HomeMy WebLinkAboutTHE SUMMIT ON COLLEGE PARKING GARAGE - MJA/FDP ..... REMAND FROM CITY COUNCIL - FDP130056 - REPORTS - APPLICANT COMMUNICATIONExhibit B
Procedural Timeline
March 19th
– Administrative Hearing Officer McAskin approves the Major Amendment to the
Summit on College Project Development Plan
April 2nd
– Jeffrey Leef, Lester Kaplan, and Councilman Ross Cunniff file separate Notices of
Appeal of the Decision
April 22nd
– Councilman Ross Cunniff and Lester Kaplan file separate Amended Appeals
May 20th
– City Council considered the appeals and remands the Decision to the Hearing Officer
for further consideration of two issues
June 3rd
– Council passes Resolution 2014-50 wherein Council adopted findings of fact in support
of its May 20th
decision to remand
July 22nd
– Council passes Resolution 2014-63 wherein Council amends and re-adopts Resolution
2014-50 to make additional findings of fact and to limit the scope of this Remand Hearing.
Issues To Be Considered On Remand
In Resolution 2014-63, Council limited the scope of this Remand Hearing
to the consideration of only two issues:
1. “The impact of the major amendment on Spring Creek viewsheds” as
provided in Section 3.4.1(I)(2) of the Land Use Code.
2. “Consideration of the possible reduction of the size of the parking
structure building and the reduction of the number of parking spaces in
the structure to a number closer to the minimum parking requirements
as established by Ordinance No. 121, 2013, and presently contained in
Section 3.2.2(K)(1)(a) for multi-family development in the Transit-
Oriented Development (TOD) Overlay Zone . . . .”
3 Elevated Level (Original) Design as Viewed from S. College Avenue
2 Elevated Level (Alternate) Design as Viewed from S. College Avenue
Comparison of 2 and 3 Elevated Level Designs – As Viewed from S. College Ave.
2 Elevated Level Alternative
3 Elevated Level
Original Design
COMPARATIVE ELEVATIONS – 3 ELEVATED LEVEL DESIGN vs. 2 ELEVATED LEVEL DESIGN
2 Elevated Level Alternate Design
3 Elevated Level Original Design
Landscape Buffer Between Creekside Park and Parking Structure
COMPARATIVE ELEVATIONS – 3 ELEVATED LEVEL DESIGN vs. 2 ELEVATED LEVEL DESIGN
2 Elevated Level Alternate Design
3 Elevated Level Original Design
Existing Northward Views From Creekside Park
Planned landscape screening as viewed
from Creekside Park
Planned landscape screening as viewed
from Creekside Park
Note: The roofline of the existing Summit
building is visible above the 2 Elevated Level
parking deck
Both designs comply with the Land Use Code, Transit Oriented
Development Overlay and Midtown Plan.
Both designs comply with parking requirements as stated in the
Interim TOD Standard.
The Alternative Design addresses the two Issues to be considered
on Remand:
1. Reduces potential impact to the Spring Creek viewshed,
while enhancing existing landscaping and screening
2. Reduces the size and massing of the parking structure, while
reducing the number of parking spaces so as to be closer to
the minimum parking requirement as established on an
interim basis for the TOD
Both the original and alternative designs provide a practical and
sustainable solution for parking at The Summit, which also benefits
the surrounding community
Enhances Creekside Park by further screening The Summit
Development from views within Creekside Park
SUMMARY