing how the partly submerged garage and its ventilation/garage openings would relate to the grade change between Front Street and the rear alley, and asked the team to show finished elevations and landscaping along West Deshler and Red Bud Alley.

Several commissioners said the current Front Street façade had improved since earlier iterations because the design brings active entries and more glazing to the public face, but many asked the applicant to break down the long blank facades on the north and south elevations and to test options that reduce perceived bulk from neighboring properties. Commissioners also repeated that, for demolition review, they expect a complete plan describing the proposed replacement, financing assurances and a construction timeline.

No vote was held. Staff confirmed the meeting was conceptual and advised the applicant to return with revised drawings (floor‑to‑floor sections, detailed elevations, garage sections, and a streetscape/landscaping plan) and with the outstanding variance filings and any coordination notes from city traffic and site compliance reviews.

The commission advised the applicant to continue engaging with immediate neighbors while preparing materials for the next submission; several commissioners said they are open to a reduced or reworked massing that preserves some contextual scale on the north and south sides while still meeting the city’s urban infill standards.