HomeMy WebLinkAboutR-82-1071t'.
r11'
RESOLUTION NO,��
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF HIANI COMMIS=
SION AMENDING A DEVELOPMENT ORDER FOR THE
NASHER PLAZA PROJECT (RESOLUTION NO.
80-790 DATED OCTOBER 30, 1980, ATTACHED
IIERETO AND INCORPORATED HEREIN BY
REFERS -LICE) PROVIDING FOR A TIt.7E EXTENSION
FOR FOUL; (4) YEARS OF TEiF RECORDED DATE
OF THIS DE VELOPHU-11" ORDEP, FCR SUBSTAIvTIAL
DEVELOPHENT, PROVIDED THAT THE DEVELOPER
SHALL NOT COMIEIvCE CONSTRUCTION UNDER
THIS DEVLLOPrIUNT ORDER DURING THE TIh1E
UNTIL A TIhtJ APPLICATION FOR Di VELOP!IENT
APPROVAL HAS BEAN REVIE�4dED ICY THE CITY
FOR WHAT IS K'NOWI4 AS PHASE III; FURTHER
FINDING 171EA`i THE 1:'OLLO'4ING A1'.BNDMENT DOES
NOT CONSTITUTI: A SUESTANTIAL DEVIATION
FROM THE TERMS OF SAID DEVELOPMENT ORDER;
AND DIRECTING TEES CITY CLERK TO SEND THIS
RESOLUTION TO AFFECTED AGENCIES AND THE
DEVELOPER.
WHEREAS, the Miami City Commission, by Resolution i3o.
80-790; dated October 30, 1960, issued a Development Order,
approving with rio(lific ations, the N asher Plaza Project, a
Development of Rogional Impact to he loc-zteci in the City of
Miami on all of lots 3 ari(I 4 and a portion of lots 5 and 6,.
Block 103S, t,KICKELL ADD MEND (B-113) ; Lot 2, J. AUSTIN.
HALL (2-4 8) ; Lot 1 , .7. AUSTIN ;TALI, LOT 1 PLAT (4-69) TRACT
"A" FLAGSHIP SUDDIVISION (108-100) AND WNPLATTED LANDS LYING
EASTERLY OP SOUT1E RAYSII0RC DRIVE (EXTEHI)ED) , approximately
623-799 Brickel.l Aveni-lo; and
WHEREAS, the applicant had requested a time extension
by letter of August 19, 1982; and
till ENE.AS, the riiami Planning Advisory Board, per Or-
dinance No. 8290, at its meeting of October 20, 1982,
following an advertised hearing, adorted Resolution No. PAB
65-62 by a 5 to 0 vote recommending approval of the amend-
ment as amondecl; and
17HEREAS, tine City Commission deems it advisable and in
the best interest of the general %welfare of the City of
Miami to amend the Development Order as hereinafter set
forth;
CITY COMMISSION
MEETING OF
N Q V 1 0 1982
WSOUoN Ko......................
MUM........................»..
MOWj THEREFOREt BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA.
FINDING
Section 1. The Commission, following an advertised
public hearing at which interested parties were given the
opportunity of being heard, finds that the following amend -
vent to pciragraph ten (10) to the Nasher Plaza Development
Order (Resolution 80-790; dated October 30, 1980) does not
constitute a substantial deviation as described under
Chapter 380.06 (17) (a)-(b) Merida :statutes from the terms
of the Developraont Order..
Section 2. The Development Order (attached hereto
[and incorl;orated by a reference herein] as Schedule "I")
issued by the City of iliami Commission by Resolution No.
81-840, dated Octohor 30, 1980, al -,proving vji.th modifications
the Nasher Plaza Project, �j Pevelopment of Regional Impact
to be loc,jted witiZin the City of Miami on all of lots 3 and
4 and a pc)rtion of lots S and G Block 1035, BRICKELL ADD
AMEND (P113) , Lot 2 J. AUSTIN BALL (2-48) , Lot 1 J. AUSTIN
HALL LOT 1 P1,AT (4-69) TRACT "A" FLAGSHIP SUBDIVISION
(108-100) AND UIIPLATTED LANDS LYIPIG EASTERLY OF SOUTH BAY -
SHORE DRIVE (EXTENDED), approximately 623-799 Brickell Ave-
nue, is hereby a►nended in the following particulars: 1/
A. The first sentence of paragraph 10 of the Devel-
opment Order is hereby amended as follows:
10. The Development Order shall be null
and void if substantial development has
not begun in twe {2} four (4) years of
the recorded (late of this Development
Order, provided that the developer shall
I/ Words and/or figures stricken through shall be deleted.
Underscored words and/or figures shall be added. The
remaining provisions are now in effect and remain
unchanged. Asterisks indicate omitted and unchanged
material.
2
82-1 r 3
hOt commence construction
under
this -
Development Order during
the time
until
a new application
for
Development
Approval is reviewed
by
the City
for
what is known as PRASE
III, or
until
Ilay 10, 1983, whichever
is
earlier.
.
Section 3. The City Clerk is
hereby authorized
and
directed to send certified copies of this resolution immed-
iately to the Florida Department of Veteran and Community
Affairs, Division of Local Resource Hanagemcnt, 2571 Execu-
tive Center, Circle East, Tallahassee, Florida 32301, to the
South Florida Regional Planning Council, 1515 Northwest
167th Street, Suite 429, t-Ziami., Florida, and to Raymond D.
Nasller Company, 777 I3rickell Avenue, Miami, Florida 33131.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 10 day of NOVEMBER ? 1982.
MAURICE A. FERRE
MAURICE A. FERRE, Mayor
ATTEST:
R PH G. ONGIE G."
City Clerk
D•,kTE October 28, 1982 FILE
_,, Howard V . Gary
City Manager NASHER PLAZA DEVELOPMENT ORDER
surs�`c AMENDMENTS
. z- F =°
COi,li•IiSSION AGENDA - NOVEMBER 10, 1982
,*urelio EPereugones PLANNING AND ZONING ITEMS
Director
Planning and Zoning Boards
Administration Department
"It is recommended that the Nasher Plaza
Development Order, approved by the City
Commission on October 30, 1930, by
Resolution No. 80-790, be amended as
proposed."
The Miami Planning Advisory Boards at its meeting of October 20, 1982, Item -4,
the
adopted Resolution No. PAS 65-82, !0!°dmby the CpiptyoCom:,Iissionn(anDevelopment
PJasher Plaza Devel opi�ent. Order approved v e y
of Regional Impact under Chapter 330.06 of the Florida Statutes) to be
located at approximately 623-799 Bric'r.ell Avenue, finding that
MY' Joseph
august 191
Page Two
1982
The Raymond D. Nasher Company is in the process of
applying to the South Florida Regional Plannof°recouncil
ncil impact
aPPnd
g -
the City of ;liami for revie�� of e Since Phase One
d
Phase Two (the approve
for Phases Three and Four °fBuilding),Nasher aza. must all
(the existina Flagship Ban:.
land aesthetically development order) and Phase
and such integra-
ses Three and Four (the DR
be integrated functional
in all livelihood, require some minor modification
tion will, is it is necessary to delay.
to the approved develop7cnt or_._r, eriod
commencement of construction of
Phase Two for the short p
of time necessary to finalize those plans.
��•-�ciate being placed on the agenda for the
We would a- .-- e ���lopm,ent Order
City Commission on this r•o^:ifition to the
in late
prior to the October nullficTYon ank date,
iefor your attention to
September or early October.
this matter.
k
PLANNING PACT SHEET
APPLICANT
Raymond D. Nasher Co.: Sepit-ember 22, 1982
PETITION
4, APPROXIMATELY 623-799 BRICRELL AVENUE
All of Lots 3 and 4 and a portion of Lots 5 and
6 Block 103S
BRICKELL ADD ,'\,%IE',D (B-1-13)
Lo t 2
T
J. AUSTI:1 HALL (2-48)
Lot 1
J. AUSTIN HALL LOT 1 PTAT (4-69)
TRACT "A" FLAGSHIP SUBDIVISION (108-100) AND
LA'.*DS L',,*ISTERLI OF S. BAYSHORE
UNPLATTED 1 � tE"%
DRIVE (E: -'T E'i D F D)
t
Consideration OIL a) a of no substantial
de,,.-ia1--icn and b) amendments to the Nasher Plaza
L.
Development Oz.--lor (resolution 80-790; October 30,
Dpmcnt of Re,,icn,
19 8 0) a Deve 1, al Impact.
REQUEST
certain in the Nasher Plaza
To exto'nu tI
Development Or(:Ior -r-in('Iin(- that t-hev do not cons,
,
tute a substantial 0e-.iatir)n.
BACIGROUi:,'.D
Per Resolution 80 -790 date(I October 30, 1980, the
Commission an, the N, Sher Plaza Development
Order. Para :raph 10 Of this De...01opment Order
prc%-i�les that the Dove I o (--M, t Orc.cr shall be null
1,
void D S, 'L al' or.:-,-ont has not bec:un
and s',!' lt�ai
in two Yea rs.
a N
In .1,11:ch, 19C'2, the Cc,!-,-:ni_sFion substantially a,,,,en(:o
the P.-CI.-CI. IOninc Di,,3trict. ,,his re,,7ision had the
of-,Oc- of tri, the nt potential of
-
the propc, -t%, b- the Do-velon-mont Order
i.e. from to 1,.1,1!t: G.
It is the 1,1 jrjjin(. Dorai .011t Is understan6illc; that
6
tiro -fold dovelonmont
the Oevolop(:,- is a t%.;
strateciv, -is f.01lows
the extension Or time limits in the C-NistiMT
Del.,elopme!lt Order to enable start of construction,
,
SO Of. dcdevelopment.on the ne:-:t Ph,-I
--and-
2. the pronaration Of a nc%.., ,,)?:)Jication for Devo P
mel-it Approval to provide an ultimate de\,ClOT)-
Ment to tal-e advantaciC Of the now zoning en
ANALYSIS
REM'IMENDAT ION
The 2=year time extension of the existing
Develooment Order being requested by the devel-
oiler will allow construction to proceed on the
next phase. lio:•ie�.-er the traffic and other impacts
of the ultimate development will not be defined
or analyzed until the developer presents an
Application `or Development Approval to the South
Florida Regional Planninc: Council and the City.
Both tine Pul3lic Wc,rks and P1_anninc Dernartments have
reason to belier-e that the ultimate dcvelopmcnt
will severel i-.,,nact the intersection of Brickell
Avenue "SE 3th Street and the adj a cc nt street System.
The e::tensions of S. Bayshore Drive and SE 7th Street
throur,h `rasher Plaza rmr,, nrc:•ide relic` to the inter-
section of Brickell A-,:cnue SF 8th Street and should
be held free of construction no-.. The issue would
be resolved at the time the City Commission con-
siders a now Development Order for the ultimate
project.
PUN I.�'G Approval of the time e::tension only if the
DEPART IE:u`r rights-of-aay of S. Bayshore Drive and SE 7th
Street, as e:.:tended through the project are held
free of construction, pending resolution of the
traffic issue.
PLliy.;I:IG Approval, as aaendod, to provide that the developer
ADVISORYshall not :once construction under this De,.,elop-
BOARD ment Order during, the ti-r,e a now ApplicaC-ion for
Develonment Approval is bei:i7 considered by the
Cite for what is known as ��hase III, by a 5 to 0
fJ
OC
ra
r4 4--)
t;
U
C c
1 O
4-J r♦
U U
�5
i+ U
4-+ r
u •r }
4-J ,
V.
tM1.�-� _
•t, '»- G G
:'i G /
v r. a nu zo,-. I ► : B
J ,� H
U-
3-Arton-Aschman Assoc; '-s, Inc. The Plaza on the Ma
201 East Kennedy Boulevard
Suite 1640
Tampa, Florida 33602
MEMORANDUM TO Raymond D. Nasher Company
FROM: Jerry T. Wentzel, Principal Associate
DATE: Septernber 10, 1982
813-229-2329
SUBJECT: Transportation Impact of Nasher Plaza Development
Brickell Avenue, Miami, Florida
In 1980, Barton-Aschrnan Associates, Inc. prepared the transportation analysis
for Nasher Plaza and identified the impact of its traffic generation on the area
street systern. This analysis also considered the traffic impacts of other proposed
developments in the area (e.g. Barnett Centre, Holiday Inn, Interterra, etc.) and
recommended a transportation irnprovernent prograrn to accommodate the total
traffic increases by 19S4. This irnprovernent program was reviewed and accepted
by the various transportation agencies responsible for the area streets.
The new Phase II development proposal for Nasher Plaza is for a slightly
larger development that will not be fully occupied until 19S6 instead of 1984.
The delay in the completion of this development phase of Nasher Plaza until after
1985 is very significant in terms of transportation impacts, because the transportation
systern serving the irea will be dramatically improved during the 19S4-S5 period.
The major improvement will be the opening of the %Ictrorail systern with high -
capacity transit service to both the downtown and Brickell ,'Avenue areas.
The purpose of this mernorandurn report is to compare the transportation
characteristics and impacts of the previous development prograrn that received
DRI approval with the current Nasher Plaza Phase 11 proposal. This comparison
is being made to determine if the previous transportation improvements recommended
for 1984 are still appropriate and acceptable for 1986 conditions.
The previous transportation analysis for Nasher Plaza estimated the traffic
volumes to be generated to and from the site as shown on Table 1. These traf fie
volumes were assigned to the area street systern and analyzed together with other
traffic increases to develop the transportation irnprovernent program.
After several weeks of traffic counts, employee interviews, and analyses
of projected traffic characteristics for the Miarni central area, a set of 19S6 traffic
generation rates for office development were developed by Barton-Aschman Associates
and David Plummer Associates and agreed upon by the City of Miarni Planning
Department, Metro Made Department of Public Works and the South Florida Regional
Planning Council. When these rates are applied to the currently proposed 1986
development program for the Nasher site, the traffic volumes shown on Table
2 result. These 1996 volumes range from 141'0 less on a daily basis to 33% less
c
3:
§dI`t-dMAt;chritan Ass tes, Inc.
Raymond D. Nasher Company
September 10, 1982
Page Two
on a peak -hour basis than the 19S4 Nastier Plaza volumes used for the previous
analysis. The major difference in the volumes is the result of the development
not occurring until after 1985, when significant increases in transit patronage
are expected as a result of the initiation of Metrorail service. The traffic impact
of the proposed 1956 development program on the Nasher Site will be less than
the impact analyzed previously in the DRI report for Nasher Plaza.
Also of importance to this evaluation is the fact that traffic volumes in
the Brickell Avenue area have not grown at the rate that was used in the previous
analysis of the area. Much of the development that was proposed for the area
by 1984 has been co;rnpleted, but the 1982 traffic levels have not increased substantially
above 1980 traffic counts and they remain far below projected 1954 levels. We
believe this situation can be attributed to a relocation of some through trips away
from the Brickell Avenue corridor and our use of high traffic generation rates
for the area development prograrn. We believe the transportation improvement
program that was id'entified in the previous Nasher Plaza Development Order
rernains appropriate for the Nasher Plaza Phase I1 development.
TABLE 1
PROJECTED TRAFFIC CHARACTERISTICS FOR PREVIOUS
NASHER PLAZA PROPOSAL (19S4)
AM Peak Hour P,�1 Peak Hour gaily
Development In Out In Out In Out
Flagship Bank Center 375 70 35 390 1285 1285
Dasher Plaza 360 75 35 370 1220 1220
TOTAL: 735 145 70 760 2505 2505
TABLE 2
PROJECTED TRAFFIC CHARACTERISTICS FOR CURRENT
NASHER PLAZA PROPOSAL (1956)
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Da
ilyIn
Development_--_ Out In Out In Out
Flagship
Bank Center 280 10 25 270 1025 1025
Nastier Plaza Phase 111 320 15 25 305 1170 1170
TOTAL: 600 25 50 575 2195 2195
"I"
SCHEDULE
8 0- 7 9 0
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION CONCERNING THE NASHER PLAZA PROJECT,
A DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT LOCATED ON
BRICKELL AVENUE BETWEEN APPROXIMATELY SE 7TH
—
AND SE 8TH STREETS, MIAMI, FLORIDA, AUTHORIZING
ISSUANCE OF A DEVELOPMENT ORDER FOR SAID PROJECT
APPROVING SAID PROJECT WITH MODIFICATIONS, AFTER
CONSIDERING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE
SOUTH FLORIDA REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL AND THE
—
PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, AS
REQUIRED BY THE CITY OF MIAMI ORDINANCE 8290,
AND AFTER CONDUCTING A PUBLIC HEARING AS REQUIRED
BY SECTION 380.06 FLORIDA STATUTES, SAID APPROVAL
AND AUTHORIZATION SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS OF THE
DEVELOPMENT ORDER ATTACHED HERETO AS EXHIBIT "B" AND
THE APPLICATION FOR DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL; FURTHER
DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO SEND THE HEREIN RESOLU-
TION AND SAID DEVELOPMENT ORDER TO AFFECTED AGENCIES,
-
AND TO THE DEVELOPER.
WHEREAS, Raymond D. Nasher Company has submitted a com-
plete Application for Development Approval for a Development
of Regional Impact to the South Florida Regional Planning
Council pursuant to Section 380.06 Florida Statutes, and did
receive a favorable recommendation for a proposed develop-
ment order, as set forth in the Report and Recommendations
of the South Florida Regional Planning Council attached
hereto as Exhibit "A" and
WHEREAS, the Miami Planning Advisory Board, at its
meeting held on July 16, 1980, Item #1, following an ad-
vertised hearing, adopted Resolution No. PAB 21-80 by a
7 to 0 vote, recommending approval of the Development Order
for the Nasher Plaza Project, a Development of Regional
Impact, in conformity with the City of Miami Ordinance 8290,
(1 ; �. i - k
as hereinafter set forth; and " v ` u L X
rr� i 0
WHEREAS, a recommendation from the Mia i H�anning
Advisory Board has been forwarded as required by Ordinance
8290; and
4'HEREAS, the City Commission has conducted a public
hearing, considered the Report and Recommendations of the
ti. ." I
CITY COMMISSION
MEETING OF
OCT3 0 12t'0
REMUIMN NO 8 0 ` 7 '
RFl.'.Rr1K& .....
South Florida Regional Planning Council,each element required
to be considered by Section 380.06(13) Florida Statutes and
considered the recommendation of the Planning Advisory Board.
WHEREAS, the City Commission has determined that all
legal requirements of publication at the public hearing for
the issuance of the proposed Development Order have been com-
plied with, and
WHEREAS, the City Commission deems it advisable and
in the best interests of the general welfare of the City
of Miami to issue a Development Order for the Development
of Regional Impact, as hereinafter set forth;
- NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA:
Section 1. A Development Order, attached hereto as
Exhibit "B", approving with modifications, the Nasher Plaza•!•' 'D
Project, a Development of Regional Impact, proposed by the
Raymond D. Nasher Company for a tract on Brickell Avenue `;j
between SE 7th and SE 8th Streets, be and the same is hereby
granted and issued.
Section 2. The Application for Development Approval is
incorporated herein by reference and relied upon by the parties
in discharging their statutory duties under Section 380.06.
Florida Statutes. Substantial compliance with the representa-
tions contained in the Application for Development Approval is
a condition for approval unless waived or modified by agree-
ment among the parties.
Section 3. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and
directed to send certified copies of this Resolution immediate-
ly to the Florida Department of Community Affairs, Division of
Local Resource Management, 2571 Executive Center Circle East,
Tallahassee, Florida 32301; to the South Florida Regional
Planning Council, 1515 NIA 167th Street, Suite 429, Miami,
Florida; and to Raymond D. Nasher Company, 777 Brickell
Avenue, Miami, Florida 33131.
f32,1 rN
-2
.80-790
I
Section 4. The recitals of fact referred to in the herein
"Whereas" clauses are true and correct and made a part hereof
together with Exhibit "A".
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 30th day of
OCTOBER , 1980.
ATTEST:
ALPH G. ONGIE Coe
TY CLERK
PREPARED AND APPROVED BY:
/ 'j, a - )Affk4-�
)MARK A. VALENTINE
AS T. CITY ATTORNEY
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CORRECTNESS:"+
Q `.' fit; I. .. , ..
-3-
80-790
EXHIt3 i " 8 "
MVtLOPME- NT ORDER
Let it be known that pursuant to Section 380.06, Florida
Statutes, the Commission of the City of Miami, Florida
has considered in public hearing held on September 15,
1930, the issuance of a Development Order for hasher
Plaza a Development of ReFional Imnact to he located in
the City of Niami, at approximately 623-799 Brickell
Avenue, being
All of Lots 3 and 4
Lots 5 and 6
Block 103 S
BRIC}:ELL APT.) AMEND
and a portion of
(B-113)
Lot 2
J. AUSTIN HALL (2-48)
Lot 1
J . AUSTI►1 BALL LOT 1 PLAT (4 - 6 9 )
TRACT "A" FLAGSHIP SUBDIVISION (103-100)
AND UNPLATTED LAiMS LYING EASTERLY OF
S. BAYSI ORE DRIVE (EXTENDED)
and after due consideration of the consistency of this
proposed develonment ;.ith regulations, and the Renort
and Recommendations of the South Florida Regional 1'lanninL-
Council, the Cor-mission takes the following action: Approval
of Application for Development Approval with the follov,ing
modifications:
Development
1.
FINDINGS OF FACT �,!ITH VODIFICATIO"IS
The development is limited to a project containinp,
not more titan 35,007 square feet of cor-nercial soacP ;
292,502 square feet of office space, 10,000 square
feet of pedestrian -oriented retail space overlooking
a Bayfront Walk; and that the combined comirerciaL retail
and office space is limited to 337,507 square feet
and that a parking, garage is limited to 1,710 spaces.
The nroject, as p.rorosed,would cornrise a floor area
ratio of less than the 2.0 allowed for the two acre site.
Further, the lot coverage shall not exceed 5937; the
enclosed Pedestrian open space at the plaza level
is 42,675 and the heiR,ht of the office tower
shall not exceed 15 stories, all as specified by
the Applicant in the Application for nevelonment
Approval, as revised, and further limited by applicable
provisions of Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance 6781.
Traffic Access and Circulation
2. The apFlicant and the City of Viami (in cooneration
with other public agencies) recognize certain mutual
responsibilities in resolving, and mitigating traffic
access and circulation problems in the vicinity.
"SUPPORTIVE DOCUMENTS
FOLL0W,y
der® - 7'p'l
■
To tesolce these probleths,
The applicant shall:
a) SE Sth Strut
Pay for, and construct
a left turn lane from
the existing center
median on SE Sth Street
to allox easthound SE
Sth Street traffic to
turn left (north.%:ard)
into this Flagship
Center property, per
City standards and
signing.
ProvidQ a left turn
lane on the east leg
of the intersection
of SE Sth Street and
SE Baysho re Drive.
u
The City 8hali.
Recommend to the Dade County
Department of Traffic and
Transportation that signalized
traffic controls be installed
at the intersection of SE Sth
Street and SE Rayshore Drive
by the Dade C_uoty DOTT when
warranted and, in connection
there,xith, shall include an
advance signal ("presignal")
approximately 90' south of
said intersection.
Pay for one -hundred Request cost participation from
(100) percent of th^ future developers contributing
cost of ,and installa- to the traffic impact at SE Sth
tion ef,a traffic signal Street and SE Sayshore Drive.
and controller m,-ch-
anism at SH Sth Strut
and SE Bayshore Drive
or such lessor percent-
age as may be deter-
mined throu_h cost
participation agreements,
developr;ental condi-
tions or offers to
contribute by other
future developers.
(The cost of purchasing
and installing the
advance signal ("pre -
signal") south of the
intersection is to be
borne by th,� o;t:ner of
Hotel Intercontinental -
Miami.)
Accept a peak -hour right -
turn restriction on exit-
ing movements from the
parking lot access along
SE Sth Street if condi-
tions warrant.
Modify the existing; left -
turn stacking lane on the
east leg of the SE Stir
Street/I3rickell inter-
section.
Provide a left -turn bay
(striping) on ,SE Sth
Street to serve the
drive-in teller.
,_IrI-?i
r.s
�rt
`'YI •1 T .
I ►.
I
I
I
I
I
I
T: CH FC'1C:5 EY
.N ; CLA-"7HT'--.'I ISLF.tlD CEVIL CPEF,S
A a t'_ = I _ I =,'.TIC'! FE Et:C'=� B'f
r+ t��" - CP1T7-TF.4. I C Fr:r.LYS I S
N
�C'
.4UG�7Ct! '
I'LA'IC -
4 At•'BASSADORS
INTE CCr4TINENTAL
HOTEL
PF.CFn_c1 MCDIFICATICIS
ADJACE `JT TO NAShER PLAZA
SITE
—3—
b)
Particivate and contribute a
Pro-rata share to the install-
ation of siznalization at or
hear the garaE:e exit of the
Hotel Intercontinental -:'Miami
on SE Sth Street and the
Claut-Thton Island Bridge, if
warranted.
Hr cke l l Avenue
Recor.mend to the Dade County Dept.
of Traffic and Transportation a
study of the need for signalization
at or near the garage exit of the
Hotel Intercontinental -Miami at
SE Sth Street and the Claughton
Island Bridge and to install such
signalization, if warranted.
Request cost participation from
future developers contributing to
the traffic impact at or near the
garage exit of Hotel Intercontinental-
Miami.
Accept a peak -hour left -turn Complete arrangement with the
restriction on exitin- more- Clauhton Island developers to
ments from the parkin; access insure that the dual left -turn
drive alon, Brickell Avenue imnrcvements of the Brickell Avenue
if conditions warrant. median bet--een SE 7th and Sth Streets
agreed to by the t o parties named
herein by the ccndition will be
completed as needed.
"SU r
DOCU Iv11- iwJ
FOLLOW"
Recommend to the Dade Count: Depart-
ment of Traffic and Transportation
that signal display equipment, con-
trollers, loop detectors, and poles
at the intersections of Brickell
Avenue/SE Sth Street and Brickell
Avenue/Sr 7th Street be modified
and reinstalled per consultant
recor.mendat ions when warranted
and as funds are available. If
warranted, re -stripe the existi.n-
southbound lanes on Brickell Avenue
between Sr 7th and Sth Streets to
permit dual south -to east left turn
lanes to eastbound ISE 8th Street
and two through lanes.
Study, in any future development
plans submitted for development
revie•.v on the parcel bounded by
SE Bayshore Drive, SE Sth Street,
Brickell Avenue and Ambassador
Drive, the need for a right turn
lane oil the south leg of the SE
Sth Street/Brickell Avenue inter-
section. If warranted, the City
attempt to secure needed
d:�dications.
Study the truncation of the exist -
in; center median terminus on the
south leg of the Brickell Avenue/
SE Sth Street intersection to
allow signal controlled unrestricted
west -to -south left turn movements.
Request of Dade County Department
of Traffic and Transportation, re -
striping of the inner through lane
on the western leg of SE Sth Street
nd hrickell Avenue to permit an
o�ti_onal right turn movement from
this lane.
-4-
86"V— (N"
C3A.0 �v t
It
the :'applicant Shall:
participate and contri-
butea pro rata share to
the construction of an
additional northbound
lane on the east side
of Brickell :avenue
between approximatelc
300' south of SE Sth
Street and 300' north
of SE 7th Street or
other similar street
improvements on the
west side of Brickell
Avenue southbound be-
tween 300' south of SE
3th Street and 300'
north of SE 7th Street.
c) SE Bayshore Drive
To -ether v.ith the owner of
HOte1 Interccntinental-
Miami , jointly pr�7are a
re -striping and rnarkinz
plan for S ^ayshore Drive,
then transm4 t the plan to
the Dade Ccunt• Department
of Traffic an(! Transnorta-
tion for ; nrr,�val. It is
furthc-r understood that the
City will not issue a
Certi ficatp of Occupancy for
masher Plaza until the re -
striping u•erc has been in-
spect-d and approved by the
Cit.: of '„iar•„i Fu)lic jtiorl:s
Department.
d) S,I 7th Street /S7,
4th Street
The City Shall:
Recor,imend to th,? Dade County
Department of Traffic and
Transportation that appropriate
Brickell Avenue street improve-
ments be finalized and request
cost participation from other
developers contributinc- to the
traffic impact on Brickell Avenue
bet;ce,?n 300' south of SE Sth Street
and 300' north of SE 7th Street,
Request of the Dade Count• Denart-
i
�•
_ ��."`�v f �.
Gro.:th Manaaemen':
3.
The City shall:
lane on the eastern lcq
bf the S:•1 71,h Street/5 i
4th Avcniic intersection
to permit an ortlonal
West -to -south left turn
rnovcmcn t to 51-1 4th Avenue,
an:? restripino of the
Westernmost south`.oun3
throuch lane of tie two
approach l.ncs to Pe --
nit an optional south -
to -nest riailt turd move-
ment to i0est—hounz! S,1 7th
Street.
Prohihit su_ffici^_nt on-
strut parking spaces
along the west si- e of. St.
4th Avenue from S:i 7th
Street/S:i Ath Avenue in-
tersectien so_ith to pro-
vire t-rough
s0uthlt oun:: Clow eme nts.
11ork closet with the
8r�c};ell '.ssociation and
the Annlicant to prcnote
mass transit use by
of,fice tenants in the
Brickell Avenue corridor
and to actively enccuraoe
the acc7t4on by 3rickell
Area e^clrve�sJ c` any,• an3
all traffic r^eas..res Dre-
sentcc: in the Scuth Florida
Reaicnal Planning Council
report includi-a voluntary
ride-sharina pre..ams, ,
variable work hour. schecules
such as staaccred work hours,
flea: -time, and a 4-day
week, and etnrlc,•er-subsidized
transit use, public promotion
of transit use and on -street
par%ing prohibition and en-
forcemcnt, which are in-
tendo,4 to ma::ir ize the use of
available roadway capacity.
The City ,rill prepare, in conjunction with the Iiiami
Accessihility and nobility Study, within months
of this Develnr.ment Order, a small area c-ircwth management
study to halance the desired use of the Brickell, Miami
Avenue, anc? Dur:ont Plana area as a major business activity
center with the public infr.zstructure im..crovements necessary
to s::;Drort SILICh u ,e. The stu:?y must result in recommended
lane? use plan and a progrxi to support the intensity of
activit,; that will he permitted in the study area. These
reccmmendaticn ; shall b,e transmitted to Dade Ccunty Derart-
nent of traffic and Transportation and the Regional Planning
7-
A..
Council for review and comment, prior to their adontion
by the City. Further, to implement the adopted nlan and
program ofy improvements, the City will formulate monitory
procedures to evaluate the cot-prehensive and collective
impacts of development occurring within the Brickell/
Miami Avenue/Dupont Plaza Area.
Environmental
4. The Applicant will obtain a complex; source permit_ from
the Florida Department of Environment Regulations.
5. The Applicant is encouraged to use onl,,,, native vegetation
species in the final project landscape plan, but is not
required to do so.
6. The Applicant will, Prior to the issuance of a building
permit for the project submit a final site and develon-
ment plan, sho�..inn detailed landscape and design treat-
ment, for Planning nerartment review and an*)roval for
a) shade and landscane treatment of the plaza level
and site perimeter; and b) sensitive design treatment
of the parking structure.
7. The AT plicant shall, Prior to the issuance of a C;ertifi_cate
of Occunancv, a) submit landscane plans for a Ba-front Valk -
way for revie�•: and apnroval of the Planning and iuhlic T•'orks
Denart-ments; h) Provide and construct_ a Bnvfront �'all�,•av
per approved plans; c) dedicate a twent- (20) font 1•7ide
public easement ir,rediately upland of the mean high water
line and d) Provide for perpetual r,aintennnce of the Bav-
front Walk a_.' at his o�,m e::Pense, it heing. understood that
this tiara-raph is further conditioned by the t•?aterfront
Charter Amendment as interpreted by the City Commission
as follows:
Fiftv (59) feet Bavfront sethacl. and
,Sixteen (16/„) percent view corridor.
General
3. The Applicant shall submit a report, twelve (12.) months
from the date of issuance of this Development Order and
each twelve (12) months thereafter until a Certificate
of Occupancy is issued, to the South Florida Regional
Planning; Council; the State of Florida Denartm.ent of.
Communitv Affairs, Pi.vi.sion of Local Resource i•'ana-e-
ment; all affected permitting agencies and the Planning;
Director, City of Miami Planning Penartment. This re-
port shall contain, for the nreceeding; twelve (12) months:
A general descrintion of construction pro-ress
in terms of construction dollars and emnloyment
compared to the schedule in the Applicant's
Application for Development Approval.
O _ Specific progress in response to paragraphs
2, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 9, snecifically demonstrating
.� ,i progress on. and in compliance with paragraph 10,
a- (� it bein,; understood that submission of this
report is not a substitution for specific
reports required by these paragraphs.
A cumulative list of all nermits or approvals
applied for, approved or denied.
A statement as to whether any proposed project
construction changes in the ensuing; twelve
me
824-10 1
0
0
(li) months are ex^ccted to deviate su!5 tan-
tially from tho approvals included in this
development Order.
Anv additional responses required by rules adopted
by the State of Florida Department of Community
Affairs.
The Planning Director, City of Miami Planning Department is hereby
desi,natcd to receive this report, and to monitor and assure
compliance with this Development Order.
9. The Applicant shall L'enlat unplatted lands on the site prior
to receiving a building permit.
10. The Development Order shall be null and void if substantial
development has not begun in tt•:o (2) years of the recorded
date of this Development Order. Substantial develcpmeTlt
is defined herein as the achievement of the following items:
a) Construction of buildin" foundations for the pro-
posed development.
b) Construction of int^rim traffic access improve-
ments to include:
striping a west -to -south left -turn land on
the east le; of the SE Sth Street/SE
Bayshore Drive intersection.
prohibition of sufficient on -street parkin
spaces ,outherly alor" the west
side of S1, •ith A%_,nuo on the south leg of
the Sl; 4ti1 :wcnueiS�'; 7th Street intersection
to provide unconstrained through movement
southbound (by the City).
on the cast le;� of the SE Sth Street,/Frickel1
Avenue intersection, construction of a left -
turn lane from the OXi5tinc' center median to
allow eastbound, traffic to turn left into the
■ project (by the Applicant).
restriction of peak -hour right -turns for ex-
itino movements from the parking lot to SE Sth
Street and restriction of peak -]lour left -turns
'for exiting movements from the parking lot access
drive to Brickell Aventic if conditions warrant.
11. All traffic improvements not subieet to Paragraph 10, above,
required of the applicant pursu;lnt to Paragraph 2 of the
Development Order, shall be complete prior to the issuance
of the final certificate of occupancy..
12. The applicant shall give notice to Richard P. Brinker, Clerk,
Dade County Circuit Court, 73 h'cst Fla;ler Street, ?,Miami,
Florida 33130 for recording in the Official Records of Dade
County, Florida, as follows.
a. That the City Commission of the City of Miami,
Florida 11,15 issued a Development Order for the
Nash er Plaza Project, a Development of Re,icna1
Impact located at approximately 623-799 Brickell
Avenue, being
All of Lots 3 and 4 and a
5 and 6 Block 103 S
BRICKELL ADD AMEND (B-113)
W9-
portion of Lots
��✓�-Ui(11VE
QOcu;,,BEN i
FOLL0 „ Jr,-1
1�&I
V.
`0
Lot
J, AUSTIN HALL (2-48)
Lot 1
J. AUSTIN HALL LOT 1 PLAT (3-69)
TRACT "A" FLAGSHIP SUBDIVISION (108-100)
AND UNPLATTED LANDS L'i INC, EASTERLY OF SE BAYSHORE
DRIVE (EXTENDED)
b, That Raymond D. `rasher Company, 777 Brickell Avenue)
Miami, Florida 33131 is the developer;
C. That the Development Order with any modifications
may be examined in the City Clerk's Offices,
3500 Pan American Drive, Dinner hey, Miami,
Florida 33133.
d. That the Development Order constitutes a land
development re,ulation applicable to the property;
it bein- understood that recording of this notice
shall not constitute a lien, cloud or encumbrance
on real property, nor actual nor constructive notice
of any of the same.
13. The applicant will incorporate all original and additional re-
visions to the originally submitted Application for develop-
ment Approval into one comFlete document and will provide
copies within 90 days of the issuance of this Development
Order, to the City of Miami, the South Florida Regional Plann-
ing Council and the State Der.artment of Community Affairs.
14. The application for Develo,Pr:ent Approval is incorporated here-
in by reference and is relied upon by the parties in discharg-
ing their statutory duties under Chapter 380, Florida Statutes.
Substantial ce,ripliance 1,•ith the representations contained
in the Application for Development Approval is a condition
for approval unless itiaived or modified by agreement among
the parties.
CONCLUSIO. S OF LX1.
The Nasher Plaza Project, proposed by the Raymond D. Nasher
Company complies with the Miaiai Comprehensive Neighborhood
Plan, is consistent with the orderly development and goals
of the City of Miami, and complies with local land develop-
ment regulations being Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance No.
6871; and
The proposed development does not unreasonably interfere with
the achievement of the obiectives of the adopted State Land
Development Plan applicable to the City of Miami; and
The proposed development is generally consistent with the
Report and Recommendations of the South Florida Regional
Planning Council and does not unreasonably interfere with
any of the considerations and objectives set forth in
Chapter 380, Florida Statutues.
«SUPPORTRT
FOLLOVV»
�RECEIVED
eft �\
I .�
~ r �7
11 r•, � � n
i �� n
1992 ..
SEC 3 PH
HU�1.•,ni� C, �:
2;
5La
LPi !� r i`;
CITY
City
r.
OF MIAMI FLA,
December 2; 1982
METROPOLITAN DADE COUNITY, FLORIDA PUBLIC WkKS
DEPARTMENT
BRICKELL PL A.Zy E'J'LD',NG
FGUR7H FLr;CP
METRO DADE °=- S • Sr ' U�
FLOP: --
bit, Joseph Id, M0,lanusy Acting Directot
City of Miami
Planning Department
275 N.W. 2 Street
Miami, Florida 33128
Res Bayshore Drive/S,E, 7th Street
Connection
Dear 111r. McManus:
This department has examined the desirability of requiring connection
and improvement of the subject roadways. biased on our review and
examination of the limited information presented by Barton-Aschman
Associates, this department strongl\' supi)orts the ['(�nRtYttrfinn imnr,.._
RECEIVED
-, r•-, i9 3
8Z _ , 2. 2
�� �t,�
CITY
City OF IAM `I,'Fr_A.,
r ,F