98-22921 RESO
RESOLUTION NO. 98-22921
A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA APPROVING A CONCEPT PLAN FOR THE
PARCELS KNOWN AS SSDI NORTH AND SSDI SOUTH; AMENDING
PARAGRAPH 5 OF THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT BY AND AMONG
THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, THE MIAMI BEACH REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY AND WEST SIDE PARTNERS, LTD., WHICH WAS APPROVED
BY THE CITY ON APRIL 15, 1998, SO THAT THE APPROVED 1998
CONCEPT PLAN WILL GOVERN IN THE EVENT OF ANY CONFLICT
BETWEEN SAID CONCEPT PLAN AND THE ZONING REGULATIONS IN
EFFECT AT THE TIME OF THE APPROVAL OF THE 1986
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, AS DEFINED IN THE ABOVE-NOTED
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, West Side Partners, Ltd., has heretofore asserted claims against the City of
Miami Beach ("City"') and the Miami Beach Redevelopment Agency ("RDA") in an Emergency
Motion styled, West Side Partners. Ltd.. a Florida Limited Partnership. Plaintiffvs. City of Miami
Beach. Florida. a Florida municipal corporation and the Miami Beach Redevelopment Agency. a
Florida municipal agency organized and existing pursuant to the Community Development Act of
1969, Defendants, Case No. 82-24526-CA 30 in the Circuit Court of the Eleventh Judicial Circuit
in and for Dade County, Florida (the "Emergency Motion"); and
WHEREAS, the Mayor and City Commission have heretofore approved a settlement
agreement (the "1998 Settlement Agreement") with respect to the Emergency Motion, pursuant to
Resolution No.98-22718, adopted on April 15, 1998, as amended; and
WHEREAS, Section 2.1.1 of the aforesaid Settlement Agreement provides, among other
things, for consideration of an amendment to the concept plan attached as Exhibit E to the
Development Agreement, dated as of April 17, 1986, by and among the City, the Miami Beach
Redevelopment Agency and South Shore Developers, Inc. (such amendment being hereinafter
referred to as the" 1998 Concept Plan" and said Development Agreement being hereinafter referred
to as the "1986 Development Agreement"), to be considered by the Mayor and City Commission,
and approved as a condition precedent to the effectiveness of the 1998 Settlement Agreement;
and WHEREAS, the 1986 Development Agreement provided that in approving the 1986
Concept Plan, the parties were to be governed by the provisions of the City of Miami Beach Zoning
Code, as that Code existed on the date of the approval of the 1986 Development Agreement; and
WHEREAS, the 1998 Concept Plan may differ in certain respects from the provisions of
the City of Miami Beach Zoning Code, as that Code existed on the date of the approval of the 1986
Development Agreement; and
WHEREAS, upon review and consideration of the 1998 Concept Plan, the City
Commission of the City of Miami Beach believes that said plan should govern the development of
the subject properties, notwithstanding any conflicting provisions of the 1986 Miami Beach Zoning
Code.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT DULY RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND THE CITY
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, as follows:
Section 1. That the Mayor and City Commission hereby approve the 1998 Concept
Plan, substantially in the form attached hereto as Exhibit "A". Implementation of the development
shown on said Concept Plan shall be pursuant to the terms of the 1998 Settlement Agreement and
the 1986 Development Agreement, as applicable. In the event of any conflict between the 1998
Concept Plan and the Zoning Ordinances of the City of Miami Beach as they existed on the date of
the 1986 Development Agreement, the provisions of the 1998 Concept Plan shall govern.
Section 2.
followsl:
Paragraph 5 of the 1998 Settlement Agreement is hereby amended to read as
5. 1998 Concept Plan. West Side has filed! shall file the 1998 Concept Plan
with the City, for its review and approval, which plan providesfmtty pro'v.idc for,
among other things, one tower, plus related amenities on the southern portion of
SSDI South. In connection with its review of the 1998 Concept Plan, the City-wtH
seek: has sought and obtained the advisory recommendations and comments of the
DRB and the Planning Department, using the design review criteria in effect at the
time the 1998 Concept Plan was filed with the City. In connection with pulling
building permits, West Side will have to submit the building plans for review and
approval by the DRB using the same criteria as set forth above. enee The 1998
Concept Plan... hftg having been approved by the City (the "Approved Concept
Plan"), then all subsequent action taken by the City in connection with any other
requested development approvals regarding SSDI North and SSDI South must be
consistent with the Approved Concept Plan, notwithstandim! anv conflictim!
Drovisions of the 1986 Develooment Al!reement and!or the Zoninl! Code of the Citv
of Miami Beach as it existed on the date of the aODroval of the 1986 Develooment
Al!reement. and so lonl! as the Aooroved Conceot Plan does not violate the Zoninl!
Code of the Citv in effect as of the date hereof and this Al!reement. and does not
increase the floor area ratio or oarkinl! reauirements that were in effect on the date
the 1986 Develooment Al!reement was aODroved.
Section 3.
This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption.
I Words stricken out are to be deleted and words that are double underlined are to added.
F:\ATIOILEVI,IPOR1'UFINIAGREEMTSICONCEPTI.RF)'; 2
Septeml>,.rl,I99H(9:22PM)
PASSED and ADOPTED this 23rd day of September, 1998.
1/1/1
MAYOR
ATTEST:
~t PcuduA
CITY CLERK
Resolution No. 98-22921
APPROVED AS TO
FORM & LANGUAGE
& FOR EXecUTION
All IdOdl, 'j/1dJ:e
'~.
1':\ATrO\LEVLlRE....O&.ORI)lCONCErTI_REs
Sepkmoor L 19911 (9:22PM)
3
THIRD AMENDMENT TO SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT
WHEREAS, that certain Settlement Agreement by and among the City of Miami Beach,
Florida, a Florida municipal corporation (the "City"), the Miami Beach Redevelopment Agency, a
Florida public agency organized and existing pursuant to the Community Redevelopment Act of
1969, Chapter 163, Part ill, Florida Statutes, as amended (the "Redevelopment Agency"), and West
Side Partners, Ltd., a Florida limited partnership ("West Side"), was approved by the City on April
15, 1998 and amended pursuant to that certain Amendment to Settlement Agreement approved by
the City on the d. Cl--day of 111A-<-L . 1998 and further amended by tbat certain Second
~ . .fi"
Amendment to Settlement Agreement approved by the City on the K day of ~
1998 (collectively, the" Settlement Agreement");
WHEREAS, the City, the Redevelopment Agency and West Side wish to amend the
Settlement Agreement pursuant to the terms and conditions of this Third Amendment to Settlement
Agreement (the "Amendment").
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants contained in the Settlement
Agreement and in this Amendment, and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and
sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto hereby agree to amend Paragraph 5
to read as follows:
5. 1998 Concept Plan. West Side has filed the 1998 Concept Plan with the City,
for its review and approval, which plan provides for, among other things, one tower,
plus related amenities on the southern portion of SSDI South. In connection with its
review of the 1998 Concept Plan, the City has sought and obtained the advisory
recommendations and comments of the DRB and the Planning Department, using the
design review criteria in effect at the time the 1998 Concept Plan was filed with the
City. In connection with pulling building permits, West Side will have to submit the
building plans for review and approval by the ORB using the same criteria as set
forth above. The 1998 Concept Plan having been approved by the City (the
"Approved Concept Plan"), all subsequent action taken by the City in connection
with any other requested development approvals regarding SSDI North and SSDI
South must be consistent with the Approved Concept Plan, notwithstanding any
conflicting provisions of the 1986 Development Agreement and/or the Zoning Code
of the City of Miami Beach as it existed on the date of the approval of the 1986
Development Agreement, and so long as the Approved Concept Plan does not violate
the Zoning Code of the City in effect as of the date hereof and this Agreement, and
does not increase the floor area ratio or parking requirements that were in effect on
the date the 1986 Development Agreement was approved.
EXECUfED as of the },3 Vl1.y Of~~ , 1998, in several counterparts, each
of which shall be deemed an original, but all constituting only one agreement..
Signed, sealed and delivered
in the presence of:
tJ
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH,
:~CiPal ~;12on
~ PrtfOrL
", ~ r
FLORIDlN.ct J
~
~---
-'"
h." '
, -
Name: ....it. ie'i
. /)
^-~(/'!:' ,i/I-
i.3 j.) /! ;! Ii' c~
APPROVED AS Te:
FORM & LANGU!,;..:~;:
& FOR EXECUTiO;\j
~~/ /#6/11
City Attor
THE MIAMI BEACH REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY, a public agency organized and
existing pursuant to the Community
Redevelopment Act of 1969, as amended,
Chapter 163, a I r Florida Statutes
,
" '\ '1,
'~~'t ~ '"/--'-(.c'"1.1./It. ,.,..-
Name: ,J c/:'t. /1/..'/,.'// lli "",
I .
By:
Name:
Title: Chairman
Attest:_~<f f~~'
N ame:Jo ~cn. r P AflC!:tftrlb.____ . .
Title: C!.l 7lj C!.-Lb-1L~ __._.
" .~-
, ~)
APPROVED AS TO
FORM & LANGUAGE
& FOR EXECUTION
~:{~"
Gef1l"rn' r.,.".,
/tId);;)
Dote
WEST SIDE PARTNERS, LTD., a Florida
limited partnership
By: WE S (f) SIDE PARTNERS, INC., a
Florida corp9rart-On, General Partner_
~ /~-;/... ///
By - /. //"- -- :.,...-- _/
Na~e: f. ~/j~~--~~
Title: II
T. !-</C ff lvv&' (l
P fZ f'SI cPif/"V V
JOINDER
The undersigned MIAMI BEACH MARINA ASSOCIATES, L TO., a Florida limited
partn~.rship, as the M. arina Lessee, hereby joins in and consents to the foregoing Amendment this
.12.. ~'" c' -::r:-:- JA
~ day of :Jj)Jk1.iI ' '.{ " 1998
MIAMI BEACH MARINA ASSOCIATES, LTD., a
Florida limited partnership
By: SoBe Marine, Inc., a Florida corporation,
general partner
By
The undersigned, as the .~wner of ~he
foregoing Amendment this ,:)bvt. day of.5 "'
JOINDER
ska Parcel, hereby joins in and consents to the
1998.
EAST COASTLINE DEVELOPMENT, LTD., a
Florida limited partnership
T COASTLINE, INC., a Florida
al Pa~
/
p~ eSt de/vl
JOINDER
The undersigned, as the ~wner of the Hinson Parcel, hereby joins in and consents to the
foregoing Amendment this ~3f(, day of ~~A(2/\ ' 1998.
~
AZURE COAST DEVELOPMENT, LTD., a Florida
limited partnership
~ .. ././'
By: AZURf COAST,JN9~/Florida corporation,
General Pa, er //// '~__. ~..-------
l~/ ~~/
/// ~?--zJ
ffG&~ ( dt;7-t (-
By:
Name:
JOINDER
The undersigned, as the owner and/or lessee of the those certain lots located in Block J 1 and
~ (the "Lots"), hereby joins in and consents to the foregoing Amendment this ::;/3 "'liay of
. vtJ{/\ , 1998.
~)7
Financial Ltd., a Florida limited
Pf(fSIJfr/vr
JOINDER
The undersigned HELLER FINANCIAL, INC., a ~D..e ~ClCuCt { <-..-- corporation, as the
holder of the leasehold mortgage encumbering the Marina Lease, and recorded in Official Records
Book 17673, Page 2862 of the Public Records of Dade County, Florida hereby joins in and consents
to the foregoing Amendment this rz-/:.... day of (1 lube y , 1998.
HELLER FINANCIAL, INC., a J)(' lO:..lAi1 (c..
corporation
1;,;/ J:~
vrtJ~.. 10:'1:/ ',-<
Name ~~ .
Name: ~., ~ i4f1..e./t-
By:
Name:
Title:
MIA980 1 /70918-1
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
CITY HALL 1700 CONVENTION CENTER DRIVE MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA 33139
http:\\cLmiami-beach.fl.us
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM NO. b 0 '1 - '1'8: C I )
TO:
Mayor Neisen O. Kasdin and
Members of the City mission
DATE: September 23,1998
FROM:
Sergio Rodriguez
City Manager
SUBJECT:
A RESO N OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA APPROVING A CONCEPT PLAN
FOR THE PARCELS KNOWN AS SSDI NORTH AND SSDI SOUTH;
AMENDING PARAGRAPH 5 OF THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT BY
AND AMONG THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, THE MIAMI BEACH
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND WEST SIDE PARTNERS, LTD.,
WHICH WAS APPROVED BY THE CITY ON APRIL 15, 1998, SO THAT
THE APPROVED 1998 CONCEPT PLAN WILL GOVERN IN THE EVENT
OF ANY CONFLICT BETWEEN SAID CONCEPT PLAN AND THE
ZONING REGULATIONS IN EFFECT AT THE TIME OF THE APPROVAL
OF THE 1986 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, AS DEFINED IN THE
ABOVE-NOTED SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT; AND PROVIDING AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
RECOMMENDATION
The Administration recommends that the City Commission adopt an amendment to the Concept
Plan of the Development Agreement, dated April 15, 1986, by and among the City, the Miami Beach
Redevelopment Agency and South Shore Developers, Inc. (such amendment being hereinafter
referred to as the" 1998 Concept Plan" ) for the SSDI North and SSDI South properties, pursuant to
the attached Resolution, and substantially in the form submitted as Exhibit A (revision dated
9/23/98), allowing the City Manager/Executive Director of the RDA to approve minor, non-
substantive changes.
BACKGROUND
On April 15, 1998, the City of Miami BeachlRDA approved a Settlement Agreement to resolve
pending litigation regarding the SSDI North and South parcels located on Alton Road in the South
Pointe Redevelopment Area. Pursuant to this agreement, the 1986 zoning requirements are the
regulating controls for the sites; however, the City of Miami Beach I RDA will be requested today
to amend said agreement to the effect that if there is any conflict between the 1998 Concept Plan and
the provisions of the 1986 Development Agreement and/or the Zoning Code of the City of Miami
Beach as it existed on the date of the approval of the 1986 Development Agreement, the approved
1998 Concept Plan shall govern, except that maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR) and
AGENDA ITEM Q.:l ~ \
DATE '1--L3-3~
parking requirements shall be governed by the 1986 Zoning Code and the 1998 Settlement
Agreement. The effectuation of the terms of said agreement is subject to the City CommissionlRDA
approving an amended Concept Plan for the subject parcels within a prescribed time frame.
On May 20, 1998, the Settlement Agreement was amended by the City/RDA to require that the 1998
Concept Plan be approved by the City CommissionlRDA no later than July 31, 1998. A resolution
approving a Second Amendment to this agreement was approved on July 13, 1998 which amended
the date to September 30, 1998 by which approval of the Concept Plan is required.
At the same meeting, the proposed Concept Plan went before the City CommissionlRDA for
preliminary comments; the City Commission referred the matter to the Design Review Board (DRB)
for additional comments and feedback. The Administration has been engaged in numerous and
lengthy meetings with the Portofino representatives and Architects (Fullerton Diaz) of the proposed
Portofino Concept Plan for the SSDI North and SSDI South properties regarding basic urban
planning and design principles. Representatives from Portofino and those comments are
incorporated in this report as Exhibit B.
Pursuant to the Administration's request, two meetings were held with interested parties in the South
Pointe area. At those meetings, individuals provided comments and recommendations to Portofino
representatives and their architects, that were in part, reflected in the evolving Concept Plan.
At the September 9, 1998 meeting, Portofino representatives and architects (Fullerton Diaz) made
a full presentation of the proposed Concept Plan. The City's consultant, Mr. Alex Cooper (Cooper,
Robertson and Partners) was also present and provided his comments on the project, attached hereto,
as Exhibit C.
A lengthy discussion by the City/RDA covered many issues of interest regarding the proposed '98
Concept Plan such as height, mass, orientation, view corridors, open space, etc. Members of the
general public also provided statements about the proposed '98 Concept Plan. Many of these
individuals had provided comments and suggestions to the Portofino representatives at the
community meetings described above. In general, those interested in the '98 Concept Plan felt that
additional time should be made available in order to allow for more community input and review
prior to final action by the City/RDA.
At the conclusion of the meeting of September 9, the City/RDA continued this matter to the meeting
of September 23, 1998 to allow for additional input by interested individuals and neighbors of the
South Pointe area.
A publicly advertised meeting was held on September 14, 1998 at 6:30 p.m. in City Hall. Interested
members of the public were in attendance along with City staff and representatives of Portofino. See
Exhibit D for a list of attendees and a list of some of the questions raised at this meeting.
Suggestions, questions and comments were made by the public and were substantively addressed by
City staff, the project's architects and Portofino.
The proposed '98 Concept Plan has been modified to address various suggestions on the SSDI North
and South parcels as follows:
SSDI-South
a. Combine the primary south Marina access drive with the SSDI-S service drive (just south
of the Yacht Club property). This matter is anticipated to be successfully negotiated by the
City with the Marina lessee. This access will provide for vehicular and pedestrian access to
the Marina and Baywalk. The accessway will have decorative treatment of the pavement and
a dedicated pedestrian walkway, as well as landscaping.
b. Residential/Retail cladding will be continued north along the pedestal area on Alton Road
to provide a more compatible treatmentluse with the adjacent uses.
c. All areas along the perimeter of the parking pedestal that are not cladded with
retail/residential uses will be treated architecturally to complement the habitable edge and
surrounding areas.
SSDI-North
a. A greater distinction between height of the stepped towers on the southern building will be
achieved without increasing the height of the northern building in order to reduce the visual
impact of the tower as seen from Alton Road south of 5th Street and neighboring area.
b. The tower location of the northern building has been moved slightly east to further reduce
the visual impact of both the southern and northern towers from the neighborhood north of
5th Street, particularly along Alton Road.
c. All areas along the perimeter of the parking pedestal that are not cladded with
retail/residential uses (including the parking above them) will be treated architecturally to
complement the habitable edge and surrounding areas accordingly.
Other suggestions presented at the community meeting were not deemed to be appropriate, or
desirable in some cases, due to site limitations, conflicting urban design concerns and the proposed
development program.
A companion item to this matter, approving the remaining Settlement Agreement legal documents,
is on this agenda for CommissionlRDA consideration. Approval of this Concept Plan and this
document will finalize the Settlement Agreement.
ANAL YSIS
It is the Administration's position that the developer and his team have worked in good faith with
the City to respond to all concerns raised and develop a sensible conceptual plan given the overall
maximum floor area ratio (FAR) of 3.5. The Concept Plan has been annotated to show the potential
design bonuses to be used in calculating FAR. Furthermore, at the request of the Administration,
the Developer has provided trip (traffic) scenarios and generation information pursuant to the
provisions of the Development of Regional Impact (DR!) document and those scenarios and data
are attached hereto, as Exhibit E.
In addition to the comments of City Staff, the Administration has also sought the advice of noted
Architect/Urban Planner and Designer Alex Cooper, as well as the input ofthe City's Design Review
Board (DRB). Additionally, Portofino has obtained comments/input from the following community
organizations, which it has shared with the Administration:
1. South Pointe Advisory Board
2. Save Miami Beach
3. South Pointe Citizens Coalition
4. Miami Design Preservation League
5. Miami Beach Community Development Corporation
Advisory comments and guidance to date from Mr. Cooper, the DRB and Planning Staff are
attached hereto as Exhibits Band C.
As discussed in the Background section of this report, an additional meeting with the South Pointe
neighborhood was held on September 14, 1998. Comments and suggestions were provided by
interested persons. Modifications to the proposed '98 Concept Plan have been made pursuant to
those suggestions and are included in the Conclusion and Recommendation section of this report.
In arriving at a recommendation relative to the merits of the proposed Porto fino Concept Plan the
Administration has exhaustively reviewed and weighed the diverse comments and concerns
presented by each of the aforementioned parties. The Conclusion and Recommendation that follow
represent a balanced synthesis of this analysis which may best reconcile the unique circumstances
and diverse interests of this area of the City.
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
The Concept Plan proposed by Portofino has come a long way since its inception, particularly with
regard to the design, orientation, siting, and footprint of the proposed towers, as well as view
corridors. In this regard, the architects for Portofino have worked diligently to address the myriad
comments, concerns and solutions put forth by the public, City Commission, DRB, Mr. Alex Cooper
and staff.
The general direction of the proposed Concept Plan has been very positive and has reached a point
where it can be approved subject to certain design conditions believed to be of importance. It must
be noted again that to the extent that there is any conflict between the Concept Plan and the
provisions ofthe 1986 Development Agreement and/or the City's Zoning Code as it existed at the
time of the approval of the 1986 Development Agreement, the Concept Plan shall govern, except
that maximum Floor Area Ration (FAR) and parking requirements shall be governed by the 1986
Zoning Code and the 1998 Settlement Agreement.
To this end, the Administration has concluded that the City Commission should adopt an amendment
to the Concept Plan to the Development Agreement, dated as of April 15, 1986, by and among the
City, the Miami Beach Redevelopment Agency and South Shore Developers, Inc. (such amendment
being hereinafter referred to as the "1998 Concept Plan") for the SSDI North and SSDI South
properties, pursuant to the attached Resolution and subject to the following conditions and
comments, relative to the proposed 1998 Concept Plan:
SSDI South:
1. The design of the subject tower is accepted as submitted.
2. Combine the primary south Marina access drive with the SSDI-S service drive Gust
south of the Yacht Club property). This matter is anticipated to be successfully
negotiated by the City with the Marina lessee. This access will provide for vehicular
and pedestrian access to the Marina and Baywalk. The accessway will have
decorative treatment of the pavement and a dedicated pedestrian walkway as well as
landscaping.
3. ResidentiallRetail cladding will be continued north along the pedestal area on Alton
Road to provide a more compatible treatment/use with the adjacent uses.
4. All areas along the perimeter of the parking pedestal that are not cladded with
retail/residential uses will be treated architecturally to compliment the habitable edge
and surrounding areas accordingly.
SSDI North:
1. The proposed location of the towers on the north and south sides ofthe SSDI North
Site are acceptable with the tallerlnarrower tower on the north side of SSDI North.
2. The view corridor in between the pedestal portions of the two (2) structures shall
remain at least 60' in width and the bridge connecting the two (2) separate pedestals
shall not be permitted. In the event depressed parking at the first level is not feasible,
or if the usage of the proposed towers are office or mixed officelresidential, one (1)
bridge connection may be permitted, only if it is minimal in size and constructed in
a light, translucent manner that does not cast substantial shadows on the plazas below
or, on adjacent structures.
3. The proposed parking pedestals should have a maximum permanent height of 50' to
the highest architectural projection; any increase in this height must be approved by
the City Commission. The top portion of the roof decks shall incorporate some form
of light railing while buffering any possible vehicles parked there, if any, so as to
minimize the impact of the height of the structure.
4. The landscape plan for both the SSDI North and SSDI South properties should be
very substantial in terms of quantity and quality of plant species and design; of
particular importance is the entry approach along the curve from the McArthur
Causeway into Alton Road.
5. The proposed entry plazas located in between the pedestal structures shall be kept to
the minimum required to facilitate adequate turning and circulation movement for
vehicles and shall be planned and designed in a manner consistent with quality
European plazas in terms of materials, landscaping and spatial relationships.
6. The facades of the pedestal structures and residential or retail shall be carefully
designed and detailed in a manner which establishes a pedestrian friendly relationship
with the adjacent residential neighborhoods as well as the Bay walk; furthermore,
they shall be broken down so as not to have monotonously long elevations.
7. Approval of the Concept Plan is conditioned upon the determination by the Building
Official of the City as to compliance with the applicable requirements of FEMA
regarding below-grade parking without the necessity of variance or flood proofing.
In the event that a determination is made by the Building Official that this is not
possible, the approval of the 1998 Concept Plan shall be reconsidered expeditiously
by the Commission upon submission of revised plans by Portofino.
8. A greater distinction between height of the stepped towers on the southern building
will be achieved without increasing the height of the northern building in order to
reduce the visual impact of the tower as seen from Alton Road south of 5th Street and
neighboring area.
9. The tower location of the northern building has been moved slightly east within to
further reduce the visual impact of both the south and northern towers from the
neighborhood north of 5th Street particularly along Alton Road.
10. All areas along the perimeter of the parking pedestal that are not cladded with
retail/residential uses (including the parking above) will be treated architecturally to
compliment the habitable edge and surrounding areas accordingly.
SRlJG/DJG:TRM/WC
T:\AGENDA \SEP2398\REGULAR\CM-PORTF. WPD
.
.
EXHIBIT B
SUMMARY OF ADVISORY COMMENTS AND GUIDANCE
ALEX COOPER:
The comments below have been a part of the ongoing discussion with Mr. Cooper Final comments
will be distributed under separate cover.
SSDI South Site:
1. The Tower on the SSDI South site should be rotated back to the original orientation of being
more perpendicular to Alton Road and the Bay which would allow the tower massing to
better relate to the existing street grid and the unique character of the site.
SSDI North Site:
1. The taller tower on SSDI North should be situated on the south side of the site.
2. The proposed structure on the south side of the SSDI North site should be re-sited southward,
so as not to impede the maximum westerly view corridor from Alton Road (this suggestion
has been incorporated in the final plans).
3. The view corridor in between the two (2) pedestalsltowers should be at least 60' in width and
should permanently remain unencumbered by structures that would impede views toward the
bay (this suggestion has been incorporated in the final plans).
4. An upper-level bridge connecting the two (2) separate parking pedestals should not be
permitted unless it would enable the pedestrian plaza to be totally at existing sidewalk grade
level.
5. The proposed parking pedestals should have a maximum height of 38' to the roof deck; the
proposed 50' pedestal is too high. Should it not be possible to maintain a maximum height
of 3 8', a permanent height restriction or cap should be established at a maximum of 50' to the
highest architectural projection so that the height cannot be increased in the future.
6. The top portion of the parking deck should incorporate some form of light railing only so
as to minimize the impact of the height of the structure, keeping the height of building mass
below 50'.
7. The north side of the site, along the curve of Alton Road should be heavily landscaped in
order to mitigate and lessen the impact of the parking pedestal and improve the primary
western entrance to South Pointe.
8. The landscape plan for both the SSDI North and SSDI South properties should be very
substantial in terms ofthe quality and quantity of plant species and design and the plaza areas
should be thoroughly designed and detailed in a manner consistent with a traditional
European plaza.
DESIGN REVIEW BOARD:
SSDI South Site:
No Comment
SSDI North Site:
1. The taller tower should be located on the northern portion of the North SSDI site (t his
suggestion has been incorporated in the final plans).
2. A much greater distance between the pedestal and tower structures on the north and south
sides of the site is needed (this suggestion has been incorporated in the final plans).
3. The manner in which the pedestal and tower portions of the project interface with the street
and sidewalk along Alton Road will be critical to the success of the project; this includes the
architectural design of the base and pedestal which must be articulated in a manner consistent
with quality low rise structures in the City.
4. A street oriented site solution will be critical to the success of the project, which registers the
long axis ofthe proposed towers with the east-west neighborhood streets to maximize views,
light and air from the bay.
5. The submitted drawings were very schematic in nature and lacked adequate clarity and detail
necessary for a more comprehensive analysis.
PLANNING STAFF:
SSDI South Site:
1. The Proposed Tower on the SSDI South Site shall be oriented so that its longest and tallest
portions are substantially perpendicular to the bay and Alton Road (this has been partially
addressed in the final plans).
SSDI North Site:
1. The proposed locations of the towers on the north and south sides of the SSDI North Site
shall remain as is, subject to the following modifications. The tallest tower structure shall be
located on the south side of the site for the following reasons: because of its smaller
footprint, the more narrow shadows it will cast, the less constrictive effect it will have on the
entrance to the City from the MacArthur Causeway and the better massing balance it will
provide on the overall SSDI North site; further, the longer and more graceful sweep of the
plan of the lower tower structure will reinforce the curved entrance along Alton Road into
South Pointe. Additionally, due to the greater length of the lower tower structure the greater
shadow cast will impact the South Pointe residential neighbors to a lesser degree as it will
fall more toward 5th Street.
2. The view corridor in between the pedestal portions of the two (2) structures shall be at least
60' in width and shall remain permanently unencumbered by structure of any nature, and the
bridge connecting the two (2) separate pedestals shall not be permitted. Only in the event
depressed parking at the first level is not feasible shall one (1) bridge connection be
considered, ifit is minimal in size and constructed in a light-weight, translucent manner that
does not cast strong shadows or result in the appearance of a massive continuous base along
the project site.
3. The proposed parking pedestals should have a maximum height of 38' to the roof deck.
Should it not be possible to maintain a maximum height of38', a permanent height restriction
or cap should be established at a maximum of 50' to the highest architectural projection so
that the height cannot be increased in the future. The top portion of the parking decks shall
incorporate some form of light railing so as to minimize the impact of the height of the
structure.
4. The landscape plan for both the SSDI North and SSDI South properties shall be very
substantial in terms of the quality and quality of plant species and design and the plazas shall
all be designed and constructed in a manner consistent with the tradition of fine European
Plazas.
5. The massing of the towers shall be broken down into an urban composition of units which
relate to the smaller incremental architectural scale of the City and do not overwhelm the
adjacent Ocean Beach and National Register Historic Districts.
6. The proposed entry plazas in between the pedestal structures shall be better balanced and
proportioned in size so that the plaza on the west side of the site is not out of scale with the
large size of the project or the plaza on the east side. Furthermore, the throat connecting the
two (2) plazas should be widened to provide a substantial pedestrian connection from Alton
Road to the Bay; the vehicular turn-around area of the west plaza shall be clearly segregated
from pedestrian areas. To this end, the vehicular areas shall be kept to the minimum required
to facilitate adequate turning and circulation movement for vehicles.
7. The townhomes along the Alton Road curve should be eliminated; the townhomes along the
remainder of the perimeter of the site, including those along Alton Road and Biscayne Bay
should be expanded and enhanced so as to improve the transition from the sidewalk level to
the much larger scale of the hi-rise towers proposed.
Cooper, Robertson & Partners Architecture, Urban Design
.
.
EXHIBIT C
City of Miami Beach
SSll Design Review
September 9th, 1998
The proposed concept by Fullerton Diaz Architects, has significantly improved over the original
proposals for the site. Clearly, they have listened well, and by that, I mean they have responded
creatively to suggestions from every quarter. And sometimes those suggestions have been
contradictory, such as the location of the higher tower on the north parcel. Indeed, what they
.,"l- .. .
have managed is not a "compromise", but a balance, . . .a balance of mass to site, ofstreetIine to
skyline and of green to pavement. And this is a more delicate task because of the prominence and
visibility of the site, as the gateway to Miami Beach from the causeway. This said, however, one
must recognize and accept that 2,250,000 square feet of development on this site will alter forever
the character of the area south of Fifth Street. The following summarizes my comments on the
major subjects:
1.) MASSING
On SSDI- South, the composition continues to satisfy all external requirements. On the
more complicated SSD I-North, the two-building solution, rather than my continuing
preference for a three or four building solution, divides the north parcel into two separate,
stand alone projects. The consequent heights of 3 5 and 28 stories will overwhelm the
immediate neighbors to the east and trivialize the marina to the east. On the other hand,
the stepped buildings reduce apparent bulk, as does the 200 foot distance between the
buildings. The treatment of the pedestal has been particularly well handled. The irregular
shape and considerable set-back from Alton Road, as well as the partial townhouse
veneer, contribute to reducing the scale of the 700 foot long garage. The entry
opposite 4th street is an appropriately-sized view corridor, but the below-grade garage
level (P-I), at elevation 2 will require the elevation of the Bay Plaza to be at 11 feet.
Consequently, the entry driveway rises above eye level blocking the view of the water.
The bridge across the entrance would not be necessary if Level P-l is provided. I would
suggest, alternatively, eliminating the garage under the driveway, permitting a flat
entrance from Alton Road. Once again, I believe that extensive landscaping must be
provided on the north and west sides of the property.
2.) ORIENTATION
The buildings on north SSDI- South and SSDI-North are generally placed
perpendicular to the bay, to minimize shadow and optimize views. The major
concern, however is the approach from the north, on Alton Road. From this point, a 500
foot wide solid line of buildings will face north. This effect is inevitable however, with this
sized-project, and is probably more acceptable than blocking the east-west views.
Cooper, Robertson & Partners Architecture, Urban Design
3.) ARCHITECTURE
While not technically part of the pending action, the architectural consequences of the
project have been discussed often among the reviewers. The issue is whether all the
buildings should be designed by one architect (uniformity) or by multiple architects
(variety). The submission before you now has buildings which appear overly similar.
This should not be troubling. Generally, the greater the distance, the more alike
buildings become. The shoreline buildings of Miami Beach blend into a uniform mass
from far away; just as each side of Central Park in New York appears absolutely uniform
from the other. On the other hand, from the street, these buildings are spectacularly
different; both good and bad. Urbanistically, the greater variety will be more satisfying at
both scales. Ultimately, identical designs will impart more of a "project" look. So you
might encourage the final developers to add diversity to their buildings.
In summary, I am deeply impressed with the process that has been undertaken. Your staff and the
Design Review Board have had penetrating and supportive comments. I urge that you favorably
consider the proposal before you as a successful and provocative solution to an extremely
complicated problem. Thank you.
.
.
EXHIBIT D
~
r;?r:ra!?j;1 k i () /I./]\ ~N: /7 t4~ rJt AA, (
I r../ ~ .':'/ ." J ~ \..-'~J '--"C). " r" '....f\, )'-l
,~~~OfZPWD lvt~)~fl
~Wvl0e::rZ- l4- I [00. B
.' N0N~ CPyZ?a/V1~~m 1J0vW1-e I
v l -
VCflr-~AJUL.....V S-g;l~/~y/
e;r)I1./3171~~ty 5~ft{(r 5Jt1---1?Z/cJW;
~(j {;(LfJ1uD/IJ ~~) D3-l~
-:z:f'.~..s\V1()~.qS6N T i ~b\--s-ro3
-Je rv 7 rn AtZ5cA SJ 2- --1 2> 3 J-
fvttulvf n. V~ S~ ~'~/1~~
1WL11'W(L fY\~~ ~~L..i1~7M~' ~l~-6i~)
/LOIJf\ WlSS 5~~W. fJj/-7UL.-
ClA1/~ L~ 30/ O~ ~ 5"386':td1
P<'1/JK.... V ' ~ FL Jltcctfr 0 ~Ol OCf'YftJ !Jtt.. 672- z-y f'b
'tAvi\) $;.tJL.. '1 '"jS- '(/~ bOY /77?
~ ~~ 02,? Co ~ (?~/-.7'Y!~
N:::~?: --- :5 l/i~/P4;t>:
~~~ A/tZ.e/L ;;;rcc. ~5('-19'77
8;)ilJ~;;l; ~hkoe 1~(cLj- ~g). )S'?Z--
~~-=-.Akr CITJi!,-C(50rF 673-1-<1-70
~ ~~. ' rtJr J$~11~3-
~l~ 5PftB, b3C(_~:lz7{
fre Bu~ 5M B ~, "1-(}"" Y(,0 )
. -v ~ ~~\~~ t g(]V CoLll{)S 53) 41J~~'
~,~~. u_~. I t~~ fVO, .p3-~'
~A
(!S -J~ Q2>(6/~
JD
J(
Cc
.~
~zaIim
- l/~~
a =!.S/~~c;r--
MJ6r(
jJW.
~'25-11 So
&1.:<. ,. ~~
, '
what is CMB's plan for the use of the at-grade core parcel
~ has the eMB given up the idea of an intercept garage; and, if not,
then where does it propose to put it
3 has Portofino responded to CMB's comment that orientation of South
SSDI's tower should be amended
i can the extent of the canopies on the proposed South SSDI building
be reduced _____._______
5 why must the ent~ance to the service receiving area for the South
SSDI building be on Alton Road instead of through the marina parking
entrance which then would permit more habitable space along Alton Road
, what is "structure" shown on the South SSDI parking pedestal's east
facade to the north of the proposed entrance to the service receiving
area
7 the "stepping" of the North SSDI's north tower might be enhanced.
8 should orientation of North SSDI' s northern building be "tweaked"
to minimize its impact on view from north
1 why is the height of North SSDI parking pedestal shown at 50', and
not at 40' -- or, even 38' given its proposed partially below-grade
first level
10 what is the final concept plan for south facade of North SSDI
parking pedestal, which should show habitable space
I' what are the design consequences to the North SSDI parking pedestal
- especially to its height and to the elevation of its Alton Road and
Bay Plazas - if the elevation of its first level of North SSDI's parking
pedestal may not be parti~lly below. grade
IL 150' X 250' easement, which equals 37,500 square feet, effectively
raises SSDI-N parking pedestal and consequently towers by 2 levels, as
it reduces parking by 107 spaces per level, or a total of 53.5 ~P~.s::~~___"__"
.... . .. '. "". " .-.....7',.;. _......~~". _ "_" _ _.__, ,.._..,,_.__.u_._u_ .____. _...__....,..,._....._.___..______..___.._ . ._
il the automobile bridge between North SSDI parking pedestals should
be eliminated
Ii the ha~bi~able mJce along parking pedestal facades needs to be
increased ... '#
---
-
15 public access to the B~ywalk from Al~on Road appears too lim~ted
and, more disturbingly, ded~cated pedestr~an access appears nonex~stent
It ~a. transter ot FAR to 404 Washington Avenue building been
subtracted from permissible FAR
17 does Concept Plan meit or surpass 60% open-space requirement of
1986 Agreement
If what is effect of change of residential use to hotel or office use
upon the proposed height of parking pedestals and to vertical extent of
habitable space thereon and does this constitute material change of
Concept Plan requiring CC approval
17 have you reduced permissible FAR to accomodate increased
residential per unit parking spaces
,0 has a parking engineer laid out parking
~I what square feet/parking space number are you using - important
because affects height of pedestals and FAR of project
""'_.._-_.....-..._...._~.'_......-.. "--... - -..
~~ 1986 SSDI-S Phase 1 parking spaces:
level 1:
100 (marina)
131
207
level 2:
438
1986 SSDI-N parking spaces:
level 1:
200 (marina) + 34 marina drop-off at surface
346
491
level 2:
TOTAL: 1,037
1998 SSDI-S Phase 1 parking spaces:
level 1:
level 2:
level 3:
level 4:
130 +5 -oiitsIde" (marIna);
130
170
170
..-.~:.:.., ;~"11O"'._~..--=-.~,;~'~.~~.......,.,.~~~.-:-_---~-"l"'. "
--..,---- , ------.,--.........-..--- _.----
TOTAL: 600
1998 SSDI-N parking spaces:
level 1: 370 (marina parking)
level 2 : 388
level 3 : 404
level 4 : 404
level 5: 404
-----
TOTAL: 1,970
"_'~._,,........,.
.....,_............... ..........-....-- ..... ~''''
.
.
EXHIBIT E
Traffic (Trip Generation)
The SSDI North and South sites are both included in the Portofino Alternative
Development of Regional Impact (DRI)*. The proposed project calls for a flexible
development program allowing a mix of different uses which when combined, do
not exceed a certain amount of generated trips. In order to maximize a particular
use, there must be a comparable reduction of another approved land use (Le. a
trade-off). For the Portofino AltC::trnative DRI, the total new external P.M. peak
hour trips cannot exceed 1,733.
The proposed Flexible Development Program for the Portofino Alternative DRI:
land Use Category Anticipated Maximum
Residential (dwelling units) 1 ,400 2,500
Retail (square feet) 258,000 400,000
Office (square feet) 120,000 250,000
Hotel (rooms) 250 700
Live Theater (seats) 800 800
The determination of the trips generated shall be made using the following
Maximum Impact Development Scenario (MIDS) Formula:
0.304(R)+ 0.62(H) + 2.37(C) + 1.14(0) + 0.018(S) + 333.31 = 1,733
Where:
R is # of High Rise Condominium Units (Residential)
H is # of Occupied Rooms of Hotel
C is # of KSF of Commercial
o is # of KSF of Office
S is # of Attraction (live Theater) Seats
The attached scenarios are examples of potential development programs for the
SSDI North and South sites and the number of PM Peak Hour trips generated by
each scenario. The actual development scenario would be analyzed at the time
of permitting to determine compliance with the DRI flexible development
program.
*It should be noted that there are other parcels of land included in the DRI, in
addition to the SSDI North and South Parcels.
SCENARIOS USE INTENSITY PM PEAK HOUR
TRIPS GENERATED
S SCENARIO #1 RESIDENTIAL 800 units
5
0 SCENARIO #2 RESIDENTIAL 1,000 units 358
I ~:~~~i!~~jr~::~W;\~fl\;';;~::\\~IJ~~ ';.
SCENARIO #3 RESIDENTIAL 600 units 623
N RETAIL 40,000 sf
0 OFFICE 80,000 sf
R
T SCENARIO #4- RESIDENTIAL 800 units 709
H RETAIL 40,000 sf
OFFICE 100,000 sf
S SCENARIO #1 RESIDENTIAL 120 units 234
5 RETAIL 20,000 sf
0
I SCENARIO #2 RESIDENTIAL 320 units 295
RETAIL 20,000 sf
5
0 SCENARIO #3 HOTEL 500 rooms 596
U RETAIL 30,000 sf
T
H SCENARIO #4 717
l~;i~iii~
M c 5 SSDI NORTH RESIDENTIAL 800 units 709
A 0 C SCENARIO #4 RETAIL 40,000 sf
X M E OFFICE 100,000 sf
I B N
M I A SSDI SOUTH HOTEL 700 rooms 717
U N R SCENARIO #4 RETAIL 30,000 sf
M E I 1.426
0 0
Anticipated Design Bonuses
Parcel Aggregation
a) for each 10,000 sf above min. lot area, up to 40,000 sf
b) for each 20,000 sf aboVe 40,000 sf up to 80,000 sf
up to 0.25
Dwelling Unit Size (If residential development) up to 0.20
a) for each 100 sf increase in min. avg. floor area/dwelling unit up to
200 sf increase
b) for each 100 sf increase in min. floor area/dwelling unit for all units,
up to 200 sf increase
Design Features
Planting and landscaping
Paving
Grading
Water features
Signs and Graphics
Street furniture
Lighting
Arcades
Site planning
Building Design
up to 0.75
.05 - .15
.05-.10
.05
.05-.10
.05-.10
.05 - .10
.05-.10
.05-.15
.05 - .15
.05 - .25
~=n
Kimley-Horn
and Associates, Inc.
September 11, 1998
Ms. Cathy Colonncse
The Portofino C'lTOUP
404 Washin1:.rton AV(.,"Ilue
Miami Beach, Florida 33139
Re: ssm Nortb
SSDI South
Tri" Generation
040024.01
Dear Ms. Colonnese:
As requested, we have analyz(;:d the P.M. peak hour trip gt.."Ileration potential of
optional land uses for both ssm North and SSDl South. The attached tables
preSt.."Ilt a summary of the evaluations. The trip generation rates, internalization
and passby capture used in this analysis arc all consistc.."Ilt with the approved DRI
traffic analysis.
Tfyou or the City should have any questions, please do not hesitate to call.
Very truly yours,
ATES, INC.
JBP:jsl
Attachments
04002401..olJI198ce.c1oc
.
TEL 561 845 0665
FAX 561 863 8175
.
4431 Embarcadero DrivQ
West P~lm Beach. FlOrida
33407
~
\0
....
""'
....,
....
~
....
0 <"l CQ 0
~ N DO ....,
N N ....
Z 0 QO .... 0\
0 '" '" ~ 0
~ N .... r--
-~i
~~ el ~ ~ l!
z:. 'f:! '= c .~c;~ .~ ':i~
~~s !is ::J ;:I Ii;
C Q I:l o~~ ~oo
~e,:, ~ 0 u
0 0 'E 88
c 00 o. g .
;~ ~~i 00
..,.~
E--4
~ on on ~
-g -8 .g "S
0 ~ ~ 0
u u
~ u u ~
.lrl ..
iia 1:1; iiil_u ~-~
~ -= ..c:-- u J:.'-
00 ,2PillE ll(I{l1:::
if ~ .- ....,
:rl"O ::tl~O
~ =: iO
- ~
5
~
~.5 .... Q()
~ 00
~ -
r;; ..,. 0\
C5 ...., ;1,
~ <"l
~ l!
.G' .-...: .c;....
~ Sui =ui
u ~8 00
~ NO
""0
o. 0
N N
;;
:;
::
@'
I .g '"
~ 0
"lOt
~ g S
0 0
u l'il
,!f.l
~ "- ii!_
..c::-- ..1::'-
ll.Q:f t10.:!
.- u '- u
::I: " :rl~
~ '" 0
00 "'"
N ....,
~
~
~~ - r--
- ~
~ ...., ....
It;; \0 r~
~ 0\ j::;:
""
'" El
e:
b 0...... &..,
o ,
:;; ......, ... '"
i 00 ~8
IS 00
'" 0
O' o.
.... ....
~
0:1
,g
...
~
CJ~ s.a
~Jl 00
::c~
... ~= =
:;l
,...,
-
:;
0
'$.
00
M
:s
~~ = 'eft
QO N
~ \0
~
.....-of 0'1
~ oi
Zz -
+
00 g
E::E= m ~~ Q ~
:0 00
0'\ cd <"l
~ ~ =z E-< N "'C M
MO c;:i
~I~ II
~~~ E-<
~
f-l~~ ~ -a
~~ '" =
d ,....,
.!! g N
M
00 N
~
IJ:J ~
CI) a;
:0
~
::I
I;IJ
'^
0
"'C
c.; d
C 8
..
&> I)
- ~
~
~ .i:l
bIl
.. ::E
z
.... ~~ \CI
::s
0 C""l
..-l
'S
Q
?Ie
go
!3 ""'
0 :a
,0
~Ei ~ eo'
~ ~
N N
\I;>
- Q,
~ ~
Z~ .....
+
S~ ~~ 00 ! g
~~~ go
It'l l'<1
N~ C""l "'Cl M
0
0 II
~I~ f-o
....J=~
~~~ .!!l
~O~ ~ 'S
j ::s
Z~ ~ N
I"")
~H ("l
- ~
C/.) ~
~ g
f<
..0
::s
CI.l
'"
oS
-; 8
= u
'"'
CI> ....
- '"
H ~
~
, ..Cl
00
z $
d V"Itf"\aOl an ~~
0 ;:;!; ~*
0 OQOQ 01 "<:/' M
- <"'\ M :l~~
O:S.El
~...~
~"
M~!:::
:E~..:_:
~"'<"'\
~~~~ V"I ClC " ""'00
V"I OQ N . .
..... N 1.Ol'<'l.....
-- tf"\ N '.'~ +
N...........
~ ~~
Zz ~33
00 +l'1'-
~8
~~ o:l ....,\Cl~1'- M 1; 00'00
~ .,.., 01
ect:~ NIO '<t I'- ...,. N ~ <"'\ II II
N<"'\ r-. \0 dEE
~O
~I~ u~z;
~~ ho-l...J
~~ In
~ .~r.:.;r.:.;
HO '" ~O'J
S~ 5 008 ~ ~ NOO'
! g80 ~ c <"'\N-
0 NOOI'-
0'0 :d S~~
(JJ '<too
CZl ==..
i
0
E-<
~
CI:l
., e ~
3 :::I "8
.... - -;
g, It 8
s =
u U u !! u
.. en
.'" ~ i0oi ~
I:: ~
.. ~] ~ fo:;; ~
j Cll
- ...... ._~S
= :~ z ::0 0
..
:; o....,~.... 0\ gg
0 -00 "'t "<t' ~ r-. *'~
-- "'t '<T N to) ';~~
Ol:i.S
~:-
o ";f?,*'
~~t-
."....
:S,.:,.j~~
Ot<'\~lrl 0 lrl 0 ~:g:;d
COoo 0\ .... N rr'l :t:!...-i"':
-- M f"l .~++
:t:!----
N 0\><><
~ o;Zz
~~ .....1-1..J
+t-t-
"""""M
?5,1C!f-;
.Q~~ O\O~N ;;l; 0\ 0\ ... 0000
0\\0 "<t' "<t ~ ia l"'l II II
M~~ NI"'l 00 ~ ~pp
~O 0""",,,-,
1/3z
~=~ E-< ...l
~t~ I>l
~ 'el.tj~
~o ~ ;::I C'.l Cf)
ZS SSg *' *' -s NOO'
oS 0 g ~ l"'lN......
0000 N<lO/'o.
SE-l O~O :d ] !:ll=l~
?:5 "'t~ ... t::!...r---I--.
~ "Ei
..!Zl
a!
t-;< u
..Q ~
=
fI.l
e: 41 '"
'"' 0
= ;I "'d
a - t; =
~ a. Cl 8
\II '"'
I\) I;".l 41 Ii)
- v,
'" .. ~ M i!<
C ~== IiI:1 ..cl]~
I: ~ ilia! ~
U}_ ... .!:!PuS
<<I ~ ~~ ..
1-1 Z ::I:p::o
.....=10 = g
::: 1,0 ~
N ..,. - .... ~
.... 8~
~.!3
~~
""'0
:5'!'!.
. ,..,
~.,.,
ClO~1O -.0 -.0 'It' 0""
N N .
...... ~ - - -.oM
.... ..+
N.......
~ ~i><
~ o\~
ZZ -...J
+t'
00 ><G
1-lE:: .I!! -al,O 0 l"'l -.:r id t;(O
CI~~ ~ 10 '" ..... ..... ~ (; ~l II
"l:!'~ N N "l:l ""!p
~O 0........
~~~ t3
=:I ~ ..
~;=1~ ~ 'a~
~~ ~ ::ltl.l
~g ~ ~ .8 ,......,.....,
.!:l NO
0 0 <I) .....N
S~ .s - 0 ~ 1">100
O~ vi ~ ~~
CI:l N - ~
(Z2 ::::.c:::.
3 g
~ ]
.6
::s
00
e oU ~
100
:J .e - "8
-
~ Co . 8
=
{,.I (W ...
u ... u
-; .... a .!'!j
e ~- t:<_
J.-t; ~ ..cl.~
.! :3u 011.13
.s ... .~ lU
~t:>:: ;z; =~
O\~-< ..... 8
0 0 "Ie
"'Ct ~ N N \;;l
~ 0
-",
5-c
..0.-
~~
......0
'i:l'!l
.-M
~~
Q\ :qC'l M ..... QQ ,,~
;0 N .
r-- M N N \OM
N ..... ..+
N~
"";.<
- ;~
:;t:
ZZ +r--
00 ~
~E= 0\ s ~"!
.c~ OO~<"') ~ - 000
N M ..,. ''It as M"
~~~ ..... ..,. f"') "t:l rt"Jj:;'
0.......
~I~ IJZ
E-...J
~i9~ ll.
~~~ ~ ._~
Sui
~~ j 00 ~ ~ NO
"
~8 0 MN
.El ..... 0 NOO
o. ori ~~
CI:) ..... ...
f;I.) ::=0
"iil
u ~
... .g
~
QI $ i
Joo
:1
- - t;
Q, ~ 8
R 1:1
U '"
c.l ..,
N - '"
;.., M iil.....
E ~:;:f liI;l
lloI "'as it ~;B
- =1;
c QI .- ..,
... =-~ Z ::Ill:(
=
0
..... ~:q~ It'1 ~-
= -
0 M 00 \Cl:::l
- ..... N ..,.0
-a~
'0
~In
~:s
RrJ
Oln
OM
~~~ ~ ,11"\
In ........,
M .-j 8M
- ..... ~
+
~ 0.- b
... ,
zZ Z~
....l...:l
00 r--.r--.
E:=~ ~::a
'3 \Q <ci o.
~~~ ~~rs 0
\0 II II
ana 0 \0 0\ ftI
!-< It'l ~ ~
~=~ ....,...,
33
~H~
~~ e.
o~ b 8~
~~ ;;; ...tI.l
= ~ -......
88 00
~ .!:! lb ....N
.s <no ..... 0Cl
oft !::~
<I.) .....
~.~
-
,f!
0
~
.
.D
=
tI.l
III
""
=
.... c;
=-
II C
U ..
0>>
bl - ....
ft M
J:l "'l -
"" ~ lB
j ..
=
.... z ~~
-
=
l;l
- \O~~ co Q '#.-
= ~ ~!
0 ~ ..... r"'l l'Pl
I:! ,"
.'
'-0
~or>
51;--
.~
~ o"Cf.
t--O
Q ~'!1.
0<,\
to- , or>
\O:qQ-. or>
N ~ ~
\0 ...., ~
N ~ M 0+
~ ,gQ'
Zz :5~
00 ......1"-
~""
..QE:~ .\0
-; t"-o S 00
~~~ ~ II II
~~~ '0 ~ '" f.4:;'
. l' to- "'c:I
~O '-"-"
~=~ 33
=E-04~
~;:Jc.:l s.
o=.. ~ Q~
~czi
S~ ~ .r- oO'
08 -N
u 0 MQO
]j ~q ...., ~~
lZl 0
lZl M =
i
~
,
~
f
::l -
-
Co ..
'" III
U ...
~
~ "; lol
Cl ~ 'B!
... ~
] ~ ~~
-
~ oS z
'<',,'.' 'lCl:;\CUY,.-SHI a"g
~~I,~ ~~
~e S-i
i~ H~
~UII~
iihll
~~s~irl
il ~a~
~ I~e
!i~t~~
Him
~~~~g~
~~~~~~
1m,!!
~$'~f
idii;
gl~~B~
~~~M
9~~~~~
~ ~~p
Ihm
"ml
~ih~;
"!i~~~~
~~~i~~
~~~h~
sUUI
I~;~B
!;JU
1~~~6
~.~~~~
~~31~
~~~ ~
~i~ iii
~~~i.i
~~y
ill!1
~I~~i
i~iu
~t~g
~~~~~
~e~~~
~~~~g
~~~~~
... 5""';
~i"~~
~ '<,
lnu~SeP' II?~
~
~
....,W~
(1)0\~
~O\(D
W>::4
0::;:'0
~e;=:s
t >0
~ <: ~. ~
~ ~ p.j i:1
8 Q N e:
'"Ij[>~
~ o~ (;j
.. ~ a
~-::r'
w (1) ~.
OY'~
VI'"Ij(D
-;:l'()
'+>-w~
.+>-wen
I _",
~.+>-~
O\O\~
N ()
.
\..
.+>-
....,~
~~~
~~'"
wen......
o e: en
VlO~
'-"oc/
VI 0 C/.)
w 0 ~.
~>O-
N <: '" V
VI (1)...... (1)
-. ." <:
\O~ (1)
~ -
'"Ij ..... 2 .g
~ ~ :...l. (1)
>< a .--. ""1
.. .....~
~ t:C (D
25~~
VI (') ..,~
'-" 0"'"
VI ~ ~
idf1~
~wO-
0\ W.
-..J_
OOw
\0
C/J
.
C/J
.
U
~
\0
\0
00
.
~~
~.
S
~.
to
(D
p.j
a
::r'
'"
!1
o
:::L
0-
p.j
n
z
o a
~ (D
=:r~
Ro."
C/Jp.j
o =:s
~
&
o
=:s
~
~
, "
-.
~
Ul ('l
o H
~ ~
o-l '"
8 P ~
Z '" H
Z '" '"
O '" H
. o-l
. Ul
'" 0 :>
00 ...,
1 ...,
N H
N ('l
~ t'1
H .
.o~w~
2~ffl~fflh
h~iW
t~~o~~~
h!t!~
P;iUI
!f~h~>
~~he~i
. ~~",d~O
.~W~~
!~~fJ~~~
m~~~dh
~~~~~~~
W~m
,,~~~~~~
;;l~~J~
"~~~5~~
~H~id
~~s~iU
a~!~F>
~>"'~~~~
~i!~~s~~
'~ >~ss
hJ~i~
~U~~~~
~.~"'~~.
~5~~~~~
~~~~:m
~~n~~i
~m~~~
~~~,~zi
g~~~~~.
'i~~d~
~~~~~~
~~;ilSI1
~I~!a
!l~~U
a~~~'
IlJil~
>~~~~~
~H~~g
~il~~~
~~ ~s~
~~~~~!
~o-i~~
~B,~!;
~~.~~~/
~~~~~~ i'
i~~~~~
~~q
I
.o~,.;<~
"'O/~<:';;"""
. "~~
. ~.
<~~~--!I//;,
c:"o"~~"'~f"" / //
~".~j (J
,ji/.i [1
)o.~( ! ~D
. ....~ . .: ~~
... , I ~
.,.,.~,. i 0
'~~t~~~/
.. ,
1
I
..
00
'0
-"'" \
~..~
r)~ ,-
'~Q$/
+.
Ii II
/.../
~.
r;:.. ;'
/", ,
, 1'''''lfO
/ /"'-....., -"'"
, ....,.
i
i
!
'0 !
-.
-"'~~... .l.~_. J
'-'~"i.~
~
~
~
.._n_.__~__d -1
F U L L E R TON
~ 1~I~Wi/rl/'
D I A Z
ARCHITECTS
----SSm NOR1'lf&--SOUTH
-------,~--_._---~
MIAMI BEACH. FLORIDA
'---,
I
I
!
INC.
'i i.~H~~
; i~1! ~ ~
~
~" ~
ium~
!!lim
II!!.'!
-liliHI
J.l;;i>
;~~!rl
7.1, ,t
~Im!l
hl!;l~
iii~~jl
li!U,'. ~
!Illl t
!~!siii
11M!!
'I!'l!!
!MIU
11~lhi!
Pillt
Illlj;l
!,~Mi
,'llili .0
!Ij i~! '00,
I i!lii .'...,
!i!"1
i'll!!
li~ :.'
iif"
!Iii!'
liI!il
hiH
~i'i!l
I'!lll
:\~!ii
hUil
'~il'f
~~! 3
Ill!
~Oft......."
'0
.'~"'''';
....
'" ,
./ ',::
.' 8"
,0 li:~
..... I'
" ,
,
"""~t I
';.'.; r---
/
..o~~
..'
"
J
~
'0
V","
.'....; .......
"""""
.'If..,
~
~
~
F U L L E R TON
~1.fl~lliff
D I A Z
__.J
-SSDfl'fORT}f..'&.._~QIJ1If.
ARCHITECTS
INC.
MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA
. , '.; <i? I~I
,. !~2-
':i*
~. ~
'ia~~i~
r ~il~ !
~~i'~~
~~~ ~
hit~~
Pil~lill
~I~~ 3
~ ~~~il>
;~~h~!
t~ ~~s
~8~~a~~
.. il" ~
~~~o=~
~~"3~"~
~~~il~l~ "
i~~i ~ J "-
"~ ~g~~ I "-
I "-
~~~8'.* "-
· 3~~. ~~~,/I "-
~~il · il
~ g~i> "-
~~ ~ ~i
~~~~~h
~~t u
~~;'i=ioz
~,~m~
~~~~~~
~~~~~il~
rmu
~b~~d
;I~~~U
· ~~a ",
~~~~il~i
~~~I~gil
~~~ s~~ ",
~~~iM
~~~~a~
ill!ll
h~~i~
~~ILi
I! ~=~
~dila ~, I
~~< !;
~~~~
~iU~~ (
.~ ~il
~>~.ii
~~ i I
nh~ ~~
iilht ~"
~ I I ",
'I! II !I 'I .
I. I,
_.~ , " II
~le i !
We ~
re
~(J) gj
i~ 'Ii ~ I
r H.
)>
z
F U L L E R TON
rrmrmn~iflfllfi
8: f lliitilllJJJ , r r rr u r
ARCHITECTS
D I A Z
SSDI SOUTH
WLUlI BEACH. FLORIDA
IN C.
~! ~iilf
; ~ 5~= Ii
!:.ia
, ~ ~
~.2~"~
'~Mii
5~'i"~
,~J~~~
~-~~Iil~
~!~ .^
I~~i~~~
~~~~~~~
'~~s~~
;:~ ~bg
~~ ~a~~
t~~~C~f") "-
8~~~d~ "-
~~~i~i~ "-
"-
~~~~~ ~ "-
h~oea~ "-
b~~ ~>
~."~~~~
~$~ · il
~~o ~ .
~1I~~'6~
u~l
HsU~
~g!~iS~
~" m~ "'.....
~ ~ <j ~ ~
~ II ~~
iihh~
+Jil
~ ~~~i
~Ij~~!!
s>~~a
~;~~~~i
~~H;~
.~>~T
~~~I'~,~i
g~~~~~~
~~~~d~
iUh~
hU~~
~;~"~~
~f~$"E
;~;;.~i
~8-~~
ld~=~
~i'ia
~g~ ~~
~~~~ ~
~8~ ~
ilil~iii~ (::::~~"'-j/
~~~~~~
~'~'i!
>H ~
~I~~~ .~ ."
" il~ 'I! !I D
~ii~~~~
~~~~~S I.
!~~S~g II
<,j
1
2l~
Q ~
z
~ }>
~i
~
F U L L E R TON
t fllmn/III
D I A Z
ARCHITECTS INC.
UJAWI BEACH, nORlDA
SSDI SOUTH
~~~~~i~
I>~~~. J
d'~U~
h~;!~~
P~U~I
~~h~g
!;~~ .~>
s~ ~H
> 8 "l~~
~i~m
.1 ~~~~o
.~ ~H
~~~M~
9~~~~1~ ,
~~~if ~ ,
o"g~~~~ ,
oOz ~~
~~~~~ ~
~I~ ~~
~i~~h~
~~~i~h
~e~ ~~
~~~~~~
-. r>
~i< M
~ Ii . ~~
$~h~~~
ii,g~~~
< M;~
~ ~~~ ~
~h~~!! ...,
~n
~~~.~ Ii
"'~r~~
~i~ ~~~ ...,
~>~ $~~
g~~~~~~
, !~~~~~
~Uli~
~ <~
· ~~h~~ .1
~i~~~ II
" ~~~~~i
i ,~H I
~igia
~id!; /
~lih~~ (
~~U~~
~~dJ ~~
~~ ~ ! -If'--ll
~~h~
~Ii~k i I ...,
;;;~hJ 'I! II !I J
H~~eg
~;! I.
~
~
- -0
(fl,
0'"
c
:i!
F U L L E R TON
~ f~I1Wllr/l/
D I A Z
ARCHITECTS
SSDI SOUTH
IllAWI BEACH, FLORIDA
IN C.
~H~~
..~~ ~ ~
~
~___~_!"-t
~mm
~~~fi~~l
mlln
'.~?'OO
~Jfi~~fil
.~~~ g
~S9~~fi'
~~"'~~8~
.. 8d~~
::Mgb~
~R~~Z~O
t~~~~~~
~~~g~8~
mm~
~~E~~~~
@H~Sg~
~~~8~~~
~;fi~~~o
~~o~.~fi
.~1l~~~6~
g)~~~. t;
~~;~.h
g~,,~"~g
~n~~~~
'"?i~~'
~g<~~~~
iI~Ii~.fi~
~~L~~S
..~~ g~
m~~6'
mUd
I ~~~i~~~
I 3~9o~i,
,~~M~
~.~~fi~.
"~'~8-'
~.~~ ~~:
'0' S32
~~~~~u
d"iZ6.
~!i~~Z~
~~~Sh
~~~i~~
~~i~~~
hogS@
~ihh
m;=~
g~$,ia
~~!i~~fi
~~~~~g
~i~~~~
'~i~~~
n~. ~ii!
H~q~
~~.:1.
~Ii~~~.
fi'.~6~
j~i~~!
'" ~.....
~ ""'~---
~~
~>);
) /;
/ II
/
I
\
'(~~
"'~
gJ
o
--0
~c:,
~
F U L L E R TON
~ '.1I1UI/I
,,~
"" ""
.~
)
,....
/
/
~/
~".
.."......... ;
"
"
"
"
"
"
/ ............
............
",
I!
II
I
: I
....
,
III II !I
. I.
B
1\
D I A Z
ARCHITECTS
IN C.
" 'm!~1
~
",'
. , '---J
ssm SOUTH
IiIAKI BEACH. FLORIDA
~Jm;~
~ ~~uJ
~W,,~
~~~~~~~
~j~~I~~
~~~. ~~
~ ~~~~>
E~~lm
ji~~a~Q
L ~~z~
g"~ ."
~.Q~d2
S~~~~I~
3q~ "-
~ior "-
o ~ 8~ "-
~1~8'3i
~~~~~~~
~~~~~>~
~i~~d~
i~hn
5U~~~~
'r~~"
~ ~ ~..
z~~> ~s
iim~~
~ ~m~
U~~ill
.o~~ ",
O~..a
~2~i~~i ~"-,
~~<~~"~
2 ~~ "-
H~ S~~ ",
g.~~~~~
~~~~a~
~U!h "
I~' ~~
.~I~~~
~. "~
~h;i' II
,..~ ~ II
~~I~~
,~ ~.E
~!d:: I
~~~~~i
~i~3~'
;;~h~~
g~~~~~
~hm .~~
~~.gu .~If'ii
'~~l
~.Q ai _ cJ
-;;I~~> I
Hg~!;;~ , I ...,
~~ II! II II II D
I. I,
(fJ
(fJ
o
- "'lJ
(fJ ,
o ..
c
--<
I
F U L L E R TON
D I A Z
ARCHITECTS INC.
t :~~Blllillill
SSDI SOUTH
WIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA
'I,
\
~.~~~i~
~~t~t J
~~T8
5~~J ~~
hJ~:~
-_~~c~~
p~zi
"'~~~ n~
. .. 3~
~m~~>
~~~~ii~~
E~~o~~~
"ls1j~
~ ~"
'"~~~~I
2'~O.~
~;;1c~~. W4' . 11'.~' .
~'-"I
'~i~~ ~
~h>~ ~
h~~e"~
>< . i::i .....;0;
~;~r~~ ~
~~~ ~~~ ~
h9~h~ m
~~~~~h i
~e~tn
~ . ~~
9Up~~ I
~ili .~~ ~
rh!U (J)
ll!lld ~
'~i ~~
~o 'u
. ~3~
Oe~2"
~'~r~~
"i< ~"ffl
M si~
.;~l~d
~w"~
111111 '...
...
...
~!~~~~
~il~i~
I~ t~s
> ~d~~
~i~~a~
~li;~~~
.~ T
. ~-
~~~~ !
m3~1
~~~~f
~mU>i
1~~~~ ~
.~
~
m I.
r
~
~
I
~
(J)
~
... I .....
--------t----- -
tIo',,' 121'-4"
---------.----..
F U L L E R TON
r~'ppin
~ r ttrmtttjfu U rr u n
D I A Z
ARCHITECTS
ssm SOUTH
WLUU BEACH. fLORIDA
IN C.
~~ !~~ I
~~~ I
~
,,' ~
= ~ I
l>!I(jjfC15\'IIlID',so"tn\9' 2:1,981:, f \- ".' U.~ ;he
~~~sm
~~~~dJ
~ijUf~
ffi~.$M
~~~~_OO
ni[I~~
~MgJ
t:~iJ~~~~
"So~~1
~~~m
~~ 'a~
t~~~e~~
g~~3~s~
S~~~a22
9~s~~~~
j.>~f6~
O~~O~a~
h~~d~
~$~~2il
~~g~~>~
:~~hU
~~S ~~
S~2~~~g
~~~m>
~~. <i~~~
~:i ~~
[~~ ;-s
rS~"~"
st~~~~~
~.<~~~~d
(j~~~~
J~3im~
~~~Am
a2. ~1~~\1
~~~ ~~~
.~~ $3~
~a~~~~~
,,~~~.Z~~
~3~~a~
illlll
~~~g~~
~~h~~
m:h
~~f,ii
~~<iJ~a
~&e~~~
~:i~~i~
2~S~il~
...n~t:l -
~~~~~!
~hm
::~~3~~
~i~~~>
~~.us~
J3g~e!
F U L L E R TON
:b :.IIiUUI
-~~ t
1"~i
i
m
!
,
Bl
g
~
~
m
~
~
,
~
8
~
~~-~
-i
D I A Z
ARCHITECTS
SSDI SOUTH
J.lIAWI BEACH, FLORIDA
INC.
. il[<- i~i
s.~.~
Jj'~
~
~" ~
l
SITE. PLAN
. S6DI NORTH
THIS 1991 CONcEPT PLAN CONSTtTlJTES" GENEltAUZED CONCEPllJAL PLAN INDICATlNO TIlE SlT1NG ANDORlENTATION OF CUTAIN ~ STllJC'Tl.OO!:S ON' llfE SSDI NOIlTH AND SSOl. SOlTTH ,......cas. ~ANT to THE Tl!RNSOF THE IWI SETTl.EMf.KT A.OAEF.MI!NT
Bt"TWfEN I'Ot.TOFINo AND nn; CITY. l1fE CONC'EI'T PlAN 15 NOT IN1ENDEO TO CONSlllUll! A DETAIlB) APPROVAL OF THE ST1I;tJCn;kES SHOWJ<; THEJWJN. NOlI. IS IT fNTeIiOED TO APPROVe ANY I'AATIC\JLAJl. USE OFlliE P'A.Of'aTY OR snUCT\JRES. DESIGN Dt:TAllS
SHALL BE ADOREssEo IN SlJBSIlQUENT SUBMITTAlS TO D.R.B. AS TO THE MATTERS WfTHIN THEIR ClU'TFJlIA FOIlIlEVtEW. SUBSTANllAl NODIf'1C..t. nONS TO TlfE CONCEPT PlAN, AS DE'T'ERWJNt.O BY STAFF. SHAll BE Il2VlEwEo AND APPROVED BY THE CITY eot.o.llSSlON
ONCII THE 1991 CONCEPT PlAN KAS BEEN APPttOVEO BY THE CITY (no! "AI'PIW\IEOalNCU'T P'LAN1. 11IEN AJ..L SlJBSEQlJI!WT ACTION TAKEN BY l1O! CITY I)l CONNECTION wmt ANY OTHER UQlJESno ~ ~VAL'l UGAlIDlNG SSOl NORTH AND SSDI soUnt
MUST Ill! alNSIsTENT WITH 1lIE Al'PROVED CONCEPT PLAN AND1HJS NOTATION. AND 11IE CITY $KAU NOT. DIRECTlY 01.. INDIRECTl v. DENY APPRm"AL Of 1NDf\1DlIAL SITE rLANS .'klSlNG THEREF1tOM BASEl> UPON ANY JU.lEGED OR ~CElVED DENSITY OR WfENSITY
CIUtElI.AAS LONG AS THE IWlICONCEFtI'l.AN. Il'IDMDUAL sm PLANSAlUSrN(j TlfEItEFJ;(IMQIt PlOf'OSWt.4OOltl(:ATIONSOR At.tENDMENt"STltEIlETO....EIN COMI'l.LANCE wtnImE I'EIlMITTEDDfiNsrn' AND~ ASSET I'OITH IN I'AkAGItAPH 2.4 OF lltE 1~
SEnt..EMENT AGREEMENT (PEJ.M1SSLBLE 3 ~ F,A.Il-2.090,I'" SQUAIlE fEET APPROXlMA m y PlUS 160.4lM SQUAkE fEET OF TltANSffU.ED DE\."ELOI'MENT IUGHTS 10 SSOl NOIlTll)
1----------,
-\\:---
~LF
~\
\ '
c.-----"
C1E:
I
,
.\
! .'
- .
/ ....1It:
.
'---i I - I
I
cdL
I~
I!
---.J!
-F
I
,~
--
[
[
.
~_J
/1
"""""""
L~AaU ........
""A11 U
BL TOTAI...au 1'-'-"
- -"""
TUU".AD4~ UOUUD'
z
o
E-<
-~
~~:~
",_e.,~
~.~
~ -------
-~-
~I
u.. --
A-lO
N
-<
-
Cl
en
E-<
U
~
E-<
-
::I:
u
~
-<
u
z
-
~
"
i!
~
i
~
i
"-UJlIna<1
DIAZ
Ak>lnIlcl> INC
~chj..tec1\..lre. .
tenor Uestgn
mng
~;l~.~':;!
~~~~~~~
~~~~:tli!
~~~jB~
~~~~i$S
~'~~~i5~
~~f~~~~
~!~~~~.
~h~~~1
:;~~~~~>
~~~il!8~
~'~g~~~
~~~~d~e
t>;;;::l!='~""
~::;~~;r;;~
~.C~~~~
~Uin~
h~dd~
~i~~~h
~~~~~~~
~~H~~
'..~~:;!Scc
'-Q~>~~
~h~~~~
~~~Ws
o;j...~~~!f
~~~~~~~
~iih~;lS
c.~.T
g~<J~i
h~e~~~
~~~~S~.;l
S~~~~~~
~~~~~h
"~I'~.
0.. r;;:i!
~~~ ~"i
z~~ ~~_
:l~~.~~~
~~~M:;!
;;!~S~d~
~~~~~
'~~I~~
~;~ ~ ~ i
ii~~l~
~hU
iW~s
~S~~~~
~~~~~
~~e~~~
~:l~~:l~
.~~9;l~
~~~~g!
~~~m
~~;;!~~~
~~~~~>
~~~.~~~
!~~~~~
o ~ ~
~ "
J! .!.
'?~~~.iU.V ~"U 5e~ lb 19
,. '"' ,.""""", '>'_"""~' ",,'1_','. "'., '0' "H,".." .."....,
,., "", ", ",..."",,,., '.,' 1.. '" .,,.~. O'",o..~'"'." ....., ,..."",.,
'I~ [JLDlrc
'-j- r r.
!g- ~b
~P1UP. . ,
".
."It~ft,. ....,
"',
I:
".
/--------
/
/
'''''''~.~
'~"
'~~!" ~.
-,
/
D I A Z
F U L L E R TON
~ :IIWiri'H!'
SSDI NORTH
.u.AWI BEACH, FLORIDA
I-I
. +c~=+rl+~~
JL
Lnnnnnnrt-
------------------...-------
------------
--....--------
-----------
~--
ARCHITECTS
IN C.
0.' m igi
o ..~~
o~
~~ ~
~~~~E~~
~~~~n!
~mm
~~~$e~~
~~~~~~8
~!~L'z
~~~i~~1
:~.>i~~
"~", 8
,~~ ~~
'1~1i>'~
t~~~~~
~~~~;~~
~um~
@~~~~~~
..~o z>
~'a,8~~;I
~h~.~~
~~~Si;~
,~~~~~~~
.~~~~~~
~a~~~n
5~h~~~
~~~i ~~
$~h~~~
I~<~~h
~~th~
~~~~~~~
gro~~i
'.~~~~
~.~'.
~.~~.~~
.~~~~~~
'~~~S.~
h~.~;;~
g;~l~~.
~~~~~~
~'~;I~~
'~'.o2
~~E;:.~
~~~S~~
C~Cl~~"
iU~~~
~S~m
~W~~
mU~
*~~g
~~I~ii~
.~ ~~~
E~ ~~i
~8~~e~
~ih~~
~~~~~~
:~h<~
!~~i"~
~
U LCifIr;
,~ .~
."It~.,. ~,
, f-~
i r
#, - / \ ~'" \
"" (\ \\' ~__n_
'\ '., ./~ ~~
", (....~~'
! ''''_... III
/ i" ,.' " .....,
~~>~~-~~."'.~".~ '~,:
/" '- ~ "',
/ " '
/ "
/
/
~,~
. zr
~~
F U L L E R TON
r~i(l!iifi
~ '~~Urnlil!
D I A Z
ssm NORTH
"'IAWI BEACH, FLORIDA
rl
Jul
__JL1LJL/w~j
lr-l~-r:Y II l
r
JLJLJLJLJULJ
1
Tllln~'
--~---------------------
------------
- ----------------
-----------
ARCHITECTS
I N C.
· : ','. ~igi
" ..~~
'~
~-~ ~
F U L L E R TON
, ~ I_mum
~i~~m
~~,~i~:~
s~ shs
~~ ~~o~
~~~~.~~
~ii~m~
~~~iN
~.~~~~.
.~s <S.
;.. ~ ~~~
~.~~~~~
~~ ~~~~
tH~~~~
~~~3~~~
~~I~~~~
~~~~~~~
o~~~~~~
~I.s~~~
~ es~,,~
;;~~~.~~
~~3~~~~
m"~~.
m~~ e
~~~~d~
~~~i~<>
~g< ~~~
~~II .~~
~i~9~;@
II'<~~U
~ tt~
~~~~&~;
~~<ni~~
~~~M~
~'~I~~~
~h ~~~
;;~. ~~~
~m~~~~~
"~~~~d~
~un~
~~~~~~
~i~~U
~~~h~
m~~~
!~dii
~~€~~~
~~I~~~
.. ~iii
~~.~~ii
~u~~~
d;!3U
~1I~k
i~~!el
~~ ~
'~ i
~~
.., r
I'"
Ii n iD\}(j
i~ ,~
~UI! -
<'.
.,'....., ."It~~,. ", P
iL
M
Ib-l
11.'-:-.1'
ll~. -....
)"
'....
~ I .
! c;:=?
jI;a:.~' "'"
1"11:, )
-- <) }If"""
(, :,,/',,',
, )a.,,, ,
, " \
, ,
'\ ,,:<
, ,
> ,
\ '
,
,
JL~Jl_~ LLJLJLJl_JI
"ii--UTlrT-11 ' II
".
~,
'-----.
'-------
{----'"
f ~---
/--
~..........
----~-
---~
D I A Z
ARCHITECTS
SSDI NORTH
~---_._-_.--._---_..,-._-
MIAW' BEACH. FLORIDA
INC.
, 8i~1
" .' :;:l~1"l ~
~ ': =~~
,"'~
~
~. ~
F U L L E R TON
r~il'fllfi
* I tttttttWlli H rr n n
~n~~~~~
I~Mh
~U~jm
.~~ ~g
~ii~ ~~~
Ijii~I~~
JM~~
~s~~~~~
7"'~f'lil~o!2
'.' ~o~~~
"'i5~>5~
I.h~hl
g~~~~~
~'~-al
"~.~ii ~
~E~j~ ~
~Uo~a~
~~~h~i
~~~$'~~
~i~5~~~
~~~dh
~.~~>"~~
~oOe~o~
9~~;~~>
~H~~~
;j~~~'~~
~~."~.~
~:etl~~~~
~d~~~;
~m~U
I~~ii~!
~~~Me
~.~~~~~
~~<;8.~
.f~ ~_.
2~~ $i~
~~h~z~
d~~'~~
~3~~a~
mm
""~~o
~~6$S'
~.~ (
~m~~
m~~~
g~~~iia
~d~~
~~~~~~
~~h~~
.~U~~
E~~~~j
h~ii~~
.~~~~~
~~~i~>
ii~~ ~~
j~i e~
'~j
. ~ ~
;2':"
,'.\' ...,I'*'p'blbJO!(1
, llll lDl-rrJ
19- !~
~, 'I t-.---- I: : \ --3-~
. '1- - I ._
r
l..JLJL./lR<fr~(1
1flr==lnf .
".
.. .....~...__.n__-.lJ~~L........r1
t"'~"'---rTlr--'-ru"~
..,.,,~~.,. ",
''',
j
I
JL..JLJLJLJLJLJ.J
'1i--"1fUUUT,ur-u1
/
/
/
~.........................
.~~
~"
..........
..................---------------
D I A Z
ARCHITECTS
SSDI NORTH
-_._--~'_..-
WIAWI BEACH, FLORIDA
INC.
, . '.' ~igl
:: i ='~:
. . .i'~
~
. ~. ~
I'
F U L L E R TON
~ 'IIJmlfm
.a~i.'~
~~~c~L
~>~~d~
,ih~n
J~h~
~~~.~~
Ij~~hl
J~.i'
~~~;~~>
r~h~U
~iP~a~~
'~~~~.s
g.~o"~
>,e,~.~
"~~~a~~
9~~~~~~
h~~~a~
~U~di
~~q~;! ~
~i"~1l6~
~~~ilh
ga~> ~~
m~W~~
~~<~;~~
.~~~~~~
~a>~~8
~i~~~~~
@ <<~~~
~ ~~~jl
~~~i>'~
~~~gU~
~~~.a~e
il~~~~~~
~~~~~~~
i~~m~
g~~~.~~~
H~~a~
iill!~
~I~~~~
>.~>~~
~8~h~
~h~:~
1:d:3
~~~~~~
.~~~o~
~~h~~
~~.~~~
~~i~el
i:",*l"l
~,~,~
~.~~~>
~'..~~~
j~i~e!
~.~
0"
~J,
lin
".
.t.A/L:cil{1
fl - n~_n_~// ./~Ilr fl..!
11 r~u-.. u u I I
II
ft-c.
~'1
I.. ,
;f-'~ ,
. )
"'-,) ~'-""
< T' '" \
" -:~1!\ '\
\ "',.,- \
, ,
'\ ".J
, ,
> ,
( ,
,
,
,
_LLJLJLJLJLJ
--If --rTTTT---.l
.""~~,.',
~,
".
'>
"~.,.
),
'f,~~,
/ ~
I ~
/ / 1/(
) /
'L____
--------
-.~
----------
---....------
---....-
D I A Z
ARCHITECTS
ssm NORTH
WlAMJ BEACH, FLORIDA
IN C.
, '~igi
...'...~. n ~a:s ~
;.. ':..~
~. ~
.
-----
~
-
NORTH E3l.O..DN:l SOOTH ElULDiNG
WEST ElEVATION - SSDI NORTH
THIS 1991 CONCEYfI'l.AN CONSTlTIJnS ^ Gt::NERAl.1ZEO CONCEl"J\JAL I'L\IO lNDlCAT1N(i THE STTlNG AND OtUENTATlON OPcrt.T..wo",-OPOSI!D STRUCTURES ON THE SSOI NOItTM AND SSOl sounr p.uCEl..S. PURS\.lANT TQ ntE TEnlSOf nn: 1M sl::Tl'U:Wt'NT AGREEMENT
BtiWEEN PQRTOFfNo AND THE em. THE CONCEPT PLAN IS NOT INTeNDED TO CONSnTlrrE A DETAILED Al'PllOVAl. Of THE STllUCTIJIl.ES SHOWN TlIERJiON. NORIS IT INTENDED 10 ~O\'C ANY PAATlCUl.A1 USE Of" l1mPl.OPERTY Ok !faUen.iRES. DESIGN ot, AIl.5
SHALL BE ~ IN SUBSEQUENT SUBMITTALS TO D.It.B. AS ro THE MATTUtS "-TrnTN ntEDt CIlJTERI.... FOR Jl.E\1EW. SU8ST~ t.IODlF1CATlONS TO T1fE CONCUT PLAN, AS DFTEJlMINED BY STAfF, SHAU BI! U!VIEWFD AND ........ovm BY THE CITY COMMISSION
ONCE l1IE 1991 CONcEn PLAN HAS IW!N Anl.mr.o B\" THE C1N ( THE "APPROVED CONCEPT PLAN"). THDl ALL SUBSEQUENT.-\C11ON TAKEN BY THE CfTY IN C'ONNECT1ON \1rlTH ANY 01l{EJ. REQlIE.STED DE\'El.OI'YENT AI'PtlOvALS R.I!O.UDING SSOl. NORTH A."IO SSDl SOL'TIi
~T BE CONSlS"nNr WITH l1IE ,........OVED U>NCt;1'l PL-.N AND THIS NOTA TlON AfIo'D nu! CITY SIiAll NOT. DUlECTl Y Ok IloTImEC!l. Y. DENY APPRO\' At. OF INDIVIDUAl SITE PLANS AIUSING TH!!Rt:t'ROM IMS!!l> UPON ANy ALLEGED 0<< I'ERCEJVfD OENSIT\' OR INTl'.NSlTY
CkTfEUA AS LONQ AS THE 1991 CONCEYT PUN.INDf\.1DUAL SITE PLANS .o.1JSIN(j THEREFROM OR Pt:OPOSED MODIFIC."'T1ONSOR AMENDMENTS ntElUITO AIlE IN COMPliANCE \lrTTll THE I'EkMlTTED De;N:Sm' ANP II'fI'DUlrr AS SET FOaTH IN PAltAGRAm 2.4 Of THE 1'Wtl
StITLEMENT AOllEEMfNT (PERMISSIBLE 35 f.A,R--~.O'JIO.I"" SQUAaf: FEET APPROXIM,m y PLUS 160.~ SQUAll fl:ET OF n.-\NSf"Ell.RED DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS TO SSDl. SORTli)
z
o
E-o
~~
~ :: :::'ITL-
o._...!llL........-
~...~
~ ....._'1112....-
----
~I
~ --
A-I7
N
<
-
o
u
z
-
tI)
E-o
U
~
E-o
-
::x::
u
~
<
I'U.1J!Im:N
.....
AkBIIlCJS ItlC.
N'~~~~1gn
Planmng
:I:
E-<
0:::
o
Z
......
o
[f]
[f]
<
Q
~
;
~
5i
.
SOUTH BlLDING NORTH BlLDING
EAST ELEV A TlON - SSDI NORTH
nus 1991l CONCEPT PlAN CONS1TTlJT'ES A GI:......nALilED CONCEl'TUA.l.. ~N INDICATING THE SlTINO A.ND OillENT.-\llON OF CUlAN F1l.0P0SED STRUClUllES ON THE SSDI NORTH AND SSDlSOUllt P.o,JlC,EUi, P\IRSUANt TOTH! TERMS OF nIE 1991 SETTLEMENT A<iItI!EMDrT
BF1'WEEN POIl.TOFINo AND THE ClTY. TlfECOHCEFT PLAN IS NOT lNTl!NDED TO CONSTITUTE A DflAlU!DAPP!lO\'..u. OF THE SnUCnJRES SHO"'''''' THEJt&:lN. NORlSn INttNDEDTO APPll.OVEANY PAATJC'\Jl.AR Il~QfTllf:PKoPEknOR. STJ.UC'TlJRES De>IGN DETAILS
SHALL BE ADDIlESSED IN SUBSI'QUENT stIl'1MmALS TO D.R-B. AS TOTlfE lotATTEltS WITHIN rum ~ FOR RfVIEW. SUBSTANTlAl. MOOlFlC,' nONS TO THE CONCEPT PLAN, AS DETEU.UNED BY STAfF. SHALL BE ~ AND APPROVED BV THE CITY COMMISSION
ONCE l1iI! 1991 CONcPl'T PLAN HAS BUN .'J'f1tO\'ED BY THE CITY ( THE "Al'f'ROYED CONCEYr P\..ANJ. THEN AlL SUBSEQUENT ACTION T.u:.EN BY THE CITY IN CONNIC1lON WTTH ANY OTHU ItEQUEST2D OEVElOPMEHT Al'PtQVALS RffiAR[)[NG SSDl NOtlTH AND SSDI SOlJTH
MUST Bf CONSISn!Nt WITH l1fE. AtPllOVED CONCE" PL.AN ANt) nus NOT A lION. AND THE CITY SKAU NOT. onu:cn Y DIlINDlkECll- \". ot.-m' AI'I'ROV AL OF INDlVlPUAl SITE PlANS AJUS~ THEIU!FROM BASI'D uPON ANY ALlEGED OR. PO.CEJVl:D DENSITY OR INnNStTy
CllJTEkIA AS lONG AS THE I9'MCONCI!P'T "LAN. rN[)(\'IDlJ.U sm PLANS AlUSING TlfEREf1l.OM OR ''IWPOSED MODlFIC.-\ llONS 011 .-\MENDME'\ITS THERETO AllE IN COMI'LIANCE Wflll no:: PERMITTED DENsm- .Il..ND rN'1'DfSITY AS SH FOII.llllN rAJlAGRAPli l4 OF THE 1\l9I!
s.ETIl..EMEJiT AGltEEMENT (PEJtM1SS!BLE l,S F.~R.2.0\l0.144 SQUAAE FEET Af'PROX1M.'TU Y PlUS 160._ SQUAllE FEn O"l1lANSfERRED DEVEl.OPMENT RJGHTS TO SSDl NORTH)
--I
'l!
~!
-f
N
-<
-
o
cJ
Z
-
tn
E-<
U
~
E-<
-
::r:
u
~
-<
z
o
E-<
-~
~ ~':"=~
o._...~
co....o '"' .dlI...--
~ --~
----
~I
~ --
A-I8
I'lU.llIrIOl
IXAZ
......". N:.
~chitec1ure
tenor IJeslgn
omng
:I::
E-
o::
o
Z
.....
Q
(f)
(f)
..
"
ii!
~
i5
~
~
i
F U L L E R TON
1- r.IPPPi
I >- f J !1f"Or
I ~ 111111111111' Ii rr r I
~~2~~~~
~~iii~j
dnu~
~~~s.~~
~j~~j.~~
~~~i~~1
.'Ii>~~o
~~8i~8~
~~;M~
!~~~g~o
t~~~..8
~~~~~~~
~Wa~~
~.~~~~.
~~~~~8?
@*.m~
~~~~~~~
~~~s'~~
~~3~$6.
~~hid
~;~>>~~
~~.".~Ii
~8~U~!
~~~g-~~
3i~>h8
nm~~
mU~~~~
l~ji>"i1
~ ~n~~'i
5 n-
~~.a
~.~;~~~
~~~ ~;~
~~~ S~~
~;~~~n
~~s~a~
~~~~~~
~~~i~.
~~2id
csm~~...
lid~~
,~~.~~
~;s~~~
~h~~~
~~di~
~ie~j~
~~h~~
~~Ui1~
U~~i,~
,3.3m
~g~~~,
~~.~~~
-:l.~~~
~3~~.g
'l
~f>_O'-lf
t 6S-_~O"___ :__ _~~'~o
~
m
~
~
,
f2
g
z
o
:JJ
-<
I
_.__ ____~~______._.___~.:J:=~
~
m
r
~
~
f2
g
5
:JJ
:i!
D I A Z
ARCHITECTS
ssm NORTH
"UAWI BEACH, FLORIDA
INC.
~H~E
~'~~ ~ ;
I ~
L-'@" ~