2015-1119 Regular City Commission Meeting

Home Browse Search

Summary Minutes:Regular City Commission Meeting November 19,2015 City of Sunny Isles Beach,Florida differentiate the addresses and the volumes of the building they have introduced an interesting play of floor plans that generates outside of acculturation of vertical cuffs that helps to differentiate the structure of the building and articulate the specific skill to avoid the appearance of the building as one. At the same time it was very frank specific because this rotation is related to optimization of use and not to the relationship of the neighboring buildings. This is happening to the building on the north, at the same time it is happening to the building on the south. On the other site you will see a more lush landscape which is different change of trees from the three respective programs to the evidence of the center with its vantage point and the residence of the other tower. It helps to structure this volume and also generate the appearance of the quite unique four buildings. We have tried different shapes of those volumes in relationship to one another, there is play in between those two buildings that is accentuated and so they work together. Mr. Friedman said again that they meet all setback requirements,they made a big effort to do that, and they also exceed all the landscape requirements, and again they have no variances. They also concurred with the staffs conditions except for two of them. One of them deals with the traffic pedestrian study which is Condition No. 10. Right now it proposes for a $300,000 contribution,if the study is not,or improvements are not warranted what they would actually agree to is $150,000 contribution and pay it at the time of the Building Permit as opposed to Site Plan. He is not sure if staff supports that or not,he believes they do. Also,as part of the time extension,we did request an extension of time to a total of 72 months,and on Condition No. 29 it still refers to 24 months requirement to pull a Building Permit. Mr. Schulman said Condition No. 29 is inconsistent somewhat with the staff report. The staff report recommends favorably on the extension of time in which to pull a Building Permit,and that particular Condition did not incorporate it. They have spoken to the City Attorney and to City staff and they were going to recommend that we make it consistent. Mr. Schulman said he started meeting with the Ocean III representative Tucker Gibbs in July. Our discussions and negotiations led to a written agreement that was supplied to him by Mr. Gibbs that he has used successfully in the past that we spent the last few months negotiating. Our negotiations led to what they considered to be a consensus among us, at about 2:00 p.m. - today. At 3:45 p.m.today Mr. Gibbs who is not here tonight for whatever the reason indicated that his client, the Association, is not going to sign the agreement although we had indicated that we would do so. We spent a lot of time, money and effort to reach a written agreement, which he is going to put into the record, because he does not like to be non-transparent. The agreement tried to address each and every one of the concerns that were raised by Ocean III and we thought we did until 3.45 p.m. today. Mr. Schulman said for the Marenas, our southern neighbor, we started meeting with them in September. We proffered to them after a number of meetings where we explained the project in detail,we laid out the plans,and then we proffered to them the same agreement that we had given to Ocean III. And so we had a series of meetings, the last meeting ended at 5:00 p.m. last night with their new attorney, Mr. Shevlin. The original agreement was about 16 pages long and they asked us to reduce it to no more than three pages, which he did. They hired an attorney, they said they don't want to have to pay an attorney, and we said we would pay the attorney,which they had agreed to do and in writing. They met yesterday until 5:00 p.m.,they 6