Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Adaptive Reuse topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Conceptual review: plan to convert 831 South Front into restaurant advances with design and accessibility questions
Summary
Owner Bronte Clifford and architect Scott Mali presented conceptual plans to convert 831 South Front into a restaurant. Commissioners supported conceptual direction but requested complete elevation drawings, ADA/lift details, site context and shared‑property information before formal review.
Get email alerts on the Adaptive Reuse topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
At a conceptual review on March 19, Bronte Clifford (owner) and Scott Mali (architect) presented plans to convert a vacant building at 831 South Front into a restaurant. Proposed exterior work includes a new rooftop mechanical screening (or removal of rooftop equipment), regrading the south sidewalk and entrance to street level, new concrete steps and a 36‑inch handrail, and an incline platform lift or other accessibility solution.
Staff noted some rooftop equipment had been installed prior to approval and asked the applicant to provide sight‑line photos to document visibility from the public right‑of‑way. Commissioners emphasized the need for a full south‑elevation drawing, a site plan extending to adjacent properties and clear details showing the routing of drainage and the approach for addressing stormwater. The applicant was advised to contact Building & Zoning Services on drainage questions because HRC cannot override code or permit requirements.
Commissioners discussed the tradeoffs between preserving original stone steps and providing accessible entry. Several members said the front‑entry accessibility requirement and site constraints make removal of problematic historic steps a reasonable compromise when reuse of the stone is proposed (for example, in planters). The commission also suggested that if the front entrance proves infeasible for ADA compliance, the applicant show that alternatives (switchback ramps or shared easements) were explored and why they are not viable.
The commission provided conceptual feedback rather than a vote. Commissioners asked the applicant to return with full, coordinated drawings (site plan, elevations, rail details, handicap lift specifications), larger photos of existing conditions, and any easement/adjacent property information that could affect the design. No action was taken; staff will accept updated materials for the next review period.

