Keep Bayshore Beautiful, Inc.
STOVALL PROJECT OPPOSITION SUMMARY
Keep Bayshore Beautiful, Inc.(KBB), is a Florida non-profit company formed by your neighbors who are extremely concerned about the proposed Stovall House project. While KBB is concerned about protecting the special character of Bayshore Boulevard and surrounding neighborhoods, the Stovall Project has far-reaching implications and is the focus of this document. We do not consider ourselves to be an exclusive group. We welcome your involvement and ideas, and, of course, we are also happy to advocate for other neighborhoods who experience similar issues.
THE ISSUE: Blake Casper is the third-generation operator with his sister, Allison Adams, of a business operatingMacDonald’s restaurants and the creator of the Oxford Exchange. He has asked the City of Tampa for permission to develop a membership-only club with indoor and outdoor alcohol service from 7AM to 1AM, and a bed and breakfast operating 24/7. The Stovall House project is proposed at the historic residence located at 4621 Bayshore Boulevard. Casper is under contract to purchase the property from (the trust of) Harry E. Teasley, Jr. The club would be inserted into the middle of a single-family neighborhood and more than double the building square footage on the property for use by members in a way not currently permitted by zoning. The project includes 80 parking spaces, and the developer has proposed a reduction of the distance between his alcohol service and residential properties from 1,000 feet normally required to a mere 50 feet. Potential impacts range from noise, light and safety issues to surrounding property values and the erosion of the character of Bayshore Boulevard and the surrounding neighborhoods, as well as precedent which could impact future City rezoning decisions.
IMPLICATIONS: The Stovall project could set a disturbing precedent for rezoning decisions throughout the City of Tampa. It couldset precedent for allowing re-zonings and alcohol use within established residential neighborhoods. The project is a private club that will benefit only a wealthy few, and especially the property owner and the developer. It will not be open to the public, and the citizens of Tampa will not benefit. If it is approved, it would erode the character of the surrounding neighborhood, and the value of the homes by introducing the inevitable increased commercial traffic, alcohol use, noise, parking issues and safety concerns for the residents throughout the neighborhood. Those with homes that border the operation would be most impacted. Very specifically, their property values would be significantly impacted, and safety would become a very real concern. Finally, the Colonnade site (which began with a different zoning designation which allowed multi-family use), was thought to be the last potential high-rise site along Bayshore. If the Stovall property is rezoned to PD, it would have increased entitlements and intensity. Though other factors would reduce the chance of hi-rise developments, the increase in entitlementscould ease the path to high-rise or commercial permitting at a later date, putting Bayshore on the path to a high-rise or commercial corridor which most planning professionals and residents alike have fought to avoid.
RESPONSES: The developer created a website to promote the project. Below are FAQs copied from the developer’s website, followed by the responses from neighbors in opposition and Keep Bayshore Beautiful, Inc. We label each of our responses as “KBB RESPONSE”.
YOUR neighborhood could be next! If you wish to sign our petition, please do so at We have yard signs as well. Let us know if you would like one. We are collecting $5 for each sign to reimburse the generous neighbor who funded the printing for us all. Our email is , and our website is
Thank you for learning about this very important issue and for your support to keep Bayshore beautiful for all of our families!
Developer’s Frequently Asked Questions:
1. How will this club affect my property values?
DEVELOPER: Upon closing, this property transaction would represent the most expensive sale of a residential property in the history of Hillsborough County. More importantly, this project will be of a caliber unprecedented in the region and will place it in the realm of the most respected social clubs, which also happen to be located in some of the most desirable and expensive zip codes in our nation.
KBB RESPONSE: This salewill not elevate surrounding home values. The property is not being sold for future use as a home. In fact, the purchase contract is almost certainly contingent upon a rezoning! As a home, it is over-priced. It is the Seller’s choice to price far above market, and the developer is willing to pay more, because he is anticipating making money on the property. That doesn’t help anyone in the neighborhood, and in fact, the proposed use will be detrimental to at least the immediate surrounding homes, as few buyers wish to live within 50 feet of an establishment that operates 24/7 or serves alcohol into the wee hours of the morning. This assertion is supported by expert opinions.
2. What is the current zoning and what does it allow?
DEVELOPER: The current zoning of RS-150 allows for the development of single family residences as well as country clubs (in addition to religious facilities, schools and other non-residential uses), which are known technically as Private Recreation Facilities per the City of Tampa Code of Ordinances. The entitlement of a Private Recreation Facility in an RS-150 zoning district is not subject to City Council approval and is administered through a Special Use 1 Permit.
KBB RESPONSE: The definition of “recreational facility, private” is found in Tampa Code Sec. 27.43. It states, “A privately operated facility providing indoor or outdoor recreation activities, including but not limited to community clubs and meeting halls (boys and girls), country clubs, golf courses, riding stables and tennis clubs.” On its face, the definition does not anticipate a 24/7 bed and breakfast operation or the service of alcoholic beverages. There are 2 rezoning applications underway. One is for a planned development (PD) custom-designed to request these intense uses be placed in our back yards in a manner not compatible with current zoning, and the other is for an Alcoholic Beverage (AB) Special Use 2 Permit, which would add another compliment of concerns. Both are completely inconsistent with the character and fabric of the surrounding single-family neighborhood and current zoning.
3. What is the purpose of the rezoning?
DEVELOPER: The only reason for the rezoning is for the ability to serve alcoholic beverages. Under the current zoning RS-150 a private recreational facility is already an approved condition.
KBB REPONSE: That’s a major reason. It is also untrue. If rezoning to a planned development (PD) were not required, Casper would not have submitted that application. True, that an alcohol permit cannot be granted in a residential zone, but we believe there are also other underlying reasons for the PD. Because the desire to configure the property in a certain way is self-imposed, he is not able to get a variance. A variance requires that the developer experiences a “hardship” that is not self-created. PD rezoning is the only way to achieve Casper’s desired “exceptions” to current requirements. According to the Tampa Code, the property’s current RS-150 zoning district anticipates “areas primarily for low density single-family detached dwellings on spacious lots, wherein a property owner may obtain reasonable assurance of compatible development.” According to Table 4-1 in Tampa Code Sec. 27-156, a bed and breakfast use is not permitted in the RS-150 zoning district. Neither is alcohol. The developer must convince the City to grant him the PD rezoning and the alcoholic beverage (AB) permit. With respect to the AB permit, it is important to note that in his application, the developer asks permission to reduce the separation between his alcoholic beverage business and surrounding homes from the required 1,000feet to only 50 feet. The 1,000-foot separation requirement has existed in Tampa’s code for years to protect residencesfrom impact.
4. Under the current zoning and land use who else if not us?
DEVELOPER: It is unlikely that this property will remain as a single family residence under the current zoning based on the sales price and associated property taxes that will follow. A likely outcome would be the parceling of the estate into 6 or more lots to be speculatively developed with the preservation of the existing Stovall House not guaranteed nor the quality of the newly developed product.
KBB RESPONSE: 1.Casper and Teasley control the sales price and associated taxes. To imply that Mr. Teasley is powerless to sell at a lower price is self-serving. Like the prior owners of the property, Mr. Teasley and his wife have used the property as a residence for years. There is reason to believe that another person would enjoy the property as a residencealso, if the property were offered at an appropriate price. Mr. Teasley simply wants to sell the property for more than the market will bear, and the only way for a buyer to justify a purchase at an inflated price is to purchase it and change the use to a business use that will return the additional investment to the buyer. Property professionals believe that the property has been overpriced since it was listed. Here are at least 3 techniques to move a property that is not selling at a particular listing price: (a) reduce the price to what the current market will bear, (b) broaden the marketing campaign, or (c) wait for the market to rise to the seller’s desired price. 2. The current zoning would allow certain expected residential uses, of which one would be the development of additional high-end homes, which would be compatible with the neighborhood and compatible with preserving the Stovall House. Mr. Casper is also a speculator. To broaden and intensify many facets of the property’s use as he proposes would be contrary to the stated goals of Tampa’s comprehensive plan, as well as its land development code and zoning regulations to protect the consistency of our neighborhoods and the value of our homes. 3. Casper’s main goal is not preservation of the Stovall House.
5. What is the potential use for the property if not us?
DEVELOPER: There are a number of potential uses for the property and while we cannot certainly commit to the likelihood of any of them we shall outline what are plausible possibilities.
•Maintain Current Status and a single family moves into a 3bedroom 3 bath house which is 5000 Sft and sits on estate that is 2.6 acres.
•A developer comes in a subdivides the lots into 6 or 7, or potentially more partials and creates a housing development.
•A developer comes in and tries to create a high rise very similar to what is already being built on Bayshore.
•An investor buys the property and rents it out on a weekly basis to groups, parties, etc. i.e. VRBO
•Outside party buys, goes through the same process then, flips and moves on.
•Unknown.
KBB RESPONSE: (1) A residential use of the nature allowed by the current code would be anticipated. (2) High-rise would require re-zoning to PD also, as the existing RS-150 zoning would not permit a residential density that would be economically feasible on that site.High-rise would also be inconsistent with the fabric of that area of Bayshore. The property is zoned RS and not RM, which indicates an intent by planners and an expectation of neighboring homeowners, that the property would not be used for multi-family purposes. Finally, high-rise would require the destruction of the historic Stovall House, which is designated as a landmark on the National Register of Historic Places. Destruction of that home would be contested by many, including the City’s Historic Preservation Commission, which could prove problematic for the potential developer of a high-rise. (3) FAA height restrictions due to the proximity of MacDill AFB, would significantly chill the potential for high-rise development. (4) Renting the property out on a weekly basis to groups or for parties or as a transient rental or rooming house is not realistic. That and temporary special events are governed by Tampa’s Code. Such events on private property must meet several criteria, must last no more than 2 weeks and may not occur more than 4 times per year. If purchased at market value, it would be difficult to justify renting the property out on VRBO or using the property for group events to recoup a likely purchase price, and VRBO-type rentals would require City approval.
6. Is the house protected by the National Parks service? If so, what does that mean?
DEVELOPER: The short answer is yes and we intend the keep it that way. The longer and more complicated answer is that no historical building is fully protected structurally. While we admit and hope that if anyone was to try and tear the building down that the governing powers would protect the establishment, the reality is we cannot guarantee that response. We do not have the authority to say that would happen indefinitely. We are going to work with historical consultants in order to preserve the nature of the original structure.
KBB RESPONSE: (1) There is a bit of a disconnect here. The house is on the national register but not on the local register, which would give the local Historic Preservation Commission and City staff the ability to comment on and make requirements for the projecton behalf of our community. Will the developer be designating the house as a local landmark so that our local historic preservation board in Tampa will have a say in the property development?(2) If the historic structure were to be torn down under the current configuration, the local Historic Preservation Commission would be involved. Obviously, if someone wants to build a high-rise, the home would have to be demolished. That could, in fact, be the ultimate plan or alternative for the developer who might now be proposing this zoning change for club use as an interim step. Short of that, however, the property could potentially be subdivided so that lots could be sold for single-family home use. There are many ways to profit from developing the property without requiring a rezoning for alcohol use, operating a B&B or tearing down the Stovall House. Putting the property to a more intense use and encouraging others to invest via memberships (and then continue to pay dues) is simply a way for the developer to justify a higher than market purchase price and cover carrying costs.
7. Are you conducting a traffic study? If so please explain the methodology and reasoning behind it?
DEVELOPER: Yes, a Transportation Analysis (TA) was prepared by Whitehouse Group.The Transportation Impact Analysis was prepared in accordance with the required methodology outlined in the City of Tampa Transportation Impact Analysis and Mitigation Plan Procedures Manual.As part of the methodology, the TA looked at the AM peak hour (the highest one hour of the adjacent street between 7 AM and 9 AM) and the PM peak hour (the highest one hour of the adjacent street between 4 PM and 6 PM). The TA indicates the proposed project is estimated to attract approximately 57 AM peak hour trip ends with 35 inbound (slightly more than 1 car every two minutes) and 22 outbound (slightly less than 1 car every 2 minutes). During the PM peak hour, it is estimated the project will attract approximately 113 trip ends with 70 inbound (slightly more than 1 car every minute) and 43 outbound (slightly less than 1 car every minute).Detailed intersection analysis indicates all intersections within the study area would operate at an acceptable level of service with background plus project traffic.
KBB RESPONSE: The traffic study indeed adheres to the standards required by the IAMPPM. However, this type of study is a very broad brush and is required by municipalities to determine if the developer must make road improvements due to additional traffic loading on the roads around a development. It does not take into account the true concerns of the neighborhood or the reality of the club’s potential impact. It is unlikely for a club of the nature proposed to generate significant, if any, traffic trips between 7AM and 9AM. The philosophy of traffic studies is to measure the likely highest utilization times, based on rush-hour. The same is true of the “PM Peak” hours. In order to address the true impact of this project on the neighborhood, the traffic study would need to take into account the most likely peak utilization times of the club itself, because road capacity during rush-hour is not the primary concern. The surrounding neighborhoods will be significantly impacted outside the 2 hours slots considered by the study. The developer states in its application that the B&B itself will be a 24/7 operation. In fact, due to alcoholic beverage consumption, the times of most serious concern for the neighbors extend into evening hours through early morning when alcohol is being served with, for example, children potentially on the neighborhood sidewalks and streets in the evenings. Casper’s Oxford Exchange closes daily at 5:30PM on a normal basis, is located in a commercial area not surrounded by residential homes, and does not support a 24/7 B&B. So, any reference to Oxford Exchange is irrelevant to the proposed project.Also, the traffic study does not take into account the recurring deliveries of supplies and other materials that will need to take place via neighborhood streets.