Loading...
CORRESPONDECE FROM 9/79 ON REGARDING COUNTRYSIDE SOUTH ADDITION [ US.HOme~] '1 I Florida Land Development I Central Division Leonard Seligman, Division President (813) 796-0911 February 4, 1980 Mr. David Healey, AICP Planning Director City of Clearwater P.O. Box 4748 Clearwater, Florida 33518 Dear Dave, This is to acknowledge your letter of January 30, 1980. We concur that the allowable commercial square footage to be built in our Countryside Tracts 81, 75 and 83 is approximately 53,000 sq. ft. We have also agreed, pursuant to our telephone conversation of Friday, February 1, 1980, that we may plan development for professional uses up to the allowable threshold limits on these same tracts, and such uses would not be considered as part of the commercial square footage calculations. Thanks for your cooperation. . LS/mm JU:CEW~'-.n - F.!B '4' 1900 PLANN1NC DBP~nNT One Countryside Office Park · Suite 400 · P. Q. Box 5088 · Clearwater, Florida 33518 CO-l d I -0 I (0) [ U5.HOme~] U.S_ Home Corporation - Florida Land ~ Developne.-,t/ Central Division I I February 16, 1978 Mr. Tony Shoemaker Ci ty Mal1ager City of Clearwater Clearwater, FL Re: DRI/Countryside South Annex Mr. Shoemaker, As per our rreeting of Tuesday, February 14, 1978, I would appre- ciate your assistance in releasing the South Armex of Countryside for developrent at this tiITe. As per the affidavit recorded December 20, 1977, and the new letter of detennination (copies attached), we will not be required to canply with the State D.R.I. statutes at t~s tL~. Our main concern is the release of Tract 81 for an :irctr:Drtant closing scheduled for February 23rd which necessitates building permits being issued at that tirre. This closing is extrel'rel y :irctr:Drtant to U.S. Hare CoTfOration, and I would appreciate your continued cooperation. Thank you for your assistance to date and if I can be of any as- sistance, please feel free to call on rre. '!hank you. lY.S. j / FlORID ,/ J L-/ DIVISION John A. Bodzia~, Jr. Division Vice President hw Attachrrents 2280 US 19 Norch Suite 144 Bldg_ K PO, Box 5088 C:ear'Nater, ;=Iorida 33515 " 1 STATE OF rLORIDA I ilrpartmrut nf AOUtiuintratiott Division of State Planning 660 Apalachee Parkway . IBM Building Reubln 0'0. Askew 'OVUNOI R G Whittle. Jr_ STATEPl.ANNING OlRfClOR TALLAHASSEE 32304 Wallace W. Henderson uc.n....' cw 1lllOO,"n,u"ON (904) 488-1115 January 27, 1978 Mr. Robert M. Rhodes Post Office Box 1876 Tallahassee, Florida 32304 Re: Application for a Binding Letter of Development of Regional Impact File No. BLID 878-015 Countryside South Addition Reconsideration Dear Mr. Rhodes: The Division of State Planning has evaluated your application for a Binding Letter dated December 21, 1977, received December 21, 1977, for a Reconsideration of the Binding Letter issued for the U. S. Homes Countryside South Addition on July 12, 1977 (File No. BLID 877-029). Based on the information contained in both ap- plications, as well as information provided by the City of Clearwater, the Division of State Planning enters the following findings of fact, conclusions of law and order: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The applicant is Robert M. Rhodes, authorized representative of U. S. Homes of Florida, Inc., which proposes to develop the Country- side South Addition. 2. The property which is the subject of this determination is located in Pinellas County in Sections 30, 31 and 32, Township 285, Range 16E. This area includes the Countryside South Addition as well as tracts 45 and 48 of the Countryside Development. 3. The Countryside South Addition contains approximately 71.13 gross acres and is described by the applicant to include: 4.86 acres in Tract 82 and 17.46 acres in Tract 71 zoned for mUlti-family use; 48.81 acres zoned for commercial and office use. In addition, the other part of this reconsideration includes: approximately 12.14 J I M~. Robert M. Rhodes January 27, 1978 Page Two gross acres in Tract 45, and 20.21 gross acres in Tract 48, both of which are contigious to Countryside South Addition. 4. The Countryside South Addition is contigious to the larger u.S. Home Countryside Development, which was the subject of a Vested Rights Determination made by the Division of State Planning on February 27, 1974. At-that time it was determined that certain de- velopments proposed in the land use plan dated July 12, 1972, had acquired vested rights pursuant to Section 380.06{12}, Florida Statutes, and was not required to comply with the provisions of Section 380,06, Florida Statutes. 5. The Countryside South Addition was the subject of a Binding Letter issued by the Division of State Planning on July 12, 1977, and is the subject of this reconsideration. It was determined at that time that the proposed addition, combined with additional property yet to be rezoned, would constitute a Development of Regional Impact under Chapter 22F-2.07 and .12, Florida Administrative Code. That deter- mination was based on the rezoning of Tracts 45, 47, 48 and 49. 6. The rezoning of those tracts numbered 45, 47, 48 and 49 was ap- proved by the Clearwater City Commission on August 18, 1977. As mentioned in Findings of Fact No.4, the applicant had previously obtained vested rights for certain developments proposed in the land use plan dated July 12, 1972. A comparison of the uses proposed in that plan for the tracts in question and the new zoning classification is provided below: July 12, 1972 Land Use Plan Tract No. Net Ac. Proposed Use Zoning 45 12.14 Motel Site CP 47 8.57 Commercial CP 48 20.21 Condominium Apts. RM-20 49 18.66 Rental Apts. RM-20 Zoning 8/18/77 CP CP CP RM-20 7. The zoning classification of Tract No. 48 was changed at the August 18, 1977, meeting from RM-20 {high density mUlti-family to CP [parkway business]}. This involves a change in use from condo- minium apartments to commercial development. The Vested Rights pre- viously obtained by U. S. Homes to develop Tract No. 48 as a resi- dential area have been relinquished by this rezoning and corresponding change in use. 8. The adjacent property, as listed below, to the south Tracts 45, 47, 48, and 49 which is also owned by U. S. Homes, is slated to be I I Hr. Robert H. Rhodes January 27, 197~ Page Three developed corrunercially as well. In the Binding Letter issued by the Division of State Planning on July 12, 1977, details of the proposal for that land submitted by U. S. Homes, to the City of Clearwater prepared by U. S. Engineering Consultants, Inc., in March of 1977, were presented. This information is contained below: : . \ ' I I , Mr. Robert M. Rhodes J&nuary 27, 1978 Page Four 9. Tracts 45, 47, 48 and 49 are contigious to Tracts 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 81,82 and 83 and are considered together as one develop- ment. 10. The applicant has submitted an affidavit stating that "in the Countryside South Addition and in portions of Tracts 45 and 48 de- clared divested by the Division, and more particularly described in the attached legal description, U. S. Horne Corporation will not develop in excess of the development threshold provided in Rules 22F-2.07, Office Parks, and 22F-2.12, Shopping Centers, Florida Administrative Code, as adopted July 1, 1973." They further affirm that "if it appears that U. S. Home Cor- poration will develop in excess of such DRI thresholds within Countryside South Addition, it will comply with the requirements of Section 380.06, Florida Statutes." However, no specific develop~ ment plans currently exist for that portion of the development con- tained in Tract 45 and Tract 48. 11. The applicable guidelines for the proposed development is Chapter 22F-2.07 and 2.12, Office Parks and Shopping Centers, Florida Administrative Code. 12. On December 30, 1977, notice of receipt of this request was published in the Florida Administrative Weekly. No comments were received in response to this notice. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The portion of the development which remains subject to Section 380.06, Florida Statutes, review involves only a portion of Tracts 45, 48, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 81, 82 and 83 since a portion of Tract 45, 47 and 49 have retained vested rights. 2. If any proposed development located within the Countryside South Addition combined with the rezoned portion of Tract 45 and Tract 48 exceeds the thresholds for Office Parks and Shopping Centers presumed to be Developments of Regional Impact as outlined in Chapter 22F-2.07 and 22F-2.12, Florida Administrative Code, then such development shall be subject to the provisions of Section 380.06, Florida Statutes. 3. The applicant has submitted an affidavit stating that the Country- side South Addition and that portion of Tract 45 and Tract 48 previously divested will not exceed the threshold for Office Parks and Shopping Centers presumed to be Developments of Regional Impact. Therefore, such development is not subject to review pursuant to the requirements of Section 380.06, Florida Statutes, at this time. However, if sub- sequent development plans substantially alter the facts and circumstances upon which this decision is based, the proposed development may be subject to the review requirements of Section 380.06, Florida Statutes. I I Mr. Robert M. Rhodes January 27, 1978 Page Five ORDER The proposed development, Countryside South Addition, and the rezoned portions of Tract 45 and Tract 48 is not required to comply with the review requirements of Section 380.06, Florida Statutes, at this time. However, when development plans are ultimately finalized, a further determination pursuant to S380.06(4), Florida Statutes, may be required. Binding letter determinations are made pursuant to the pro- cedural requirements of Section 120.57(2) or Section 120.57(1), if appropriate. See Rule 22F-l.16, Florida Administrative Code (copy enclosed). If you want to submit additional evidence in opposition to this determination or to establish an appropriate record for appeal, you may do so pursuant to Section 120.57 (2) (a) 2, I f you think a material issue of disputed fact is involved in this determination, you may request a proceeding under Section 120.57(1). This determination does not obviate the need to comply with other applicable state or local permitting procedures. Any questions regarding this determination may be directed to Ms. Lynn Ekholm, Bureau of Land and Water Management. Sincerely, . . ~:Z-1// / . -' ", /';~;:;/!fd!t!Z&z // C{' ! ;/'7-1 R. G. Whittle, Jr. ~/' State Planning Direcnor I RGWjr/LE/kf Enclosure cc: Mr. Paul Bergman Mr. Steve Logan Mr. Jay Landers Mr. Chris Papandreas " ~ " ')Y "25 't cl T Y OF C LEA R W ATE R Interdep.rtment Correspondence Sheet TO: Aleta Cozart. Mst. to' Ci ty MlAager FROM: Lucille Williaas, City Clerk COPIES: SUBJECT: Parks - u. S. Hoae.,;; DATE: September 13, 1979 Tom Bustin's interpretation of paragraph 11 of the U.S. Home annexation agr.ement is that it is the builder's obligation to donate 35 acres of land within a 6-year tiae fraae to the City as indicated on the master plan, free of charg., fol' use as recreation or for City acbain- istrative needs. We have received 28 acres which have been utilized for recreation or administrative needs and 7 acres were transferred to the second annexation. The 6-year tiae frame has now expired. If we had not received all of the 35 acres or aade arrange.ents for the final 7 acres the developer would be under no obligation to donate any additional acreage. LW/cbaj ",t", ~" ',i"H~p;iIl!'V' :jV I ;)..,..,.~ 'cl T Y OF C LEA R W ATE R Interdep.rtment Correspondence Sheet TO: FROM: Aleta Cozart, Asst. to City Manager Lucille Wi11iaas, City Clerk COPIES: Tho..s A. Bustin, City Attorney (~ ~) SUBJECT: Parkland Deeds DATE: September 4, 1919 We hav. continued to research all parkland deeds received from u.S. Hoa. toda~e. Hone rayeal a tim. frame reverter clause but do contain wording to the effect that the property Bst be used for ,public park, recreation, or City administrative purposes. The original aDJlexation agree.ent (copy attached), Page 4, Paragraph 11, contains a6-year reverter clause. This agreement covers 1,407 acres which was the first annexation approved in 1972. The second annexation, Phase II, occurred in 1977 nd.o agreeaent was signed. To. Bustin is r,e.earehin, the agreeaent and will give us an opinion. LW! daj Att. , )