[Trio at 621 Middleton (23-27 stories, 280', 405 units, 14,770 sq. ft. ground level retail, 439 capacity internal garage)]

Did I miss an Overall Height Modification on this? That site is 8 stories by-right under DTC, with Bonus Height maxing out at 11 stories. Really struggle to see how they'll get to 27 stories here on a constrained site without the ability to do green space or any of the other features that have earned OHMs on other sites. 

[Printer & Bank (16 & 6 stories, 193'; 265 residential units; 33,637 sq. ft. retail; 3 level underground garage)]

27 minutes ago, smeagolsfree said:

My question to you is looking at the document, there is no mention of the number of parking spaces, so how do you know there will be less spaces unless you have more information than we do??????

Evidently you are privy to some info we do not have. Do you mind sharing!

Space, not spaces. The bonus height matrix shows 55,400 sq. ft. of total parking area. Parcel records say the existing garage is 90,828 sq. ft. and the surface lot is 5,626 sq. ft. 
 

Math isn’t my thing, but seems like that’s a reduction by almost half. 

[Printer & Bank (16 & 6 stories, 193'; 265 residential units; 33,637 sq. ft. retail; 3 level underground garage)]

8 hours ago, Nashvillain said:

It sucks that a development in probably the densest part of downtown needs a 6 story parking garage. Everything else about this proposal is great but why do we need an influx of cars in Printer's Alley/ "Banker's Alley?" (and adjacent areas). And I know this is a necessary measure on the developers part to get funding--but it's just so counterproductive and dumb. The Downtown Code abolished parking minimums but clearly that's not enough. Can we go a step further and legislate a way to punish lenders who insist on parking in new development downtown? 

Baffling that folks can look at a proposal from a developer who appears to have bought parking-only facilities expressly to tear down, replace with less parking space than currently exists on the site (apparently using automated parking lifts to subordinate that use to a degree no other project has done in Nashville), throw in 266k square feet of new housing and retail, upgrade some iconic public spaces.... and come away thinking that LENDERS/DEVELOPERS should be punished, rather than whoever wrote the code that incentivizes parking three different ways while limiting other incentives to improve a historic subdistrict such that a project as clearly beneficial as this is only possible because it earns 2/3rds of its bonus height from adding that parking. 

Aside from the totally wrong premise that this represents "an influx of cars" in the area, it completely ignores the real causes to promote a meme with little basis in reality.