SAND KEY MISC DOCUMENTS INTERDEPARTMENT CORRESPONDENCE & LETTERS RECEIVED
SAND KEY
MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS
INTERDEP AR TMENT
CORRESPONDENCE
&
LETTERS RECIEVED
~
IIII'I",,~
/"~\~L"r.;2"-~
h"'M~';.
~'~ .-"
~c:...i ,,\L, s \
~~. _,~S
;:.~ -=- s
~-==~
~..lI?4TEl~~
~-,~
'C IT Y
OF
CLEARWATER
City Manager
POST OFFICE BOX 4748
CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33518 - 4748
~
<>
# .... ,1..-
.. .. ~ ~ ..
'<.- 1- -'>-
- .I'" ~'"' '-
September 24, 1985
Mr. Samuel D. Burns
Justice Investment Corp.
7820 38th Avenue North
St. Petersburg, Florida
33710
. '
- .
Re:
Development of Properties. ~
Formerly Owned by U. S. .Steel
Sand Key
Clearwater, Florida
'. ,
:
- .
"'-...-"
-...."" . ..
-.
Dear Mr. Burns:
~
On behalf of the City of Clearwater I would like a moment of your
time to briefly describe the City's position in regard to
particular parcels of land located on Sand Key within the City of
Clearwater. As you may know the City has been concerned about
the rate and intensity of growth and development on Sand Key for
many years. In 1978 the City completed a comprehensive analysis
of the City's carrying capacity and rezoned many areas including
undeveloped lands in Sand Key. In response U. S. Steel, a
principal landowner brought a lawsuit which resulted in an order
that granted to U. S. Steel vested rights to develop according to
the zoning classlflcation in effect when Sand Key ,was annexed
into the City in 1971. The order provided, however, that it was
unnecessary, at that point, to determine whether the so-called
"vested rights" would last indefinitely. Starting in 1983 the
City has pursued a consistent course of using all available legal
avenues to secure relief from the judicial order perpetuating the
1961 zoning.
The most recent of these efforts culminated in a decision of the
Second District Court of Appeal that makes it clear to the City
that the appropriate course is to rezone the property and for a
reviewing court to evaluate the reasonableness of the action if a
landowner is dissatisfied. The City recognizes that such a
course is not consistent with Cheezem's expectations and the
purpose of this letter is to suggest a dialogue between Cheezem
and the City and to ensure that you understand the City's .
willingness to work with you to ensure that the City's interests
as well as Cheezem's are protected.
"EqlUIl Emplo) me.tt and Affinl1atlt'e ActIon En'ployer"
Mr. Samuel D. Burn~
Septmeber 24, 1985
Page - 2 -
The island of Sand Key is a 270-acre barrier island on the west
coast of Clearwater, Florida. Within a relatively short time
span of thirteen years, this once vacant island is now developed
with approximately 2300 dwelling units consisting of apartments,
condominiums and townhomes. Several parcels still remain vacant
but are proposed to be developed under a zoning category not now
in existence in Clearwater's zoning code but preserved for
several parcels of land through a court order issued for Case No.
78-4765-7, United States Steel Corporation vs. City of Clearwater
in 1979.
The City of Clearwater is willing to meet with the owners of the
remaining vacant parcels of property on Sand Key formerly owned
by U. S. Steel Corporation in order to achieve a desirable
development pattern. The factors to be considered in determining
levels of desirability as envisioned by the City of Clearwater
include density, building height, public services, community
character and impact fees.
Since the early 1970's. the City of Clearwater has consistently
allowed no greater residential density than 28 units per acre
throughout the City with the exception of the downtown area. Our
Land Use Plan adopted in 1979 clearly provides for no greater
density than 28 units per net acre. As you are aware. state
legislation mandates that munic1palities must develop in
accordance with adopted plans; i.e., no greater residential
density than 28 units per net acre in Clearwater. For all of
Pinellas County, no greater than 30 units of residential density
per gross acre is permitted as per the County Land Use Plan map.
Maximum permitted building height provided in the Clearwater
Zoning Code is 80 feet from existing grade and is ,permitted only
in areas zoned for high density or commercial use.
Building height and dens1ty max1mums serve to help establish a
commun1ty character. The City of Clearwater discourages
overdevelopment in order to preserve a quality community
character which its citizens demand. To do otherwise would
jeopardize the confidence of the voters in their municipal
government and put additional demand on the public services which
are limited in availability.
Sand Key is a residential community with the highest density per
net acre of any other neighborhood in Clearwater. Water and
sewer services. transportation facilities; i.e., roads, bridges,
public transit, recreation lands and facilities and police and
fire protection are but a few of the required public services of
a residential community which must increase as residential
densities increase. The City of Clearwater insists upon new
",
Mr. Samuel D. Burn~
Septmeber 24, 1985
Page - 3 -
development paying its share of impact for public services to be
provided to new residents in order to not overburden the existing
residents in Clearwater for costs of services.
Development of the vacant parcels on Sand Key would be no
exception to bearing the burden of costs of public services for
its new residents.
As one observes the historical development of Sand Key, there is
clearly a different pattern of density and height between the
Gulf side of Sand Key and the Bay side. The Land Use Plan
recognizes this difference by designating the Gulf side to be
developed at the highest level of density. Traditionally, and
in keeping with the Land Use Plan, densities range from 25 to 36
units per net acre with building heights ranging from 80 to 170
feet. The Bay side conversely is developed with less intensity.
Densities range from 11 to 16 units per net acre and building
heights from 40 to 80 feet.
This is the same character which the City of Clearwater would
seek to preserve with new development. Any effort to plan
development at a level less than the maximums noted on the Gulf
side and the Bay side would be of additional benefit to providing
an acceptable level of public service and to enhancing the
community character accepted and expected by the existing
residents of Sand Key.
Concept plans were presented by Mr. Ken Cheezem to the City staff
on July 5, 1985 for a determination as to the acceptability of
density and commercial square footage levels proposed on the
vacant parcels recently purchased from U. S. Steel Corporation.
A copy of that proposal is attached. In summary, Mr. Cheezem
offered for discussion a compromise which would allow for 126
residential units and 105,000 square feet of commercial space on
the North Bay site, a total of 144 residential units on the South
Bay site and 464 residential units on the South Beach site.
Additionally, it was proposed that 120 units be added to a parcel
identified as the Sand Key V site which was covered in the
settlement stipulation of 1984 between Cheezem and the City of
Clearwater.
In light of the foregoing discussion and with the knowledge of
the city-initiated rezoning efforts now pending before our
Planning and Zoning Board and City Commission, the following
comments are offered for your consideration.
The North Bay site located on the Bay side of Sand Key is an
8.64-acre parcel proposed to be rezoned to RM-16 from its present
liB" Business zoning. It is upon this parcel that specific
architectural plans for residential and commercial development
were prese~ted to staff. Approximately one-half of the site is
.,
Mr. Samuel D. Burn~
Septmeber 24, 1985
Page - 4 -
to be developed residentially. The attached drawing proposes
300 units; however, the compromise notes that 120 units are
proposed. It should be clarified that the 15.9 unit-per-acre
density calculated by Mr. Cheezem is incorrect by the calculation
standards utilized by the City of Clearwater. Whatever land area
is to be devoted to the commercial use of the North Bay site'
would not be available for calculating density of the residential
portion. Without having exact figures available, it would appear
that the proposed residential density is actually 32 units per
acre rather than the 16 units per acre shown. This density level
is unacceptable on the Bay side of Sand Key as is the proposed
13-story height of the residential towers.
The commercial development proposed is at a level and of a nature
which will obviously attract persons other than the residents of
Sand Key. One would expect that the guests of the Sheraton Hotel
on the west side of Gulf Boulevard would frequent the commercial
establishments. However, we would anticipate that persons from
Clearwater Beach and the mainland would also come to the
commercial center. Typically, a commercial center of this size
would generate 7,000 vehicle trips per day. And as is typical of
the other commercial establishments on Sand Key, most of the
traffic comes from the north. This would necessitate excessive
left-turn movements into the commercial center from Gulf
Boulevard which contains no left-turn lanes. The City's and the
developer's interests would be best served by providing for
roadway improvements to assist in mitigating this unfortunate
impact on the existing traff1c system. The internal site
circulation for both the commercial and residential us~s should
be reworked. It would appear that if one were to enter the
property to "drop" a person off at the main entrance area, it
would necessitate an exit onto Gulf Boulevard and re-entrance
onto the property in order to park the car. This.is a cumbersome
movement and very hazardous from a traffic standpoint.
The marina portion of the proposal anticipates 128 boat slips.
It should be noted that any proposal of 100 or more boat slips is
a Development of Regional Impact by state legislative standards
and a request for 80 to 120 slips necessitates a binding letter
of interpretation from the Florida Department of Community
Affairs to determine the status of such a proposal in light of
DRI standards. As this is quite a lengthy process, steps should
be taken immediately to prepare the DRI application for review by
state, regional and local agencies.
The City's primary concerns other than the obvious environmental
issues for marina facilities are adequacy of parking space for
boat users and mechanisms for controlling or limiting the number
of users of the slips.<
. ,0
:
~
Mr. Samuel D. Burn~
Septmeber 24, 1985
Page - 5 -
The South Bay site is now partially developed and a valid
building permit exists for the remainder of the site to allow for
a total of 144 units on the property. This development at
approximately 16 units per acre is acceptable to the City and is
in keeping with the developed character of the Bay side.
, -
The proposal to develop 464 units on the South Beach site at 54
units per acre should be reconsidered in light of an existing
average developed residential density on the Gulf side of Sand
Key of 30 units per acre. In keeping with the earlier settlement
stipulation, a development of 280 units would equate to the 32
units per acre on the Gulf side proposed to be developed by the
Cheezem interests.
The Sand Key V site, which was one of the subject parcels of the
settlement stipulation in 1984, is not to be considered for
renegotiation. The City of Clearwater entered into the
settlement with full faith that no additional units beyond 610
would be considered for the subject parcels of the settlement.
The City has proceeded to continue until October 1 and October 3,
1985 the public hearings on the city-initiated rezonings before
the Planning and Zoning Board and the City Commission,
respectively. The purpose of the continuation is to provide you
as the new owners of the vacant properties on Sand Key an
opportunity to learn of the concerns of the City of Clearwater in
developing Sand Key and to present to the City your proposals,
if any, which would address the concerns as stated herein. Our
most recent experience with Hurricane Elena which never actually
landed on our Pinellas coast reminds us that development on our
barrier islands is not to be taken lightly and must be regulated
with the utmost concern for the existing and future residents on
the islands. -
The actions of the City and recommendations of staff at the
upcoming rezoning hearings in October will be governed primarily
by your response to this letter and any further discussions
which you may wish to pursue. I look forward to hearing from
you at your earliest convenience. '
Sincerely,
Anthony Shoemaker
City Manager
cc: Charles Siemon, Legal _Counsel
M. A. Galbraith, Jr., City Attorney
Paula Harvey, Planning Director
. .
. Density3
o
CH~ aM COMPANIES
SAND KEY LAND DENSITY SUMMARY
-----------------------------
July 2, 1985
(
I. BASE: B-BUSINESS ZONING
No. of No. of
Acres Units Density Corrun.SF
-------- -------- -------- --------
A. South Beach Site 8.60 464 54.0
B. S.Bay Site - 1501 4.71 64 13.6
C. S.Ba~ Site - 1551 4.47 241 53.9 215,000*
D. Nort Bay Site 7.90 426 53.9
-------- -------- -------- --------
SUBTOTAL 25.68 1,195 46.5 215,000
E. Sand Key V Site 15.00 370 24.7 0
-------- -------- -------- --------
TOTAL 40.68 1,565 38.5 215,000
-------- -------- -------- --------
II. ALTERNATE #2 - ZONING PROPOSED @ CITY COMMISSION MTG JUNE 20,1985
---------------------------------------------------------
No. of No. of
Acres Units Density Camm.SF
A. South Beach Site
B. S.Bay Site - 1501
C. S.Bay Site - 1551
D. North Bay Site
SUBTOTAL
E. Sand Key V Site
TOTAL
8.60 241 28.0
4.71 64 13.6
4.47 71 15.9
7.90 126 15.9
-------- -------- --------
25.68 502 19.5
15.00 370 24.7
-------- -------- --------
40.68 872 21.4
o
--------
o
"'
o
III. ALTERNATE #3 - COMPROMISE WITH TRANSFERING UNITS FROM N.BAY TO SKV.*
No. of No. of
Acres Units Density Carom. SF
-------- -------- -------- --------
A. South Beach Site 8.60 464 54.0
B. S.Bay Site - 1501 4.71 64 13.6
C. S.Bah Site - 1551 4.47 80 17.9
D. Nort Bay Site 7.90 126 15.9 105,000
-------- -------- -------- --------
SUBTOTAL 25.68 734 28.6 105,000
E. Sand Key V Site 15.00 490 32.7 0
-------- -------- -------- --------
TOTAL 40.68 1,224 30.1 105,000
-------- -------- -------- --------
* NOTES:
1. The commercial area that could be achieved in accordance with the B Business
zoning could reach as much as 400fOOO SF, but from a practical standpoint
215,000 SF is probably more marke able.
" ,
,. Dens i ty3
.
CHEEZEM COMPANIES
SAND KEY LAND DENSITY SUMMARY
-----------------------------
July 2, 1985
.
I. BASE: B-BUSINESS ZONING
--------------------------
No. of No. of
Acres Units Density Comm.SF
-------- -------- -------- -------- If~f
A. South Beach Site 8.60 464 54.0 d8D
B. S.Bay Site - 1501 4.71 64 13.6 tctf
C. s.Ba~ Site - 1551 4.47 241 53.9 'ilC
D. Nort Bay Site 7.90 426 53.9 215,000* 0 /os crtrO
-------- -------- -------- -------- I
SUBTOTAL 25.68 1,195 46.5 215,000
E. Sand Key V Site 15.00 370 24.7 0 'f?D
-------- -------- -------- -------- / oS: ocrO
TOTAL 40.68 1,565 38.5 215,000 /.m
-------- -------- -------- -------- I
)
II. ALTERNATE #2 - ZONING PROPOSED @ CITY COMMISSION MTG JUNE 20,1985
---------------------------------------------------------
A. South Beach Site
B. S.Bay Site - 1501
C. S.Bay Site - 1551
D. North Bay Site
SUBTOTAL
E. Sand Key V Site
TOTAL
No. of No. of
Acres Units Density Comm.SF
-------- -------- -------- --------
8.60 241 28.0
4.71 64 13.6
4.47 71 15.9
7.90 126 15.9 0
-------- -------- -------- --------
25.68 502 19.5 0
15.00 370 24.7
-------- -------- -------- --------
40.68 872 21.4 0
410
1018
Jl
4:tc.4-
~l/
'RO
D
-------- -------- -------- --------
III. ALTERNATE #3 - COMPROMISE WITH TRANSFERING UNITS FROM N.BAY TO SKV.*
------------------------------------------------------------------
~( l,,~
~~. f
.1tJ
)/V
~)Lf
l;%
~~~
~~X
f>'
~~~
~\,~
No. of No. of
___~~~:: ___~~!:: _~:~:!~~ _~~~~:~~ ~61
A. South Beach Site 8.60 464 54.0 -B- 80
B. S.Bay Site - 1501 4.71 64 13.6 ~ 'to
C. S.Bay Site - 1551 4.47 80 17.9 D
D. North Bay Site ____~:~~ _____!~~ ____!~:~ _!~~!.~~~ 0 if 10
SUBTOTAL 25.68 734 28.6 105,000 ?; 1 U
E. Sand Key V Site 15.00 490 32.7 0 4 -=t 0 c--l lJ
TOTAL ~~~~~~~~ ~~~!~~~~ ~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~ ~ ~
* NOTES: {€?1 ~
1. The commercial area that could be achieved in accordance with the B Busines~~O'
zoning could reach as much as 400LOOO SF, but from a practical standpoint
215,000 SF is probably more marke~able.
~__~___-~~--...J"'I'-;-...~ ~--..-
, -
~
t,
~.
"
.~ '1
OLI_AWATBA Il_AnOIl
SITE PLAN AT PLAZ^ LEVEL '0111, I'. II' ,."..1
HAKINQ Llyn _.... ,Jt1lII_um
~.. ""IL~ "..... Mtt\Alllll ''''''''10.'' r:1IN1...WIl
\M'" W' ,11II.... lie """"
'LAlA LlYn _...m.._"~""_,,",,__
"'__" CP"'" IN.lCI.I..IIMftIlO~'~~.''''''''tI'MlU
TO'MAll ...- "'_-
. tOM.. "",It. "'" t,IH'lM\DCJl t,....rt 1M
3'
j~
".
-~
(;.
~
( /~
,
(~
SAND KEY SHOPS AND CONDOMIUMS
CLEARWATER. FLORIDA
John/on
Nlo('af~'
Archn~Cu. nc
lilt", ..",..
"
-
t!O -/(J fS-
,.
- -,
J-~", -'-"-_n.d;,,_V<Ml.....::& _u~f'- .. .. . ____~__nn~n..n - u_
- - - ~ - -- ---- ----- ----- -- -
~~_~_ ~..~.~ ..~~~~~A-::~~~~=_n~_-_-~_.~_._ . j
- - - -- - - -- - -- - ~- Fr,~~ ---------- - ~o~
~ ~--r~ ________~ -'i- __~/_
--- - - ----- ~.:J
- ~-- ----- - -
L06 u~ ------- - . -'- ..", ~t
-.-------~.~----gJ~)J;~-- .. ~ ~\o<6~l\~~1() ~
_n ___ --- -____ .. --tlf cP~-------_. --"?? - '\ '\
' Y () J \
- ---- - - - - - - - - -------~-~~ - ------------ -- ---. ._- --
_ · ~w~J..J~h~ _____
.d__ ;j.g~ U~-=-~1: n____~_.___d .... ..
~- ~--~~. - -- --- ---
-. ~~ .-~~~12-~--.------- -_w
-- . _ _.P~~. ._.___ u______. ...
J -Q.18-.---~_b--- ---- ---
-- - - --- -- ------ )
_ . _ __. __ _ ___.__ _ F'^- _ ~q.j.'_J'. __Q_~____ . ___ ___
-- - -- _. -_ - ____ ___ ______ 077. ?_~______________ _ _
.-- ----- - ----
--- --- -- ---~-------- - ------
S4i~-U s.~_._ -. - ____d. _a..___._._. . .
- - -- -----~dY II f- i d - -.-1.. -" ~ /1_ _I J 1._~ vi.~ _ .._ _ __
-------- ---/~_{-V:-( - r___C/~/~__~ /-~
_____ __________ __d_____g_Q_____=_ ~a~____ ________ . _ _
_ __. ____ ________ _._ __I-~~-?-- _yo-~------_------ _ _ . _ _ ---
_ ___ ___ _______ ___._ _____________ _____ __._ ___ - __ ~ ._,,____________ __ u_
___ _____ _.____ ___.u_ ~_~ _ ~_~ u~ ---i5 __ -- -
. ,
0~ /2 / _\0~/,
~-~-t-eJ--- -~~J
S.jr+ehxfCL-~~.4J-~ -
~ ___________ ___________h
__-::i:L <!.. - ---~~-'I---~----r~1i " --------
______ AJ ~ ~-p:;~--- _- ---- -
--;; -:, - -..-~? LOS:r_&-C>~ J1--#-j.-~- -=--it~ -t;.~
- -- --~;~~.~4."'--~~,L---.LS~-d- ~j,~ ~~---
------ i' ~-_:::i!'iiift.~~-----.k~~ -L.---T=~<- '=t'-~:JJ.-~o~
___ ______ L~..:~6____~s ~ # .
~-- --
_____: L~ - ~b.___ --
--~-
_ __ _____ _____ ;120_1- "3~ ~~_I..._~.s -----
I() 'i K
I?L
------- ~~~-
o . ------------- -- -
__ ________ ______~it_~-~--I1&+ _~~~___
_ ___ /J!-~ i2o-__.~ _ __f1rJ_______
_ _____ ___ ___________'f 20 _ c.----"Js. - 2:L~-~--~~~ _~__
h--------- -~ -~. --I- f) d. ~\
_V~ -~-L~ 1_- -~~_~~u~~
I
~-- - - --- - - -----
I
. 4 __._ _ _
I - - - -- .--------- - - -- - ---------
- t ---- ------ - - --- -------- -- --- - - - ------- -- ----- --- - - -- -
.1
~~_~jJ-k.
e:u..S cIo / -L .. .L4. -
__ _____. ___~_L.S_ _L~
---~-~. h;=-- __;v~m/o ~~i~~J.~
~~~
U~
------------------~--------------- --~ ---
~___ _._____ _________ ___n______ _ .
met. '()--~74r-- .._mm~
_~ ___ _ _ _ _.___._____ ____n ___
I /J .
- .- -- . ------C-a ~ .~~ .h n 6' ~-----
(Vd>jL-~~- j .~ft ~~-~----
,S
e - - . u -- - --'7
----- -- -- -- ~-d--- ----- --- - .. {- - J- ,
_____~Jo -f~--.n-.--nj~n.~--u.
, ,
. ~-+)!I<"" ~ ~ J,-'l;'
~------- ~-~---- ---- -
-~ F~ -J=-~h-~:~-It-j
;J,J~'J_-_~~=~_ ~:~""-'~C?~
~---,-S--_~~b ~
--
------- ~LL~_A_:--=~~ U~2~?----~y2
~ A_~_~ /; ___ _ _ ____
- --
------7'-U--~,~ ~-~~u~-.
-----* -~},-~ ~~.s~_~_~~.6~~__ ~j;h~
~--- -- ~ -- - ---~-h-~~----
-- - - 1----,1}-
~ --~-
----~-
Jf~ t ------- -- --- --
____ _ :.1.- --
~------
~
--~,~
1/--
3~L~..Ll21dNL~+
{! () J
to I ~16
b -:S-3- Co
_u__---~_____ _ j~tt {J
~
TO
CIT T OF CLEARWATER
I nterdepartment Correspondence Sheet
Paula Harvey, Dlrector, Plannlng
FROM
Frank Kowalskl, Chlef Asslstant Clty Attorney
COPI ES
.
fxK
SUBJECT
Justlce Corporatlon
DATE
October 18, 1985
Enclosed please flnd coples of the legal descrlptlons of the
parcels lnvolved In the orlglnal U,. 6. Steel lltlgatlon.
Charlle Slemon asked that I forward thls to you so that you'
mlght consult wlth the approprlate Clty personnel to ascertaln
whether the propertles whlch are the subJect of the present
negotlatlons wlth Justlce Corporatlon are lncluded wlthln the
enclosed legal descrlptlons.
FK:fs
P Au L A,
FrzAVt) K.,
GAVG
V\1A-PS
cR-OS~
TI-IE L-E(,.ALS AJfJ
~€r€~CtJ cE D
ffJ
10 - ~z..- r-~-
LAW OFFICES
M~MULLEN. EVERETT. LOGAN, MARQUARDT & CLINE, P A
FIRST NATIONAL BANK BUILDING
400 CLEVELAND STREET CLEARWATER FLORIDA 34615
POBOX 1669
JOHN TWEED ~.";MULLEN
FRANK C LOGAN
EMIL C MAROUARDT JR
HARRY S CLINE
J PAUL RAYMOND
JAMES A MARTIN JR
STEPHEN 0 COLE
MARGOT PEOUIGNOT
R NATHAN HIGHTOWER
ROBERT C DICKINSON III
THOMAS C NASH II
NANCY S PA1KOFF
MARIE: L DtMARCO
T SHEA GILLS
CLEARWATER. FLORIDA 34617
(813) 441-8966
FAX (813) 442-8470
OF" COUNSEL
JOE S EVERETT
WILLIAM E NODINE
PALM HARBOR OFFICE
(813) 78S 4402
33920 HWY 19 NORTH
SUITE 150
PALM HARBOR FL 34684
February 12, 1992
Mr. Theodore Clark, Planner II
Planning Department
Post Office Box 4748
Clearwater, FL 34618
Re: Harbor Condo
Dear Ted:
Following up on our most recent conversations, I understand
that no site plan has been filed for the third Ultimar building.
As you will recall, we represent condominium owners across
the street. They are most concerned that the Development
Agreement for this site be honored, which in particular provides
that there will be no structures, walls, fences, parking and the
like in the view corridor. The view corridor is to provide for
passive amenities such as landscaping, pedestrian walkways,
driveways and emergency vehicle access.
We would appreciate being advised if and when a site plan is
filed, so we can review the same to insure compliance.
With best regards, I am
SincerelY70 rs,
JiWf ' {!!UU I _
Harry s. Cline ;I~dl~
HSC:koh
cc: Harbor Condo
REceIVED
FEB 1 4 1992
PLANNING &
DEVElOPMENT DEPT.
".JI--:-,
:;
-
~.^ .
. , i, J ".;- .~ -.-
t?((~rt=:'" 11,."-
1!{JI'~~~~:[!\>~!~
~JU /1/ !
&_..-- Il'
Gf.f"1 pjJ.Ai,;;~_,l':'
. _ _ l - ) ,
. . 1
~----_~,--I
Sea Towers
ConstructIon Company, Inc
VIA HAND DELIVERY
March 19, 1992
Mr. Michael Wright, City Manager
City of Clearwater
112 Osceola Avenue S.
Clearwater, FL 34615
RECEIVED
RE:
Ultimar Three
1560 Gulf Boulevard
Sand Key, Clearwater, Florida
, 'I
/I!uf/ ') '-, _
, tv,' ,~O)
FUt'Ji\fJf!C 8. '
DEVfLOr-\il'II:'J"- lJRf):\N
it ../, I DEPT.
SUBJ: Request for Approval of Alternative Site Plan as to Tower Building Only
Pursuant to Settlement Stipulation dated October 17, 1986
Dear Mr. Wright:
Sea Towers Construction Company, Inc., general contractor for USX Corporation,
hereby requests approval from the City of Clearwater of an alternative site plan for
the tower building portion of the third phase of the Ultimar project. Our current
plans for Ultimar Three consist of a 22 story tower building containing up to 140
dwelling units and 8 townhouses (for a maximum total of 148 units), and a
surrounding two story parking garage and plaza deck. We have enclosed two copies
of an alternative site plan prepared by Y.H. Lee Associates, Architects dated March
17, 1992 which shows the modified tower building envelope we are proposing.
This request for approval of an alternative site plan is being submitted pursuant
to the requirements of Paragraph 14 of the Settlement Stipulation dated October 17,
1986 and is proposed as a modification of the portion of Exhibit "B" to the
Settlement Stipulation entitled "Parcel II Schematic Site Plan 2". It is our
belief, and we are hopeful that you will determine this to be the case, that our
alternative site plan for the tower building of the third phase of the Ultimar
project complies fully with the requirements of the Settlement Stipulation.
We would lik~ to further clarify that this request is for approval of an alternative
tower building footprint only; Le. a modified "multi-level building envelope" from
that shown on Parcel II Schematic Site Plan 2. Therefore, we are not seeking
approval of the overall site plan at this time. The City's approval of this portion
of the site plan is needed at this time, however, in order for us to proceed with the
...'..."'tftE'l~ti,':~ .........~ e\"'~ ~M~.i~i:"~ .:t=-.....~.:~~......~~:"31 3.:':~ e::~ir:ee~i=, ss=--!:=~s cf ~e cesi~.
We fully intend to sul?mit the completed Sl.te plan 'to the City' ~ Development Review
Committee at a later date in the same manner as Ultimar One and Two were previously
,submitted.
1520 Gulf Boulevard - Clearwater, Flonda 34630 - 813-595-8915 - 595-8928 FAX
,"
/
;/
/
~
Mr. Michael Wright
Page 2
March 19, 1992
In comparing our alternative site plan with Parcel II Schematic Site Plan 2, we ask
that you consider the following:
1. The proposed tower building does not exceed the allowable "multi-level
building envelope" dimension of 250 feet in the north/south direction. Thus,
the vistas from Gulf Boulevard will not be reduced. In fact, by "lopping-
off" the southwest corner of the "multi-level building envelope", the vistas
from Gulf Boulevard are improved. You will also note that there is no
reduction in the vistas from the Cabana Club condominium, our neighbor
immediately to the south.
2. The proposed tower building will have a footprint of approximately 19,500
square feet which is considerably less than the maximum allowable "multi-
level building envelope" area of 25,000 square feet.
Furthermore, in keeping with ,the provisions of Paragraph 14 of the Settlement
Stipulation, we call to your attention the following additional considerations:
1. There is no increase in height being proposed by the alternative site plan.
2. The setbacks as proposed by the alternative site plan are greater than or
equal to the setbacks shown on "Parcel II Schematic Site Plan 2".
3. There is no reduction of the open area proposed by the alternative site plan.
4. There is no increase in density proposed by the alternative site plan.
5. There is no reduction of the width of the view corridor proposed by the
alternative site plan.
We trust that this letter and enclosed drawings will provide the City of Clearwater
with the necessary information as described in Paragraph 14 of the Settlement
Stipulation so as to allow the City to approve the alternative site plan for the
tower building of the third phase of Dltimar. We would be pleased to meet with you
at your convenience to answer any questions you may have regarding the site plan or
this letter. We look forward to hearing from you in this matter.
Sincerely,
~~
Ted Cobb, President
TC/dk
Enclosures
cc: City of Clearwater
Attn: Mr. James M. Polatty, Jr., Planning and Development Director
(with enclosures)
Mr. Milton A. Galbraith, City Attorney (with enclosures)
,
~"
:;
. t-p P-!f1'tf ,- ,-- -
. I C ~~; ~fl\~r -_I
- l' t';, \- 1"-'" ,-...~ 'I
!'I\\j~~~~i
L .(O.'~. ~)l' '\["4\"-"""'r::)
'1 I...l~~ ~l.:;. IJ-l
_ ~o:.. ~-=.J_,t....J:..$__ .-........_~"!.____..
.
Sea Towers
ConstructIOn Company, Inc
VIA HAND DELIVERY
April 23, 1992
RECEIVED
Mr. Michael Wright, City Manager
City of Clearwater
112 Osceola Avenue S.
Clearwater, FL 34615
RE:
Ultimar Three
1560 Gulf Boulevard
Sand Key, Clearwater,
APR 2.1 19Q)
v~
PlANI'4Ia17 & URBAN
DEVELOPMENT DEPT!
Florida
SUBJECT:
Transfer of Forty (40) Residential Dwelling Units
Pursuant to Settlement Stipulation dated October 17, 1986
Dear Mr. Wright:
We are in receipt of the City of Clearwater's "Interdepartment Correspondence"
dated March 25, 1992 (copy enclosed) which indicates the City's approval of the
"tower building footprint only" for U1timar Three as requested in our letter of
March 19, 1992. We thank the City for its timely consideration of our request.
We note, however, that the last paragraph of the "Interdepartment Correspondence"
of March 25, 1992 indicates an apparent discrepancy that exists in the City's
records with respect to the transfer of forty (40) residential units from Parcel IV
to the Ultimar project (Parcel II) as provided for in the Settlement Stipulation
dated October 17, 1986. More specifically, the forty (40) residential dwelling
units were transferred by virtue of a document entitled "Assignment" dated January
'23, 1987 between the land owners at the time, Sand Key Investment Program I, Ltd.
and American Design and Development Corporation of Sand Key. This "Assignment" was
recorded in the Public Records of Pine11as County on February 2, 1987 in Official
Records Book 6418, at page 1098, a copy of which is enclosed. It is our
understanding that a copy of this "Assignment" was also provided to the City Clerk's
office at that time.
We are hopeful that this letter will clarify and substantiate that the developer of
the Ultimar project has the right to construct up to four hundred (400) residential
dwelling units. As stated in our letter of March 19, 1992, our architect is
proceeding with the design of U1timar Three based on this understanding. Should the
City not be in agreement with the foregoing, please notify us in writing as soon as
possible.
1520 Gulf Boulevard - Clearwater, Flonda 34630 - 813-595-8915 - 595-8928 FAX
...:. 4. ~
. ,~ .
"
~ ~"
. "
-
.
Mr. Michael Wright
City of Clearwater
April 23, 1992
Page 2
Again, we thank the City for its cooperation and assistance in processing our plans
for Ultimar Three.
Sincerely,
~J'~
TC/dk
Ted Cobb, President
Enclosures
cc: City of Clearwater
Attn: Mr. James M. Polatty, Jr., Planning and Development Director
(with enclosures)
Mr. Milton A. Galbraith, City Attorney (with enclosures)
Ms. Cyndie Goudeau, City Clerk (with enclosures)
---q-- it-... '
f=flR-e3-1992 15:32 FROM
~ J 1Y OF a...W. EI'G II'EER J I'li TO
95958928
P.01
FAX MESSAGE
~
CITY OF CLEARWATER
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENTIENGINEERING
SENDING LOCATION FAX NUMBER: (813) 462-6641
OFFICE TELEPHONE NUMBER: (813) 462-6970
TO: W'\R~ ~
LOCATION:~T\~ ""J1I:
FAX NUMBER: 6><1C::>- S9Ze
FROM: LocA Ll.u__~iJ
DATE: Me..IL- ? 111"2-
I
MESSAGE:
NUMBER OF PAGES THIS MESSAGE (INCLUDING THIS COVER PAGE)
Z-
"r'\.
~
, .
1=F'R-03-1992 15:33 FROM CITY OF a..W. EN31!'EERIN::] TO
95958928
P.02
./
C :I T Y 0 J'
Interde
TO: '.
Michael Wright, city Manage
FROH:
. .
\ ~j ,
James M. Polat'ty, Jr., oi
Development
COPZES:
Kathy Rioe, oeputy city
Ultimar Three - Request for approval of alternative
sitQ plan for the tower buildillQ' footprint onlY
pursuant to settlement stipula.tion dated October
17, 1986
Scott Shuford, Plannlnq Manager: File
VI:A:
SUBnCT:
nATBI
March)25, 1992
The Ultimar project is being developed in accordance with the
Exhibit "B", Parcel II Schematic, Site Plan 2 pursuant to the
settlement stipulated dated October 17, 1986 (Circuit Civil No. 78-
4765-7). This schematic presents the building envelope tor ultimar
XII as a rectangle measuring 100 ft. X 250 ft. x 210 ft.
The applicant is requesting the city Manager's approval of an
alternative site plan for the building footprint of ultirnar three.
The propose.d change incorporates a unique "U" shaped buildinq
dQsiqn that increases the buildinq setback from Gulf Blvd. on thQ
north end of the struetul:'e and eliminates part of the building
envelope on the south end of the structure. The overall building
footprint is deoreased from the allowed 25,000 square feet to the
proposed 19,500 square feet.
After careful review of this proposed change to the Ultimar Three
building footprint, the Planning Departl'llent has determined the
proposQd change to the building footDrint only. to be acceptable.
However, it should be understood that this does not satisty the
requirement of PaJ:agraph 11 restricting the developrnent to 360
residential units with the eligibility to transfer 40 residential
units from Parcel IV. The overall development does, in fact,
propose to develop the maximum 400 reliidentlal units. Therefore,
the developer shall be required to record an appropriate notice of
transfer in the Public Reoords of Pinellas County and filing a copy
thereof with the City Clerk's Office.
It
APPROVED
lei
DISAPPR.OVED
DATE:
~/f9r2J
03mem3.tc
TOTfl.. P. 02
.. ",. ...' to \ 'f~'
., f' ~,' "',~ ": .
_, I. .' :.':"~' - ,
, .,r.I~' V: ~ }'f\.";:q,:, , ,
,~...:....~'~ ""'o'\#''-1~' .\ .
. I ~ .. ft ....
~... ~ .'~
~':-lr t1..'" .:~...f.~., I r...~,
:' ~ I , .., '. ' .. '" .
\.
. .
~SICHMD'I _d.' thl.' .JJJ:d day of J~rJ',;' ~ 1981, by
m!4~ P1\OCRAH x, LTD., a FLorida lhdt~
p;~,'(.A:..iqno%'''), an4 ~CAH DESIGN AND DZVZ1.01'MEH'r
. 1~':I~~;~~.'~' · Florida ootpOrat:ion, ("1.8.191\..-).
,'10'. ",....-., ......., \ H
,,10:..., ',.1-. .' .'.. 11 X '.r 11 B S & II 'r I
. ~~,!~J"'~i!" "
. r' ~'''J' :!"v.,' d., .
. ~.1gnor{,~ 'in' 'conllic!.rat.ion ot 1:12e .~ of Ten Dollara
'10~OO)~~,an4. other valuable conalderation, the receipt: an4
!Clancy' of.'which i. hereby acJcnovledg'ed, doe. ~.reby C)J:'ant,
. tt ..11 ,'~ conv.Y, anc1 a..1gn to AII.ignee a -total r..id.n1:ial
1~11v ':unit count. ot forty (40) unit., which Wlit. are allocated
~to,:th. property d..crIbed on EXhibit "A" attached bel'eto and JIlzsde
_.~'f:!f.r~.~IPUtl: horeo! ("Parcel AN) purauant. to the city of Cloarwe.ter's
r ~~~~~~~ land u.. ordinances.
,..... irt.r,~: .,'~.f" ~.. .' '1 t' .
1-'''--I'''--:'f''':::';~'r;!l'O . HAW AND '1'0 HOLD tb. etoJ:esaid units .et forth above in
. ;,~l'oonn.otJ.on with, and only in connection witb the real ..tate
'...: :iJ d..cribe4 on Exhibit "8" attached hereto and by thi. reterence
)R:~'t.~..~\1ncotporat.4 harain (-Parcel BM).
~~~, ..~,t. ,." ,
~~,u:,:1!;~.?.,:.. ','.; ~'. utl1lzat:lon ot the unibl dellcr-ibed above shall b.
~:(,-: ::'7. liait:ed to PIlrcel D, and upon coapletion ot ASl!liqnee 'a
;'~.::~ . . develoPJB.nt ot 1'1It'c.l D, all unit- not 80 utilized shall b.
?";. reconveyed to Aall19nor tor the ben.tit ot Pat"c.l A within liv.
(S) ~ay. ot l'.qu..~ ~y AS8ignor.
.,
r
~.
1 ..
...
....
~
C"1
f")
..
"0
'0
o
ri
Cd....
-a
M ..
~..
~~
.32
. "
0-
.....
..u
I
r
, "
Thi. Aa8ignm.n~ i. given in accor-danCG with paraqrapb 11 ot
the Settl..en~ stlpullltion in united States St.el Corporation v..
City ot Clearwater, circuit civil No. 78-4755-7, Pin.~la. county,
l"lorida.
'IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Assignor haa executed thi. ~a.i9nment a.
of th. ~ay and year tir.t written above.
WITNESSESt
SAND KEY INVESTMENT PROGRAM I,
LTD., A Flo~ida limited
partnership
Iy. ~ LAND ~tn.r
By: ~
lce-rresident
Ita CanQral Rartner
~t:t::!
STAT!: 01'"
COO'N"fi OF
~4 217=6P71 70
40
TO'~L
1. 02F!87
13 09
13.99 atK
rlQrida
Pindl..
,
)
'lb. torC!lgolhCj lnat:J;'UlIIBnt WDS Dcknowledged befot"G lnQ this
--UI4day _O~_u_J~~~ary,_ 1~87_,__b~_ Ro.h_e_rta II. ~c_~nb .. G.ner~;
/'
';";'.1\_ "I" J,' Pa.rtn.r'o~' SAND
/. i
/ _ .., p~rtn8rsh p, on
,
~J ItrjESTKEN'l' PROGRAK I, LTD., a FLorida 1111a1~el:l
~alt of said partnership.
~ .-...".... '-.
~ .-t.~ :~..
No ar publ c: ..' I~
/
- .
R.E40.2-120JG
My commission Oxpiro.:,"i\:
<I "4"~V
!lOllu "",ue IUlf tlI nellN
II' CO/l.II'IOI (I'. "" ..~ It"
lO.,lD rl.'" ~Utl'l 1'$.. uab; .
.......,... \
.-
.'
~.. -.
-
. .., .
.
. .
-,
'.
.. -
.
..,'" ,
~ .
. .
".- .
....... ...---.... .. ..
~-... . ...-...
r r ._--.-."'-_-.....-......
t ' r . I .... ". .
. . "{J' ~':/' ..,.j,~~\~:.'~.t""..; '~..it'~~:fi..\U~;~''''~' ,~
.~,;~ ;.; .:'. .. . .,~ . ,It'~~fl)M?~1i:~~1W,fI{~_.,.1
'~"ir,~ll~~ .~.. I ~fr'l'll' !J.~''-I,. , ~w.J~'J1:
I ~~.~ 'JJ. . .. "l"!"~' .'t\J.'r.~~~w.
. ft.~ :..~~,1'~),.ro l~j~~ "'~" 'J~, .:i;l.. Q.:. :8.;1 i~1 ~
. ~.... . '~l ~" ;.y, ..~ :\;0-:' Jo'~' t......~....l~.' "rl:!' III. ~
. rf.~,~~Ul~.;~:$"4 ~:F_~(Jt~'a..\'li\S:'; ,-,,:.-',''''1. ,~;'tl~"'i.,l4~1" .~f,,'lt! ' .
... ''I' r .,~''tl., ,", ,t.. ro' II". t .", ~" b,.,. .. w .~.:; · -
.~: .. ~ ~l~ '.~L ."..~..~~~;A).~,!t 1'''''-:'' ~ .I.:. 'l MlJ.~J,J.,I' :~.. Wr- · l ~tA.'St~I'~' ~
, ." N", ',._.. ~I~ 71,,-.ir.i 10:)., '" r'''~I.:o..,1 " i~~t:::"J"....J".t.JL';';,~~!"': .,
o' . " ~f:'~;'''~''~ ....'1!JI \..ta~'f.,~:n:'., 't':'... ."!'."'c~\iJ\'7t:,l.l"~":1~~"f-;)I~~t. ,",,'.'
. . II" '~~~I{'ij.li1Ji;Ki('~I~>>;t.:/:.:~.~..~:. *',;:~.~ ;I:'li!~:': ,:,i.~w~~~~
~i/:~.tJf fl:~I!IW" fj ::l~;"'.: >.' ".. ,I'r n~t '1" . !...,~.' ..;t :,::' .: ,.. ,-: .' " . : .. ~!,,,"~:j;~f!/:
. "'". .... . ,.. .,.. .' .'~ ", -." .. .' ...... ,.:.,.'"
, 4 "."UZ, .: I .... " ~... ". ..' , . ,. ,.., : -4 \ .......
. _ f' 'h t'!l'.:,_:_...O............~~~o:. , :::<.'.1....... :..;.... i i: ot';'j,<f",.:;.:'(
. .....IIJ~..... 0' w:-." Q .;"1"- ~" ..... ."" ,'" ...' ~....~,..\~.'
~. '1J.1\..\",,,~, ..; , . .' .' "", ,'. .' . " . "," . .... .,.' " ~'').'.rr..:
1<"'1' ,: .~ ,.,. -0' ~ I .' '." ,.... " .,.' '" . , ~." ' .
~~''.f'li~t..,j".. ~'.. .!.'':.~\:'......,...(,...lo.... :'..: .' .. ~..~..'.." " ..li.:'P.~."r.'
...~fJi .........\1,-. T....."'P 29 !\<Kith,,' ...~. n E....; Pl.. 1 hi . ". ' :". ~I 'J\~*'
'lorl~';~ "'f~;' ....ra.~,. h."',~r',' ~"arr 1"0' 'aa, 10U,",_I:.. ~:\. "'.'. .... \~'~tl.,:,:~fii~~
" .'a..~~Sk..~~.iA~.~..~..:.. . ''',':''1.) .I.:":'",:~~: ,'.. ,. '..' .: ~' : ~<, ',~:.',~'.,.#~-:J:t-:
c' .C~'H':Io"1.hfta'l; co",,,r car sa'. SectS" 1'~', thence... ..toCt..~ v.: ": ;'.,t,"Xl',;'-.
~~;ll~D !!ii'; .1.....,....: Jo..'" 11.. of '..14 s...I.. '0 . po I.., .. . lie' ....: ., .<1': 1~";~;:
".....1:r1fl...-ot--111.. 01 r..U ....1...... (lCO' alu. 0... 1'66. 4.... . '''1.'~4
211;';39));:. cl'toftce alo", I'A '4 Voat orl" rS~hI"or-vaJ UnD 11. ',10SS'2D" E.. " \" .,'
, S)!3F f.it t. 11\. rOSftt nr ",.tIM In,: t1,.nt. II. "004 '0'''' ,u.. 38).00
1!..I~;.1.or".r S... ,. . ....Int on the .ean hl,h "Inr u"to or eb. eMU'
~oJ{HCltcP:..,S. poInt hCf~I~,'.~r rererr... to ft. rolnL MA- ro~ (OQ-
I"I"S""CI' "ShoM. Iro. chit tolnt or "..~I"altlr. '"'' al"n~ tl", .fort'" 1-"
r~;it.rl1 rll..-.I-~a1 II~. 01 r~l( ..ul..... .h. foll~I... ,..ra.. ....
;v~une'l II. 310$'-20" E.. ')03.;') (wot to It polllt of cuNes Ihol'e. )ton....
~ !Aj",uiet1' .10nl ~t4 C'dn' "lth a fl\4luI of le~'.16 'ect ,',roul" It cen'"
~rcr.l' tall. of oto07~~\., an art dlat~nt. of ~96.~n fc'~ (C.,.
~ . 1(.'.3102"'')0'" L. 1"".99 hrtH thenco K.' 22D~O.)9.. E.. ')oa.so fue;
.;:,,_ eh.nce hlVinl ad4 \luurJ1 rtt;ht-ot-V:l1 Un., M. 6,0"09'21.' U., )9S
,\~...' I.d. .,ore O~ 10'. to the .,.;\11 hl~h ,",ol.,r \ 1ft" or r-'lll 01 Kodco~
th."ce $oyth~..~c~11 alon~ .~S4 .c~ft blRh ua~ct 11n. and btndlna
tberevUh .to the Alor....'-n" I"...'" rltAn.. "A".
........ -
t .
I
,
)
I
I,
\
,
~
:1
i
..~- ,.1
.\ ~..
,~
s
----
Sea Towers
ConstructIon Company, Ine
VIA HAND DELIVERY
May 4, 1992
Mr. Louis R. Hilton, Planner II
Planning Service Division
City Hall Annex
10 South Missouri Avenue
Clearwater, FL 34618
RE: Ultimar Three
1560 Gulf Boulevard
Sand Key, Clearwater, Florida
SUBJ: "Assignment between Sand Key Investment Program I, Ltd. and American Design
and Development Corporation of Sand Key dated January 23, 1987
Dear Lou:
In keeping with our discussion of last week, we have been able to obtain a better
quality reproduction of the above captioned "Assignment", a copy of which is
enclosed. This "Assignment", which was the subject of my letter to the City Manager
dated April 23, 1992, was recorded in the Public Records of Pinellas County on
February 2, 1987 in Official Records Book 6418, at page 1098.
We are hopeful that the enclosed document will be adequate for your needs. Please
feel free to call me if you require further information.
Sincerely,
~/
Ted Cobb, President
TC/dk
1520 Gulf Boulevard - Clearwater, Flonda 34630 - 813-595-8915 - 595-8928 FAX
I
~f ~ ... !.
..; ~ (~~'tlj~~ I ~ 1 .. : -.. ,,'-"'" ".: f
.;.;, - :.'J!,,- "-.'l'~_L~ " ' ':~.,..
~-'.rf). ~";" .... 7"~~,"," i
81~~i~L;;'~,~,~" :-81'f),,\4bi8~:~' f
t' ,., fir ~ '" 'I'" . '" .' .;,. ^ :' r
~, ~"lt ..
~--.........-....~ ,
i
i
1
r
. ';"':iir~ 1_
~1.!4~1~~' ,.,\..
-':'1'\: ' _
J. 1".:.(' \ ".
GJOIIN'r" made this -ZJIlI day of January _ , 1987, by
. PROGRAH I, LTD. , a FLorida lhited
PI) 'C!'A"a8ignor"), and AHERICAN DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT
._. ~. O',LBAHD KEY, a Florida corporation, ("Asslgnee").
~"CI~;;~,. )"'I;~:' .!~'
.~~:?~, ' WIT N B SSE T H:
~ \, ./;.... ~;~ 'p- ~ :" '"a \ '"
...,A\!.(....,~.::~, 1.A8~ignor, in conslderation of the sum of Ten Dollars
: :I. ....".,.., ($10.00) and other valuable consideration, the receipt and
;., ~.tl"" - sUfficieney of which is hereby acknowledged, does hereby grant,
$~~ bargain, sell, convey, and assign to Assignee a total residential
J living unit count of forty (40) units, which units are allocated
'- " to the property described on Exhibit "AIt attached hereto and made
a part hereof ("Parcel A") pursuant to the City of Clearwater's
zoning and land Use ordinances.
"
..:
""
.
d
'"
~
llIl
>4
llIl
o
:.I
o ,..
lQ ....
VI
M
~ M
'"
o
'" oS
'"
. ~
>- ...
~ 0
!:! ~r;:
jM.
lQ.......
QI
.K'"
:z: 0 oS
~lQ~
150:
o ..-4
., "'U
o
E-o
~
::>
E-o
::J
TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the aforesaid units set forth above in
connection with, and only in connection with the real estate
described on Exhibit "B" attached hereto and by this reference
incorporated herein ("Parcel Bit).
The utilization of the units described above shall be
limited ,to Parcel B, and upon completion of Assignee's
development of Parcel B, all units not so utilized shall be
reconveyed to Assignor for the benefit of Parcel A within five
(5) days of request by Assignor.
This Assignment is given in accordance with paragraph 11 of
the Settlement Stipulation in United states steel Corporation vs.
City of Clearwater, Circuit civil NO. 78-4765-7, Pinellas County,
Florida.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Assignor has executed this Assignment as
of the day and year first written above.
WITNESSES:
I,
~/:',- 5~
- fl.J/LY
p~rtner
By:
STATE OF
24 2472,:,9;4 70
40
1 92r:eB7
13 99
13 90 Ofk
Florida
Pinellaa
10TIolL
COUNTY OF
The toregoing instrument was acknowledged
23rd day ot January 1987 by Roberta H. DennIs
- "
Partner ot SAND KEY INVESTMENT PROGRAM I, LTD., a
partnership, on behalf of said partnership.
before me this
, as General
FLor1da limited
~~. <5~
No ar Publ c ' ~ ~ '
RE40.2-l2036
My commission ~xpitc~:~~,\
NOIARY PUBliC SIAl( 01 f10AI~
NI COAKIS\IOI liP laY 19,Il81
80NOlD "AU ~[NlRlI us ullb:
\ '
4~1Jft!
41 OS ~
43 Int
To17~
.
.' 'l.~'8tJrn';ia:pj'~; I
, ,_ ~ '1f::.. l f,
_ ~_' .......:_ ill,: _":J ~,. \~f '{I
('tY:~1
~~:..~l. _~
,';J'!r ~
....... : ~f;1~ : ~
'\.^_~~r'\__'}. ..
~}.~ 4.... :..~ ., J/ ~' ..~
'"("\' J-_ .; ~ ;-- ,-
" t.. _ I{ ~ ,,.'" ..,
,fto.:.';; \1: 'L" .. \ I [J',
..,~J.. ", \-""l f">~' ..-
"S;:'::' -..1"I~~I" I ;~"~...J t ..
'~." .-, -, "" ,
':C~~::;'t}\of;\.\ ,to..., ~~
. )..._;~.., (, _.., ,... :...I........}Jr- ,......,
~.I Itt"~. ,..J
.......i",.., \0
..."*~ ' " -
~~~otq~f.'f ....,~'? ,. _ -- - ..
'I-:J..r:s:-....:...::;- ""':' --------t- ... -...~-..n.---_ - '
~msCRtmCN p1JC:[. IV ~ -~ ~~~. i~1i~~~~ ,.' ;;,~~~:1\~
..~ _J ~_ -- ':2i." - ;j:'.~ .'.4" .~ "oM ....\?-~
...."':~~\i . r- \"~~>C:';~~-'::~'" "~'?'J~. ~,_,=.L~:O-I.~,";{o.I_:
A~.urv.y of PARCEL. a150 known"'u'Si~..V.Sand lCey,..'': ~r '.;:,;;.':.l"_~...:..~.:~.
beln; a portion of Sec~ion. 17 and 20.. Townahip 29 ~ '.: _.~ ...--:'" r~ 31"': .
~ou~h_' Ran;e 15 Eut. PineUu CouMY." .'lorida.-::-~n~~:~r,,~:.~:~~ '~.:p---:.,
.particularly d..cr1b~ a. fOUOW.~~~~ ~(,;;"';''''''''' '~#t!::Ii-';~ J-.'l._....:fC:;-:-~'. , f'o.
___" .. " :t 0 ,,~..;.. ",'~._' l;.~'''::;i --::~ -;1-. ----.' '."..'
C;'""'l .' , .~' .' . -).~ ",",..,..,", ......,...;r :1,-:..- .,- . f- -<. ~T,'"' -r "~'- .
ror. ., poln~ of reference c~_enc. r atl the Section corncr,....- . _7~~!-."'-r4."
co.-on to 5ec~lon. 17. 18; 19.and.20:ofs.a1d Town.hip .,.i'{:.~':i~kP"I.:-,~~~ '
and.Ran;e.- a. now e.tabU.hed. .S: havinQ'. ~he coordin.te.......::.; ~~l.--'-',..;;;'
(ba.ed on the PineUU County G~id 5ys' cad of Jtor~h-i r*J:.~.~t. " ~:;..~.V;..'::~:.
16500.12.. E..~ Jl~S2. 98: thence rurf II 89-10. J1~, E.' a1on;-~- ':,- -.J'.- 'o4''t;:.~''
.~he Section line d1vidinQ...~id. Sections 17 anO 20. · _:._.~ ~, "',. ..::'
diatance of 8"3.~7 feet to an:1nter.ect.ion- with- the "-..;;:! '" ..-. ~-~;~..:'
centerline of Gulf Boulevard (State Road No.- 208) a..' -;--- ~':..- r-
now established a. a lOO-foot ri9ht-of-way: ~hence run. ~:,. -, ':c_
-~:r=S 42-11'31- W .10n9 said cent:lrline. distance of 263.93', .~~;,~'::':::.3'
.r:-!;"Z"'{ feet t.o . oolnt: thence' run N 47-46' 29. W,' . distanCe of . ". i"
;f~,~' 50.00 feet to the point of Be9l1'ininljl: t~ence run . - .: :-.- ... ..;
,~, II 42-13'31- E. alonljl the Northwesterly I'lqht-of-way line
_; of aforesaid Gulf Boulevard, a dlstanCe of 650.00 feet:
thence run ~ 47-46.29- W, a diatanCe of (776.5 feet ~re
or lea. deed) (1169.69' DOre or lesS field) to the .ean
h19h water line (elevatlon 1.29 feet II.G.V.D. of the
Gulf of MexiCO: thence run aoutherly al~n9 aaid aean
hi9h water line, a d1atance of (690 f.e~ .ore or lea.
decd) (724.7" more or le.s field) to a point that lie.
N 47-46'2'. W. and (540 teet .ore or lesa deed) (849.21'
~ore or le.. fieldl diatant tro~ the pOlnt of 8e9innino
thence run S 47-46'29. E. a dlatance of 1540 feet aore
~~ . or le.. deed) (849.21' ~r. or lea. fieldl to the Point
~,'~ ...,.., '.If 8eljlinninljl-
"
EXHIBIT A
..n
[
!). ~ ')~ \~~~l,{ _,. '.:: 1.t'1 L -' 7"
.t" \ ~~\/!,} ':-?";}:iJ"1,1 ',....-;
or. . ""~p.1 ~'lJl"'I-\1:' ~ ~\ \:
,'" ;;~~1f,-i.:Jt.~W'_l ~~;1
rri "'';' ~p\' ,.>.. ~
,J... ~ ~' ~I'/"
t I_~t;:, ~ .""
';. : ~ ' ,~
ttk-W~\ .....' -,' , >f ' I I
~"''''1r ~ .', '
- .:.^,,:"., , \ EXHIBIT B
,#" \'Sj ~ (or I I 1
"'.olJ\}'y.,'Jo~'t;"'~ /,
~ r\~ 1t.,. ~..::
:tt~jl ~j.,,": ........V ,..,.:,"' r~ .l \ I
;~l (~} .;;.- t I'l ' A/.~ ~i'_ ..
~~'1t",~....., ~, .,
>;. .. A1C'f;!:..11:
..UIi$.:t~r~r~....1 .
.. ~1If",~"",i!::.,,.lt'\.;
~~,.(;"'t,.~~~" j. :1',-"
t o"Fo/'Sectlon '\9. Townllhll' :!'1 ~..rh. bnl;e n E:ast. rlnellu
C:O\l~C,,~"FI~rfCs:a'. be'ln!:..,,,, I':.r' 1&...I:\rly ~~arrlhed :u lollov.:
;f ';1:!'f,,:r," . - . -
=:~.,..~"t~J*,,:,'1; "
\ ~r..:'i~~eftC. at the Southnut corn,'r br uld Section 19. thence M. 890010.0'" v..
~~r' 'i ~3~~~aO '!et Alonl the ~OlJt h llno or u 14 Sect Son to a rolnt on the
\;!}~~."" vuterl, rl&ht-of-vay line of r.1I1 r "ouley.rel ClOO. 'R/v. O.R. 1766. ,~. .
~? .'-2'3-29~); thence alonl; ,,~leI U('''lerly rlhht-or-\I:\y Une N. 31058.20" E..
....0' ~~ ,~S3.31 hll to tho rolnt nf RI-tinnln,; ch.nre N. 119004'0'" -'l.. 383.00
'" ",' f.et. .ore or le.. to a ""inc on chc mc:\n hli:h uacer l1n" oT the Culf
" : of Hexlco; uld point h('rL'in:\h,.r rderrrd co :\It rolnl ",," ror con-
_ "_ 'v.nhnce; thoncl" frolll thM rninc or Rr&inninr. TlIn alnns; till: aforclllcntloa"d
Vesterly rl&hc-o(-vay llnr or r.utr B~ulev:\rd thc rolloutn& tour.e. and
curves; N. :n058.20" E.. ')1)).;) het co :a poll'lC or curvc; thence ~nb-
vuurl)' alon~ ul4 cllrve uith a udiul or 18~9.86 het through :a cen-
tral anile of 0900'~41". an arc dlAc:\nce of 296.30 feet CC.9.
M. 27024.30.. E.. 295".99 Cert); chencc ~. 2:!0~O''39'' E.. '308.S0 rut;
_ thence luvln& u14 UUlerly rls;hc-of-u:lY line, N. 67009'21" v.. '39S
feet. IIIOre or lesl co chCl "I":\n hll;" u:ller line: "f C:ull DC Mcxico.
thence SouthuesccTly alons; I~ld IDC:ln hiS;h vatcr line and binding
thercvith co chc :afofl"DI'l\tll'lIl,.,1 r..lllt '.^'..
. '.
"
'. ",. """
.. I \ ,. .....~ --
... ." ," _'" \ ~ "~'..l'
" ., '"" ., ti^' /.' :-:,1:.",,":-
....~ r." ,..t" ..~c;,-;t"If'
, a~la~i;f8fta tt~
] ~.3 .. ..~... 'h';l.. _ y.Jf...)1.~ 1.)"tC"'~~
- ...\,,-,tnf'''~~,(
l\t..,.\tt"-.''-.;l.t~ _....
"'..' ~ I ~ 1-01 _" : ./~
, . 1: - ~/,,-. 1/1 ~
- "k-'" ~"'~ ~h~:..~i;";N!r <
':.-1 "'~~","'l.r.:'''l
_-.. ~<;f~:i'jJ~V /...1
~ ""~~_,:'ii~
..., l"....~...""'f....~
l '..'
.. ~ I..
, ~,
""': 14,<: ..~ :~
fo'\ t, ~
\t~. 0'1
J . (-",\"
::~ -, :..
;
"
"
A.
(C(O)[P)y
11,'rl"L~''''''''''''~
/ff~\~ ',r"rff--:..
~\~ 0-"\ C I T Y
l(j~,*, "l g\
~r-, _J-:c'_ ~~
~c:. -_ _ f:::j~
,.. . . - - :--..; ~
,~::-- ~t
't1 j Et\.I~;,l
'#',r"I'
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT
(813) 462-6880
OJ4-" CLEARWATER
POST OFFICE BOX 4748
C LEA R W ATE R, F LOR I D A 3 4 6 1 8 - 4 7 4 8
May 5, 1992
Mr. Ted Cobb, President
Sea Towers Construction Company
1520 Gulf Boulevard
Clearwater, Florida 34630
RE: "Assignment" Between Sand Key Investment Program I, Ltd. and
American Design and Development corporation of Sand Key dated
January 23, 1987
Dear Mr. Cobb:
The city of Clearwater is in receipt of your letter dated April 23,
1992 to Michael Wright, City Manager, with regard to the Ultimar
Three transfer of forty (40) residential dwelling units pursuant to
the Settlement stipulation dated October 17, 1986.
The City is also in receipt of your most recent letter dated May 4,
1992 with the clear copy of the "Assignment" which has been filed
with the Office of the Clearwater city Clerk and with the Public
Records of Pinellas County on February 2, 1987 in Official Records
Book 6418, page 1098.
In reference to your original request regarding the request of an
alternative site plan modification to the proposed Tower Building
footprint, the City is not opposed to the proposed alternative
building footprint as submitted on March 19, 1992 with the
understanding that the proposed site plan meet all applicable site
plan review and Development Review Committee criteria.
If I can be of further assistance to you, please contact me at 462-
6880J and thank you for your interest in the city of Clearwater.
Sin erely,
-~- .,
R. Hilton
er II
LRH/lrh
cc: Michael Wright, city Manager
o
"E'lual Employment <'lnd Affirmative Acflnn Employer
iI:til<"-"",""~~~~'"l:l6~'~1~6~~'<>l~k&Ii'~<."":'&\~/i;,"'~[ij\j'~~.oi"'"~~h..".-.l\'~~..lOlI'"",,,",
ONE BARNEIT PLAZA. 101 E KEN~,,;fBOULEVARD. SUITE 3200 · PO BOX 3399. TAMP/ )RIDA 33601 . (813) 224-9000. FAX (813) 221-8811 I
SALEM, SAXON & NIELSEN
A TIURNEYS AT LAW ProfessIOnal AssocIatIon
STEVEN M BERMAN
GERALD R BOYD, JR
BETH M COLEMAN
LYNDI GORDON
SHARI L LEFTON
CONSTANCE J McCAUGHEY
RICHARD A NIELSEN
CATHERINE M NORTON
JUANA M ROJAS
RICHARD J SALEM
BERNICE S SAXON
JACQUELINE M SPOrO
DAVID J TONG
MARK HUNTER
Of COUNSEL
June 25, 1992
Mr. Louis R. Hilton
Planner II
City of Clearwater
Post Office Box 4748
Clearwater, FL 34618-4748
RE: Consolidated Bank, Sand Key Property Matters
Our File Number 012638.01
Dear Lou:
This is just a brief note to thank you for your time, consideration
and assistance during the course of our meetings in connection with
the above-referenced property. We will be in touch with you soon
in order to schedule a time to outline the terms of a "development
agreement" that can be acted upon by the City Commission.
If you have obtained any additional information, or if you should
have any suggestions concerning this project, please feel free to
call. We look forward to talking with you soon and working with
you in the future. With kindest personal regards, I am
Very truly yours,
s~'
Richard J. Salem
P.A.
RJS/tj
cl\misc_a-m\letr\hilt2638.81a
RECEIVED
JUN 2 6 19!U
PLANNING &
DEVELOPMENT DEPT.
-1-,-1
s
/ J / 7---::<0-92-
WC:LLI:
cjk/U- ~ ~/
p;!ii-i. ~J-( /}tL~
~ V; N-DfCM-d Iv .
~~~ ~ ;:;-1r
Sea Towers
ConstructlOn Company, Ine
VIA HAND DELIVERY
July 14, 1992
Mr. Michael Wright, City Manager
City of Clearwater
112 Osceola Avenue S.
Clearwater, FL 34615
RE:
Ultimar Three: The Third Phase of a Residential Condominium Project
To be located on property previously known "South Beach"
1560 Gulf Boulevard
Sand Key, Clearwater, Florida
SUBJECT:
Application for Site Plan pursuant to Settlement Stipulation dated
October 17, 1986
Dear Mr. Wright:
Sea Towers Construction Company, Inc., general contractor for USX Corporation,
hereby makes formal application to the City of Clearwater for site plan approval for
the third phase of a residential condominium project planned for the property
referenced above. You will recall that we had previously requested and received
approval from the City of an "alternative site plan for the tower building only" of
Ultimar Three.
This application for site plan approval is being submitted pursuant to the
requirements of Paragraph 17 of the Settlement Stl.pulatl.on dated October 17, 1986,
and more specifically, in accordance with the portion of Exhibit "B" to the
Settlement Stipulation entitled "Parcel II Schematic Site Plan 2". It is our
, intention, and we are hopeful that you will determine this to be the case, that the
design of Ultimar Three complies fully with the requirements of the Settlement
Stipulation and the previously referenced schematic site plan.
For your review and consideration, we are enclosing two copies of each of the
following; (i) a signed and sealed site plan prepared by Y. H. Lee Associates,
Architects dated July 8, 1992 and (ii) a signed and sealed civil drawing prepared
by Kl.ng Engineering Associates, Inc. dated July 14, 1992.
1560 Gulf Boulevard - Clearwater, Flonda 34630 - 813-595-8915 - 595-8928 FAX
,.,
~,
,
J /
//
/
/
/
Mr. Michael Wright, City Manager
Page 2
July 14, 1992
We trust that with submission of the drawings as described above, we have provided
the City of Clearwater w~th the necessary drawings as descr~bed in Paragraph 17 of
the Settlement Stipulation so as to allow for the approval of the site plan for
Ultimar Three. We would be pleased to answer any questions you may have regarding
the drawings. Please feel free to contact me in this regard.
Sincerely,
~/
Ted Cobb, President
Tc/dk
cc:
City of Clearwater
Attn: Mr. James M. Polatty, Jr., Plann~ng and Development Director
(with enclosures: seventeen (17) sets of plans)
'"
~
'"
, "
..
,
"
" <:
<I"
, ,~
'~,P
;~
~t~'
',~
..~..>1
,\/i~~
."
, .
1 '
l~ ...
"
, ,
I ,
.r
)""
f,;' ,
;~~
}...~~
<;~
.,;r .,
H}i~
1 ~ I i~
........ ).1
..::~
"':~1
, i;x
II-~~
-', ~ '",;
, ~ r..t 't
t i "~~f~
'-",-
... '
.... .,,~..,.
.:~~~
r ~~.
~ ..
;" -,
I
~ It,
'I.
"I.
I >
lr J !
_ v. 1
J -
<
~:t' ",
- ;:1
,
,
~, I j
, .'
.. ",; 1
~I .,. .. '
...; .t,
~ I',
, ,
,./
--'
LAW OFFICES
M~MULLEN, EVERETT, LOGAN, MARQUARDT & CLINE, P A
FIRST NATIONAL BANK BUILDING
400 CLEVELAND STREET CLEARWATER FLORIDA 34615
POBOX 1669
JOHN TWEED MCMULLEN
FRANK C LOGAN
EMIL C MAROUARDT .JR
HARRY 5 CLINE
..J PAUL RAYMOND
.JAMES A MARTIN .JR
STEPHEN 0 COLE
MARGOT PEOUIGNOT
R NATHAN HIGHTOWER
ROBERT C DICKINSON III
THOMAS C NASH II
NANCY 5 PAIKOFF
MARIE L DtMARCO
T SHEA GILLS
CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 34617
(813) 441-8966
FAX (813) 442-8470
OF" COUNSEL
.JOE S EVERETT
WILLIAM E NODINE
PALM HARBOR OFFICE
IBI31 7854402
33920 HWY 19 NORTH
SUITE 150
PALM HARBOR FL 34684
August 7, 1992
Mr. Louis R. Hilton
Planner II
City of Clearwater
Post Office Box 4748
Clearwater, FL 34618-4748
Re: Proposed Ultimar Phase III
Dear Lou:
Following up on our meeting a few days ago, and consistent
wi~h our correspondence to the City of Clearwater dated October
22, 1991, and February 12, 1992, we represent members of the con-
dominium association across the street from the proposed project.
We have requested that the City insure that the plans for this
final Ultimar project comply with the Settlement Agreement
pertaining to this property.
We do not feel that the initial plans submitted to the DRC on
July 23, 1992 comply with the requirements and limitations of the
referenced Settlement Agreement and Court proceedings. As Mr.
Polatty noted in his letter of July 31, 1992 to Tim Johnson, the
swimming pool/deck, and driveway, are structures within the view
corridor which are not permitted. Mr. Polatty raises the limita-
tion as Note #4, which is correct; Note #3 also confirms where
amenities, driveways and the like should be, which is in the open
area as shown on the schematic. This is further confirmation
that these matters should not be authorized at all, in any man-
ner, within the view corridor.
Our clients also object to the height, and believe Mr.
Polatty's objections should be maintained. Note #1 on the refer-
enced exhibit specifically limits height to 210', subject to the
adjustments authorized in Note #8; under no circumstances would a
72-foot increase be envisioned within these contractual provi-
"./ ~
August 7, 1992
Page Two
visions. In addition to this proposed height being violative of
the agreement, which is a sufficient basis to deny this expanded
request, our clients also object on the grounds that it is
anticipated that the developer will seek to illuminate these
towers at night. They have done this on the two (2) prior
developments, and it represents a nuisance and invasion of the
privacy and sanctity of their homes to have this intense light,
at extreme heights, all through the night.
In summary, our clients, as residents, property owners in the
Ci ty of Clearwater, and immediate neighbors to this project,
insist upon strict compliance with the agreements on this site. I
would like to ask you to advise us when amended site plans are
filed, which I understand are being prepared, so we can come and
review them further before final Ci ty approval is granted. If
further City boards are meeting to review these plans, or new
plans, we would request notice and an opportunity to attend on
behalf of our clients.
As we discussed, I am sending a copy of this letter to Tim
Johnson, attorney for the developer so he knows of our concerns
and our clients' position that the agreements should be complied
wi th according to their terms. I will be happy to meet with
representatives from the City and Mr. Johnson, should you or Mr.
Johnson deem it beneficial.
Please have your files noted as to our involvement and
concerns and please keep us advised of subsequent plans and plan
review and approvals.
With best regards, I am
S.i:cer~ yours.
~S_ Cline
HSC:koh
cc: Mr. Norman Olson, Harbor Condo
Timothy A. Johnson, Esq.
RECEIVED
AUG 1 1 1992
PlJ.NNING &
DEVELOPMENT DEPT.
\
, ~
-" L_
..:---
.
Y. H. LEE ASSOCIATES, Architects
330 Flll~en[h SlrcLt, Oakland, CA 9-1612 (510) 836-0688 r LX ISICJ) ~36 nod9
August 12, 1992
Mr. Ted Clarke
Planner II
City of Clearwater Planmng & Development Dept
10 South Missoun Ave.
Clearwater, Flonda 34616-4748
Re: VIdmar Three
Condmon Of Approval No.4,
Site Plan CertIt1cation
Dear Mr Clarke:
ThIS letter and the enclosed matenals are mtended to provIde addmonal mformation and
response to the quesuon rUlsed regardmg roof top elements of UltImar Three during the
Development ReVIew CommIttee meetmg of July 23, 1992
The exact language of the Settlement StipulatiOn states that "Elevator machme rooms,
mechanIcal rooms, stUlrs, parapet walls and other necessary deSIgn elements WIll be permitted
above the maxImum heIghts established herem" The proposed deSIgn has a tlat roof deck at
210 feet above tlood plam. The only proposed bUIldmg components exceedmg thIS heIght are
the elevator penthouses, mechamcal eqUipment and shelters, stairways, parapet walls and
necessary archItectural deSIgn elements (unoccupIed space) that are reqUired to mamtain the
mtegnty of the buildmg design. To elaborate on thIS concept. we have prepared a deSIgn
statement regardmg the....e roof top elements, as well as some prehmmary deSIgn sketches for
your reference. The statement and sketches WIll demonstrate the deSIgn neceSSity of the roof top
elements of Ulumar Three
The roof top deSIgn cOmpOSitiOn m conjUnctiOn with other components of the bUIldmg establish
a posmve aesthetIc statement. In thIS respect these elements enhance thIS project m partIcular as
well as the vIsual deSIgn enVIronment of the commumty as a whole. ThIS IS achIeved at
addItwnal expense to the project sponsor WIth no dIrect economIC return.
Statement of Necessity for Design Elements Above 210 Feet
When deterrmnmg the "necessity" of any feature of a gIVen deSIgn. the architect IS usually trymg
to achIeve a balance between the speCIal reqUIrements of a WIde fi;mge of objectIves. These
;,/
..
"
Mr. Ted Clarke
VIDmar Three, CleaIwater, FL
August 12, 1992
Page 2 of 3
objecDves WIll vary from the concrete (code comphance, structural support, Incorporation of
mechanical systems, etc) to the abstract (pleasIng aesthetIcs, perceIved quality of constructIon,
"fitting in" to the communIty, etc). Our desIgn successfully syntheSIzes the following outlmed
objectives which demonstrate the necessity for the roof top elements of the VIDmar Three
building.
1. Functional Requirements:
Items such as elevator penthouses, exit statr termInatIOns and mechanIcal eqUIpment
must, of necessIty project above the roof of the last habItable floor. In "flat" roofed
bUIldIngs these objects can appear Jamng and unSIghtly. To mmgate theIr presence, we
have composed theIr mass Into the overall desIgn cOmpOSItIOn
2. Orientation of the User:
Part of an archItect's task IS to proVIde VIsual atds to help users understand how a
bUIldIng IS organIzed. One tIme-honored devIce IS to gIve speCIal promInence to
entrances and pnmary CIrculatIOn spaces. In our buIlding thIS translates to emphasIZIng
the elevator lobbIes and vertIcal CIrculatIon The roof top projectIOns of these vertIcal
shafts accentuate their Importance and onents the user on the SIte.
3. . Imparting a Sense of Quality:
In order for a bUIldIng to be well accepted and maintaIned by Its users and to be
welcomed by the communIty at large, it must Impart a sense of quality. To achIeve thIS,
it IS necessary to go well beyond satIsfymg the functIonal reqUIrements of the deSIgn
program. A well deSIgned and promInent top to the bUildIng allows us to "go beyond"
the functional mInImUm, to Impart a sense of qualIty and to contnbute something speCIal
to the commumty
4. Aesthetic Composition:
AesthetIc judgement IS always somewhat subJective, but certaIn pnnclples concernIng
buIldIng massIng are faIrly unIversal. In a bUildIng such as ours (where the overall
heIght IS nearly that of the overall WIdth) It IS necessary to VIsually "dIVIde" the buIlding
Into smaller pans In order to aVOId a "boxy" appearance Two deVIces were reqUIred to
accomplIsh thIS
A The first IS to break the bUildIng Into dIstInct vertIcal elements (so as to make the
composltlon look lIke an assemblage ot well-proportIOned smaller structures) In order
for the vertIcal elements to be dIstIngUished from one another, It IS necessary that one (In
~,
.
//
(
Mr. Ted Clarke
UltImar Three, CleaIwater, FL
August 12, 1992
Page 3 of 3
our case the central element) be taller than the adjacent o,nes. ThIS also works well WIth
our desIre to hIde roof top eqUIpment and accentuate "entrance" and CIrculatIon.
B. The second device is to dIvIde the bUIlding loto a base, a mid-sectIon and a top. This
is a classical approach to bUlldlOg cOmpOSitIOn and one whIch IS hIghly successful in
reduclOg the scale of tall bUIldings and maklOg them appear "approachable" at the human
level. In order to achieve this diVISIOn, the top of the buIlding must have a umque
character to dlstlOgUlsh it from the mId-sectIOn. Also, the bUlldlOg top must be
proportioned SUitably WIth respect to the overall buIlding heIght and bulle Clearly, if the
top IS too short, It WIll present a vI~ually weak appearance WIth respect to the rest of the
bUlldlOg.
To sum up, we are mItIgatlOg the potentIal "bulkiness"and "boxlOess" that a more
simphstIc deSIgn would Impose by provldlOg numerous recesses and projectIOns, and DY
provIdlOg a vanety of roof heIghts. When VIewed overall, the aesthetIc compOSItIOn of
the bUIlding is greatly enhanced by the lOclusIOn of the roof top deSIgn elements and
would lOdeed suffer without them
5. Historical Precedent:
ArchItects nowadays often look to hlstoncal precedent not only for lOspiratIOn, but to
find ways to achIeve contlOUlty with theIr present work. The truly delIghtful hIgh nse
bUlldlOgs of the past are those that celebrate theIr heIght WIth a creatIve and memorable
top; bUIldings WhICh go beyond mere functIon to 10 whIch they were created. A
prominent and well-deSIgned top WIll help connect our bUlldmg to a nch archItectural
tradItIOn and secure Its speCIal place 10 the commumty.
It is for all these reasons the roof top deSIgn for UltImar Three IS a "necessary deSIgn element"
We would be pledsed to address any further quesuons you may have regardmg the deSIgn of
- UltImar Three.
cc: Ted Cobb
JOHNSON, BLAKELY, POPE, BOKOR, RUPPEL & BURNS, R A
ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELLORS AT LAW
E D ARMSTRONG 111
BARBARA A BACCARI
BRUCE W BARNES
JOHN T BLAKELY
BRUCE H BOKOR
GUY M BURNS
MICHAEL T CRONIN
ELIZABETH J DANIELS
LISA B DODGE
BRIAN BEVANS
MARION HALE
REBECCA HENSON HUDOBA
SCOTT C ILGENFRITZ
FRANK R JAKES
TIMOTHY A JOHNSON JR
SHARON E KRICK
JOHN R LAWSON
JAMES G LEWIS
MICHAEL G LITTLE
MARIA MAISTRELLlS
MICHAEL C MARKHAM
DANIEL L MOODY
DAVID J OTTINGER
F WALLACE POPE JR
DARRYL R RICHARDS
DENNIS G RUPPEL'
CHARLES A SAMARKOS
JOHN A SCHAEFER
CHARLES M T A TELBAUM
GLEE A TRIPLETT
JOAN M VECCHIOLl
MICHAEL T WILLIAMS
ANTHONY P ZINGE
. OF COUNSEL
PLEASE REPLY TO CLEARWATER
FILE NO
August
13,
1992
r" "t":-. ~"" 3 0 8 7 4 . 8 3 4 7 4
,J, /' , , r~
, ' 1 I ( ,~
. .) I 1 -; ':7)
'. ,: r I
{I tl
,,'~h I .
"'-1 ,1.' : .~
A(Jr; 1 (. ,':1/( I,,,,.:)
Mr. James Polatty
Planning Director
City of Clearwater
121 S. Osceola Avenue
Clearwater, Florida 34616
Re: Ultimar III
PI ,"':f/ '1".~1
t I ~ \..7
DEP~mMENl;
..
Dear Jim:
As promised, enclosed
architect explaining the
elements of Ultimar Three.
please
design
find the
necessity
letter
of the
from
roof
the
top
Very truly yours,
o ::--~--
TAJ/lm
Enclosure
cc: Mr. Ted Cobb
Timothy A. Johnson, Jr.
911/TAJ/30874LELl
83474
CLEARWATER OFFICE
911 CHESTNUT STREET
POST OFFICE BOX 1366
CLEARW A TER FLORIDA 3461 7-1368
TELEPHONE (613) 461 1618
TELECOPIER (613) 441 6617
TAMPA OFFICE
201 E KENNEDY BOULEVARD
POST OFFICE BOX 1100
TAMPA FLORIDA 33601 -1 100
TELEPHONE (613) 22S 2500
TELECOPIER (613) 223 7118
JOHNSON. BLAKELY, POPE. BOKOR. RUPPEL & BURNS. F! A.
ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELLORS AT LAW
E D ARMSTRONG III
BARBARA A BACCARI
BRUCE W BARNES
JOHN T BLAKELY
BRUCE H BOKOR
GUY M BURNS
MIOiAEL. T CROMN
EUZABETH J DANIELS
USA B OODGE:
BRIAN BEVANS
MARION HALE:
REBECCA HENSON HUOOBA
SCOTT C ILGENFRITZ
FRAN!< R JAKES
TIMOTHY A JOHNSON, JR
SHARON E. KRIa<
JOHN R LAWSON
JAMES G L.E:WIS
MIOiAEL. G UTTLE
MARIA MAISTRELUS
MIOiAEL. C MARKHAM
DANIEL L. MOODY
DAVID J OTTINGER
F WALl..AC2 POP!!:, JR
DARRYL R RICHARDS
DENNIS G RUPPEL'
OiARL.E:S A SAMARKOS
JOHN A SOiAEFER
BETHANN SCHARRER
PHIUP M SHASTEEN
OiARL.E:S M T A TEL.BAUM
GLEE A TRIPLETT
JOAN M VECOiIOU
MJCHAEL. T WlU.JAMS
ANTHONY P ZINGE
. OF COI.H.;E1.
P~SER~YTO~RWATIR
FILE NO
October 1,
--3,0 8 7 4 . 83 474
J.9L:2~(I'-4~~ -~ ~F.~\\ 'f
It' ' \ ~ "i ..t"\ I,'
,\ '
~~
~, \ ') ~~\\\7
" ' \ 1\ ,\ ',\ \ \,
In''\'\\\\'~
\ t- I'
OH) ~~~U\lt1 t_
Mr. Michael Wright
City Manager
City of Clearwater
P.o. Box 4748
Clearwater, Florida
34618-4748
Re: Ultimar III
Dear Mike:
Please
meeting is
caused any
note that the
October 15 and
inconvenience.
correct date for the City Commission
not October 16. Our apologies if this
Very truly yours,
~~e~
Secretary to
Timothy A. Johnson, Jr.
TAJ / 1m
911/TAJ/30874LELl
83474
, cc: Mr. Ted Cobb
Mr. James Polatty
/'
CLEARWATER OFFICE
911 CHESTNUT STREET
POST OFFICE BOX 1368
CLEARWATER FLORIDA 3461 7-1368
TELEPHONE (813) 461 1818
TELECOPIER (813) 441-861 7
TAMPA OFFICE
100 NORTH TAMPA STREET
SUITE 1 eoo
POST OFFICE BOX 1100
TAMPA, FLORIDA 33601-1 100
TELEPHONE (813) 225-2500
TELE:COPIER (813) 223 7118
~ ~
~-,-.
."",<r
;/
:;
Sea Towers
ConstructIon Company, Ine
VIA HAND DELIVERY
. \
October 7, 1992
, LONlt!S SECTION REViEl-J f
CITY OF ClEARWATER ·
oct OS".!,
RevieWed ~
,
.
Mr. Louis R. Hilton
Planner II
City of Clearwater
P. O. Box 4748
Clearwater, Florida
wjt;~~'!,-~~,"",""",il,,1' ., 1 . ...
34618-4748
Re: Ultimar Three
certification of site Plan
Dear Lou:
In accordance with the requirements set forth in the city's letter
to King Engineering Associates, Inc. dated July 23, 1992, we are
submitting for final certification twelve (12) signed and sealed
copies of the site plan for ultimar Three. Please note that the
site plan for Ultimar Three has been revised to satisfy the
conditions set forth by the Design Review Committee ("DRC") at its
meeting on June 25, 1992.
In addition to satisfying the conditions of approval set forth by
the DRC, the site plan also has been modified by: (i) deleting the
swimming pool, and (ii) deleting the portion of the roof top
elements that extended above the 248 foot height. These
modifications were made to satisfy the requirements set forth in
the City's letter dated September 23, 1992, a copy of which is
attached. Please be advised that we disagree with the city's
decisions regarding the appropriateness of the location of the
swimming pool in the view corridor and the height of the "necessary
design elements" of the building. We have deleted the swimming
pool and that portion of the building above the 248 foot height in
order to allow the site plan to be certified at this time and we
do not waive any of the rights we may have to appeal, or have
'reviewed, the City's decisions with respect to the swimming pool
and height that exists under the Settlement Stipulation dated
October 17, 1986.
'1560 Gulf Boulevard - Clearwater, Flonda 34630 - 813-595-8915 - 595-8928 FAX
r"
~
)~
~../'
Mr. Louis R. Hilton
city of Clearwater
October 7, 1992
Page 2
\ LONlt!G SECTION REViEr)
CITY OF CLEARWATER
) OCT 08_
, nevieWed ~
t -""~----
",- -- - -
, , '
........
_.~
Should you have any questions regarding the enclosed site plans,
please advise.
sincerely,
~~
Ted Cobb
President
cc: Mr. Timothy A. Johnson, Esquire
,
"
~ _'""I"
r '-~-
'~~4f I
~t -\~ ~ ..,~~
JOHNSON. BLAKELY. POPE. BOKOR. RUPPEL & BURNS. R A.
ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELLORS AT LAW
E D ARMSTRONG III
BARBARA A BACCARI
BRUCE W BARNES
JOHN T BLAKELY
BRUCE H BOKOR
GUY M BURNS
MIO-IAEL T CRONIN
EUZASETH J DANIElS
USA B DODGE
BRIAN BEVANS
MARION HALE
REBECCA HENSON HUDOBA
SCOTT Co ILGENFRrrZ
FRANK R JAKES
TlMOTliY A JOHNSON, JR
SHARON E. KRICK
JOHN R LAWSON
JAMES G LEWIS
MICHAEL G UTTLE
MARIA MAISTRELUS
MICHAEL C MARKHAM
DANIEL L MOODY
DAVID J OT"TlNGER
F W AL1.ACE POPE. JR
DARRYL R. RICHARDS
DENNIS G. RUPPEL'
CHARlES A SAMARKOS
JOHN A SCHAEFER
BETHANN SCHARRER
PHIUP M SHASTEEN
CHARlES M TATELBAUM
GLEE A TRIPLETT
JOAN M VECCHIOU
MICHAEL T WIWAMS
ANTHONY P ZINGE
. Of' COUN5I!L
PLEASE REPLY TO Q.EARWATER
FILE NO
october 14,
30874.83474
1992~~' rz -I-.).........'f-~~-:;...R..
1, !" ~'\,: t' \ .1
J .7 (. ' , . f\
r It t ~ ',i L. ',' " \; j I
'\~I/.' 'I'
~ u.' -
or.-r '1 ~ 1qtY) \.-...
, ,), .J .
Mr. Michael Wright
City Manager
ity of Clearwater
P. O. Box 4748
Clearwater, Florida
34618-4748
Pi MlN1NO
OEPAnn.iENT
"lJ
Dear Mike:
I learned today that the Ultimar swimming pool and height
issues were not scheduled for hearing by the City Commission at
its meeting on October 15. I have spoken with Jim Polatty and he
understands that we do continue to request that this issue be
reviewed by the Commission. Accordingly, please schedule this
matter for review by the Commission at its meeting on November
19, 1992. I would appreciate confirmation that the matter will
be on the Commission's agenda.
Very truly yours,
o~
Timothy A. Johnson, Jr.
TAJ/lm
911/TAJ/30874LELl
83474
cc: Mr. Ted Cobb /
Mr. James Polatty
CLEARWATER OFFICE
911 CHESTNUT STREET
POST OFFICE BOX 1368
CLEARW A TER, FLORIDA 3461 7.1368
TELEPHONE (8131461 1818
TELECOPIER (8131 441-8617
TAMPA OFFlCE
100 NORTH TAMPA STREET
SUITE 1800
POST OFFICE BOX 1100
TAMPA FLORIDA 33601-1100
TELEPHONE (8131 225-2500
TELECOPIER (8131 223 7118
,J j' "r ~ M
.,~\ ~ I "Ii, ,i
I \ tJ '" \ - "t. /~...
,/ " (-::
,(I \1 "t:J'r;' <: \
- - '4 ~
IIi V ~~~
i' ,\... '\~'-/
I :!;~ ,_( \\ ~)?
..., ~ J ,JI"'"
CI'I'Y
OF CLEARWATEH
POST OFFICE BOX 4748
C LEA R W ATE R, F LOR IDA 3 4 6 1 8 - 4 7 4 8
(
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT
Telephone (813) 462-6880
October 26, 1992
Mr Ted Cobb, President
Sea Tower Construction Company, Inc
1560 Gulf Boulevard
Clearwater, Flonda 34630
Dear Mr Cobb:
Re: Ultimar Three Appeal
The issue of the proposed swimming pool within the view corridor and the proposed
height of the Ultimar Three Condominium development will be submitted to the City
Commission November 5, 1992, as an appeal of the City Manager's decision to remove
the swimming pool from the view corridor and to reduce the height of the building to 210
feet in height in accordance with the Final Judgement of the Circuit Court, October 17,
1986.
If you should have any questions concerning this matter, please contact Louis Hilton at
462-6880.
Sincerely, 'a
~allY' Jr. Ale
Director of Planning and Development
cc:
Mr. Timothy A. Johnson, Esq.
"
,1
o
\,;",
) ~, ..l~4( I
. '
. ,
c~~~
JOHNSON. BLAKELY. POPE. BOKOR. RUPPEL & BURNS. R A. ~
ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELLORS AT LAW
E D ARMSTRONG III
BARBARA A BACCARI
BRUCE W BARNES
JOHN T BLAKELY
BRUCE H BOKOR
GUY M BURNS
MICHAEL T CRONIN
ELIZABETH J DANIELS
LISA B DODGE
BRIAN BEVANS
MARION HALE
REBECCA HENSON HUOOBA
SCOTT C ILGENFRITZ
FRANK R JAKES
TIMOTHY A JOHNSON JR
SHARON E KRICK
JOHN R LAWSON
JAMES G LEWIS
MICHAEL G LITTLE
MARIA MAISTRELLlS
MICHAEL C MARKHAM
DANIEL L MOODY
DAVID J OTTINGER
F WALLACE POPE JR
DARRYL R RICHARDS
DENNIS G RUPPEL'
CHARLES A SAMARKOS
JOHN A SCHAEFER
BETHANN SCHARRER
PHILIP M SHASTEEN
CHARLES M TATELBAUM
GLEE A TRIPLETT
JOAN M VECCHIOLl
MICHAEL T WILLIAMS
ANTHONY P ZINGE
. OF COUNSEL
PLEASE REPLY TO CLEARWATER
FILE NO
30874.83474
Mr. James M. Polatty, Jr.
Director of Planning and Development
City of Clearwater
P. O. Box 4748
Clearwater, Florida 34618-4748
-.... r;-j~t~
o'i'i'r~ 17',J:'\'i..\r\~),: \r 1 H \ ~
1\ '\ 1.1 110 \ \ I '\' '... " .,l \ ~
~)I>i\::(,\,'~~...~..l~j\\.,.l. ',''''' I
~... ,. t J '....,.. ... I I I
,. r \ ~;1 .. :
.. " I' , t ~
, \ \, r{)
~\:~~l ~ n \/ '\ i, \1) ,)
F\ r Ni,\\NG
Ot.~ t"\R1N\'C.H r
November 13, 1992
Re: Ultimar III
If .
Dear Jim:
This letter confirms our telephone conversation on November
13 wherein I requested that the appeal regarding the pool
location and height of Ultimar III be continued from the
Commission's December 3 meeting to its December 17 meeting. If
there is a problem with this continuance, please let me know.
I
v~yours,
Timothy A. Johnson, Jr.
TAJ/lm
9ll/TAJ/30874LELl
83474
cc: Mr. Ted Cobb
CLEARWATER OFFICE
911 CHESTNUT STREET
POST OFFICE BOX 1368
CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 3461 7-1368
TELEPHONE (8131 461 1818
TELECOPIER (8131 441-8617
TAMPA OFFICE
100 NORTH TAMPA STREET
SUITE 1800
POST OFFICE BOX 1100
TAMPA. FLORIDA 33601-1100
TELEPHONE (8131 225 2500
TELECOPIER (8131 2237118
1/
7'
LAW OFFICES
M!;;MULLEN, EVERETT, LOGAN, MARQUARDT & CLINE, P A
FIRST NATIONAL BANK BUILDING
400 CLEVELAND STREET CLEARWATER FLORIDA 34615
POBOX 1669
JOHN TWEED M\;MULLEN
FRANK C LoGAN
EMIL C MAROUARDT JR
HARRY S CLINE
J PAUL RAYMOND
JAMES A MARTIN JR
STEPHEN 0 COLE
MARGOT PEOUIGNOT
R NATHAN HIGHTOWER
THOMAS C NASH II
NANCY 5 PAIKOFF
MARIE L O~MARCO
T SHEA GILLS
CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 34617
(813) 441-8966
FAX (813) 442-8470
or COUNSEL
JOE S EVERETT
WILLIAM E NODINE
PALM HARBOR OFFICE
(BI3) 7654402
33920 HWY 19 NORTH
SUITE 150
PALM HARBOR FL 34664
November 25, 1992
Mr. Michael Wright, City Manager
City of Clearwater
Post Office Box 4748
Clearwater, FL 34618
Re: U1timar, Phase III/pending site plan approvals
Dear Mr. Wright:
As the City files will reflect, we represent owners in the
Harbor Condominium located essentially across the street from the
proposed development. Our client's position is that the Settle-
ment Agreement reached by the City and the land owners, after
protracted litigation, should not be modified to allow increased
height or construction within the view corridor.
Mr. Polatty has indicated by letter dated September 23, 1992,
that the City is inclined to approve a building at a proposed
height of 248'. The Settlement Agreement specifically provides
for buildings with "a maximum of 210 feet in height." The
agreement further provides that the:
"height of the building structures is defined as the
distance above the flood plain to the roof deck or, in
the case where sloped roofs are used, to the mid-point
of the roof slope. Elevator machine rooms, mechanical
rooms, stairs, parapet walls and other necessary desi~
elements will be permitted_~b~ve~e maximum h~hts
established herein." [Emphasis added]
Our clients do not believe that any height should be approved
in excess of 210', plus the necessary design elements.
In the first instance, the land owner has under the Settle-
ment Agreement the right to propose to modify any of the
"schematic site plans" subj ect to your approval. We do not
believe that this envisions increasing the specific limitation as
to maximum height. The height limitation is contained within the
text of the site plan, and is not part of the "schematic site
plan". As in the case of a proposal to put a swimming pool or
November 25, 1992
Page Two
other active recreational facilities in the view corridor, we
submit that this is not a matter that can be varied or altered
since these are limitations imposed by the text and not by the
"schematic site plan".
In the second instance, it is our understanding that the
basis for this request is architectural in nature, relying on
aesthetics. We view this request in the nature of a variance
request, and aesthetics are not proper to vary a Code limitation,
and should not be authorized to vary this Settlement Agreement
and its limitations. If aesthetics are an overriding concern for
the property owner, then the building can be redesigned within
the mandated building envelope of 210' in height.
Accordingly, on behalf of our clients, and consistent with
prior correspondence to the Planning Department, our clients
object to any expansion regarding height over and above the
agreement, and object to the inclusion within the view corridor
of anything other than passive items as defined in the agreement.
It is our understanding that this matter is now calendared for
hearing on December 17th before the City Commission as a result
of an appeal by the land owner to apparently seek to place the
pool within the view corridor and to seek even more height.
Please accept this letter on behalf of our clients as an
appeal as well, since we seek review of any approval granted in
eX8ess of 210' on the building itself, which apparently has been
internally approved. In the event the matter is to be heard on a
different date, please advise since we wish to appear on behalf
of our client.
HSC:koh
cc: Mayor Rita Garvey
Commissioner Art Deegan
Commissioner Susan Berfield
Commissioner Richard Fitzgerald
M.A. Galbraith, Jr., City Attorney
Commissioner Charles E. Raney
Commissioner Bruce Tyndall
Commissioner Barbara Sheen Todd
Commissioner Steve Seibert
Commissioner Sally Parks
Timothy A. Johnson, Esq.
Harbor Condo (Attn: Mr. Norman Olson)
Sincerely yours,
~/{A~/;/I {J(c~( /A
,1 ' /7(tL--
Harry S. Cline
"
() 1)on ~ '~I k: 'Ynk /AJ/?~...Jhfr;
'-"'(}- ~e~~-
i
C I T Y
o F
CI...EARWATER
POST OFFICE BOX 4748
C LEA R W ATE R, F LOR I D A 3 4 6 1 8 - 4 7 4 8
January 11, 1993
~u f ~ll-lo
U I f{(\(;\rt~
~
Office of
City Attorney
(813) 4626760
Fax (813) 4626426
COPY VIA FAX TO 8-223-7118
E.D. Armstrong III, Esquire
Johnson, Blakely, Pope, Bokor, Ruppel & Burns
P. O. Box 1368
Clearwater, Florida 34617-1368
Re: Ultimar Three Condominium (1560 Gulf Boulevard)
Dear Ed:
Just as you were kind enough to let me see Paula Harvey's letter
prior to the City commission meeting on December 17, I am pleased
to share with you a copy of a letter I received today from Charles
Siemon.
Shall we take his deposition in Boca Raton, or Chicago?
Sincerely,
~
M. A. Galbraith, Jr.
City Attorney
MAG: a
Copy:
Mrs. Harvey (via fax)
Mr. Siemon (via fax)
RECEIVED
JAN 1 3 '9~J
PLANNING &
DEVELOPMENT DEPT.
o
. Equal Employment and Affirmative Action Employer
.
433 PLA2'A REAL
MIZNER PARK. SUITE 339
BOCA RATON, rLORIDA 33432
407-se8-3800
LAW OFFICES
Siemon, Larsen &: Marsh
DEARBORN STATION
47 WEST POLK STREET
CHICAGO, ILLINOIS 80805-2030
TELEPHONE 312-93g..7117
FACSIMIL.E 312-1i39-7188
SUITE G~
19800 MacARtHUR BOULevARD
IRVINe, CALIFORNIA 92115
114.7S2-1S38
I
.,
January 11, 1993
COpy VIA PAX TO (813) 462-6426
Mr. M. A. Galbraith, Jr.
City Attorney
City of Clearwater
Post Office Box 4748
Clearwater, Florida :'4618-4748
Re: Sand Key Settlement Stipu~atiQD
Dear Al:
I have reviewed your letter of January 7, 1993 and offer the
fallowing thoughts for your consideration in regard to the two
points which were raised in the letter.
In regard to the phrase "passive recreationalll facilities, I
do not have any recollection of specific conversations or
discussions, however I do have some vague recall that the view
areas were to be are,as where project improvements and their Use
would not interfere with visual access to the water.
I am fairly confident that I was the initial source of the
term "passive recreatJLonallt because I was one of the authors of the
conditions of settlement and the term is one that we in our firm
have used for many years in a variety of land use projects. r also
have no doubt, notwith.standing Ms. Harvey's intent, that the term
was used intentionally to limit the use of the area within the
view corridor to USes Which did not include active recreational
activities. And, I clo not think that there can be any question
that swimming pools are active recreational uses. In practically
every context I can think of the swimming pools are considered
active recreational Uses. ~ ~ ~ Recreation, Park and Open Space
Standards and GUidelines(1983) PUbliShed by the National Recreation
and Park Association of Alexandria, Virginia.
Moreover, in my experience, the term passive recreational
activities is used to distinguish between those activities that
invol ve active physical acti vi ty and sometimes improvements or
structures. In this context, walking, hiking and picniCking are
examples of passive recreational use, and golf, tennis, SWimming
.
f
Mr. M.A. Galbraith, Jr.
City Attorney
City of Clearwater
January 11, 1993
Page 2
and various games involving a ball are active recreational uses,
even though some such Uses might not involve structures. A
baseball diamond without fences is still an active recreational
use.
As for the term "necessary design element," r agree with your
attention and again illS the likely author, I can assure you that to
the extent of my involvement and experience, the word "necessary"
design element does not mean aesthetically desirable but rather
means physically required.
I hope that my recollections and thoughts are helpfUl and I
would be pleased to help in any way loan.
'~
.'. "
:;
Sea Towers
ConstructIon Company. Ine
HAND DELIVERED
June 27, 1994
Mrs. Elizabeth Deptula, Citv Manager
City of Clearwater .
112 South Osceola Avenue
Clearwater, FL 34618
RE:
Ultimar Three: a Residential Condominium
1560 Gulf Boulevard
Sand Key, Clearwater, Florida
Application for Building Permit pursuant to
Settlement Stipulation dated October 17, 1986
Dear Mrs. Deptula:
SUBJECT:
Sea Towers Construction Company, Inc., general contractor for Ul timar Three
Development Corporation, a subsidiary of USX Corporation, hereby formally
makes application to the City of Clearwater for a full and unrestricted
building permit for the third and final phase of a residential condominium
project planned for the property referenced above. This third phase of the
project, known as "Ultimar Three", will consist of an 18 story tower
building containing 100 condomInium dwelling units and a surrounding parking
garage and plaza deck which abut the parking garage and plaza deck of
Ultimar Two.
This application for building permit is being submitted pursuant to the
requirements of Paragraph 17 of the Settlement Stipulation dated October 17,
1986, and more specifically, in accordance with the portions of Exhibit "B"
to the Settlement Stipulation entitled "Parcel II Schematic Site Plan 2".
We call to your attention that our site plan was certified initially by the
City on April 16, 1993 and was later modified and recertified on January 5,
1994. In addition, the foundation permit for Ultimar Three was issued on
May 14, 1993 and subsequently amended on April 20, 1994.
In order to facilitate the City's review of this application, by copy of
this letter, we are submitting three (3) sets of signed and sealed building
plans and City of Clearwater permit application form directly to the City
of Clearwater Building Department to the attention of Mr. Victor Chodora,
Assistant Director of Central Permitting.
1560 Gulf Boulevard - Clearwater, Flonda 34630 - 813-595-8915 - 595-8928 FAX
...1 ~ '"
Mrs. Elizabeth Deptula, City Manager
June 27, 1994
Page 2
We trust that with submission of the building plans as described above, we
have provided the City of Clearwater with the necessary drawings as
described in Paragraph 17 of the Settlement Stipulation so as to allow the
issuance of the building permit for Ultimar Three. We would be pleased to
answer any questions you may have regarding the plans or this application.
Please feel free to contact me in this regard.
Sincerely,
~;..~~
Ted Cobb, President
TC/dk
Enclosures
cc: City of Clearwater
Attn: Mr. Scott Shuford, Director of Central Permitting
(without building plans)
City of Clearwater
Attn: Mr. victor Chodora, Assistant Director of Central Permitting
(with building plans - three (3) sets)
USX Realty Development, USX Corporation
Attn: Mr. Tom Howard, General Manager - Southeast
(without building plans)
CITY OF CLEARWATER
Interdepartment Correspondence
FROM:
".--
ElIzabeth M Deptula, CIty Manager ! (2v~
Kathy S. RIce, Deputy City ManagericS
Scott Shuford, Central Permlttmg Dlrecto~ 5
RRcr:nT~D
.11" - 0 1994
City MtQlliDiOlger
TO:
VIA:
SUBJECT:
JMC CommunitIes, Inc - Sand Key Settlement Stipulation - Parcel IV
COPIES:
Loms R HIlton, AssocIate Planner
DATE:
July 5, 1994
The attached site plan is being forwarded to you for your approval as provIded for m Article 14 of the
Sand Key Settlement StIpulatIOn, (Cucmt CIvIl No 78-4765-7) dated October 17, 1986 CIty staff has
revIewed the site plan for Parcel IV receIved by the City on June 6, 1994
The SIte plan follows the basIC parameters of the Settlement StIpulatIOn Parcel IV SchematIc SIte Plan
notes as shown in the approved Development Order The proposed development mcludes two bmldmgs
WIth a total denSIty of 274 luxury condommmms m two 20 story towers WIth amenities
My staff finds the site plan to be m general conformIty WIth regard to height, setbacks, open area,
densIty, parkmg, and VIew corndor The sWllnnllng pools, beach cabanas, boardwalks, dune
enhancements and deck areas are proposed to be located seaward of the Coastal ConstructIon Control
Lme (CCCL) and final approval IS subject to Department of Environmental ProtectIon (DEP) approval
and permlttmg processes Staff feels that If approved by the DEP, the proposed pool area to be
constructed seaward of the CCCL wIll not impact the enVIronment or the avaIlabIlIty of beach area for
public use as the sand has accreted over the years and there is 770 feet from the CCCL to sovereIgn
waters A far more dramatic pool area was permItted by the Department of Natural Resources for the
prevIously approved and now defunct Sheraton Sand Key Hotel expansIOn project WhICh was an approved
Development of RegIOnal Impact (DR!)
In addItion, the developer IS consIdering conveymg an easement for publIc access to the beach, however,
it has not been determmed as to whether the pedestnan access should be located at the north property lme
or the south property line (see attached map) Please refer to the attached copy of the motions from the
CIty'S Development ReVIew CommIttee meetmg dated June 23, 1994 for the condItions of SIte plan
approval
Attached for your SIgnature IS a letter to the developer which serves as OffiCIal notIfication of your
approval of the SIte plan Please SIgn this letter and the attached letter to the developer and forward both
copIes back to me for copying and mailIng If you should have any questions, please contact myself or
Lou HIlton of my staff at 6567
July 5, 1995
Page two
[~ROVED
DATE
[] DENIED
enc pedestrian access map
DRC Mmutes
letter to developer
SS/LRH/lrh
--
C I T Y
OF
CLEARWATER
POST OFFICE BOX 4748
C LEA R W ATE R, F LOR I D A 3 4 6 1 8 - 4 7 4 8
July 5, 1994
Mr. J. Michael Cheezem
JMC Communities III, Inc.
2201 4th Street North, Suite 200
St. Petersburg, Florida 33704
Dear Mr. Cheezem:
Re: JMC Communities/ Sand Key - 274 Unit Residential Development
As provided for in Article 14 of the
(Circuit Civil No. 78-4765-7), City Staff
plan for the northern two-thirds of Parcel
on June 6, 1994.
Settlement Stipulation
has reviewed your site
IV received by the City
We find the site plan to be in general conformity with the
provisions of the Settlement Stipulation. Please refer to the
attached copy of the motions from the City's Development Review
Committee meeting held June 23, 1994.
If you should have any questions, please contact me at 462-6700 or
Scott Shuford, Central Permitting Director at 462-6567.
Sincerely,
Elizabeth M. Deptula
City Manager
cc: Harvey A. Ford, Esq.
enc.
SS/LRH/lrh
o
"Equal Employment and Affirmative Action Employer"
~
\\u"';a~
~M~'\
i::i ,d/, ~\
, ~
c-:a __ ~lii
~ -0:_:= ~"""lli
~ -==- ~~
~~~
C I T Y
OF CLEARWATER
POST OFFICE BOX 4748
C LEA R W ATE R, F LOR IDA 3 4 6 1 B - 4 7 4 B
City Manager ,
I
July 13, 1994
Mr. J. Michael Cheezem I
JMC Communities III, Inc: I
I '
2201 4th ,Street North, Sui~e 200
St. Peter~burg, FL 33704: i
RE: J~C commumties/sanJ Key - 274 Umt Residential Development
I
Dear Mr~ Cheezem:
,
As provided for in ArtIcle 14 of the Settlement StIpulatIOn (CIrcUit CIvIl No. 78-4765-7),
City staff has reviewed your si~e plan for the northern two-thuds of Parcel IV receIved by
the City on June 6, 1994.
!
,
We find lite site plan to be in general conformity with the provlSlons of the Settlement
Stipulation. Please refer to the attached copy of the motions from the CIty'S Development
Review Committee meeting held June 23, 1994.
If you should have any questions, please contact me at 462-6700 or Scott Shuford, Central
Permitting Director at 462-6567.
Smcerely,
It: Deptu!a
City Manager
cc: Harvey A. Ford, Esq.
enc.
SS/LRH/lrh
o
"Equal Employment and Affirmative Action Employer'
(C(0)lPY
CITY OF CLEARWATER
Interdepartment Correspondence
SUBJECT:
MIles Lance, Assistant City Attotey
Louis R. Hilton, Senior PI~_ -
Sand Key :- Parcel IV
TO:
FROM:
COPIES:
Scott Shuford, Central Permlttmg Director
DATE:
August 4, 1994
Attached for your review is an Agreement submitted by legal representative Henry Ford for JMC
Communities, Inc. JMC Commumtles, Inc IS the contract buyer of the northern two-thIrds of the Sand
Key Parcel IV property Mr Ford IS requestmg the Agreement be executed by the City Manager at her
earlIest convenience Al Galbraith and I met With Mr Ford to determme the allocatIOn of the
$545,89800 between the subject property and the southern one-third of Parcel IV
If you have any questions, give me a call at 6567.
,
~ tlearwater
\
,,'
u
Interoffice Correspondence Sheet
To:
Ralph Stone, Planning Director
Date:
Cyndi Hardin, Assistant Planning Director
Teresa Mancino, Planne~
March 4, 1999
From:
RE:
UB" Zoning District
The following uses located on Sand Key are currently zoned uB" (Business) as a
result of a legal settlement with U.S. Steel in February 1987. The data provided is
varied as the site plan files for these developments are incomplete. I have also
included a copy of the settlement agreement for your review. Please let me know if
you need any further information regarding these developments.
Sand Kev Condo - 1501 Gulf Boulevard
. 143 apartment units on 4.6 acres
. Future Land Use: Residential Medium 115 upa
Sand Kev Park South - 1551 Gulf Boulevard
. City owned park with tennis courts and parking area
. Future Land Use: Residential Medium 115 upa ?
Ultimar Condo - 1 520 Gulf Boulevard -
. 114 residential units
. Future Land Use: Residential Very High 1 + 30upa
*Total of 500 parking spaces for the Ultimar development
Ultimar Two - 1 540 Gulf Boulevard
. 1 38 residential units
. Future Land Use: Residential Very High 1 + 30upa
r ,.
~' Ultimar Three - 1560 Gulf Boulevard
. 148 residential Units
. Future Land Use: Residential Very High 1 + 30upa
The Grand - 1170/1180 Gulf Boulevard
. 230 multifamily units - density 17.9 du/acre
. Future Land Use: Resort Facilities High 1 Mixed Use
Radison Bavside Hotel - 1201 Gulf Boulevard
. 220 rental units and associated retail (gift shop, on site massage, ect)
. Future Land Use: Resort Facilities High 1 Mixed Use
Columbia Restaurant - 1241 Gulf Boulevard
. Restaurant with 200 seats
. Future Land Use: Resort Facilities High 1 Mixed Use
Shoos at Sand Kev - 1261 Gulf Boulevard
. Various Retail shops including: snack bar; beauty salon; real estate broker;
specialty retail
. Future Land Use: Resort Facilities High 1 Mixed Use
1281 Gulf Boulevard
Zoning atlas show a restaurant use but currently no occupational license at the
site.
. Future Land Use: Resort Facilities High 1 Mixed Use
Hardin, Cyndi
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Hardin, Cyndl
Wednesday, August 11, 1999 9 50 AM
Akln,Pam
Stone, Ralph
FW B ZOning on Sand Key
Pam, I Just wanted you to be aware that are proceeding with rezoning this parcel and would appreciate any
adVice ya'lI can give us re special process or notice that we should follow as a result of the settlement
agreement ObVIously, we cannot keep them forever as B zOning since that zOning no longer eXIsts and
administration IS difficult Teresa IS dOing an evaluation of the eXIsting uses compared to the new zOning dlstncts
In an effort to find the most closely appropnate new zOning dlstnct
We plan to send thiS to the Community Development Board for the Sept meeting Please let me know If you
have any concerns or Issues Thanks
From
Sent
To
Cc
Subject
Mancini, Teresa
Wednesday, August 11, 1999 9 40 AM
Dougall-Sides, Leslie
Hardin, Cyndl
B Zoning on Sand Key
I wanted to touch base WIth you regardmg the "B" Zomng DIStnCt on Sand Key If you recall, tlus IS the property that was
subject to the legal settlement Wlth US Steel m 1987 Ralph and CyndI have deCIded to move fOlward Wlth gettmg these
propertles rezoned under the new code I wanted to ask you IT you know IT there IS anytlung speCIal that we would need to
do because of the settlement agreement If not, we plan to move forward hke a typICal rezomng
Also, some tlme ago I tlunk I mqmred Wlth you as to whether you had a hst of property owners Wltlun tlus B zomng or a
representatlve that would be responsIble handhng Issues mvolvmg the settlement Do you have tlus mfonnatlon there? If
not I can get It through the property appraIsers office
Thanks for your help
Teresa
Page 1