Employee Sponsored Hotel on Canal Street?

The City of Miami Springs is considering allowing an employer sponsored hotel along Canal Street.  Okay.  The City says it’s not a hotel.  It’s being called “Employee Sponsored Housing Accommodations” for an aviation company.

Here’s why we call it an employee sponsored hotel.  Employees will use the housing as temporary place to sleep / live while traveling to and out of Miami.  Employees will come and go and rotate based on their work schedule.

Call me crazy, but this sounds like an employee sponsored hotel within the Gateway Overlay District.

The Employee Sponsored Hotel or Employee Sponsored Housing Accommodation is being pitched for the property located at 30 Canal Street.  If you drive by the property now, you’ll notice two things.  1 – The property has been gutted.  2 – The property is listed for sale again.

The arguments in favor of the project are as follows:

• It’s going to be better than the dilapidated building we had before.
• The employees will use company provided transportation (buses) and Ubers to get around so it won’t use up critical parking.

We respectfully, but vehemently disagree.  Using the excuse that what we’re getting is better than what we had before is the same lazy argument that brought us the parking disaster at One Curtiss Parkway aka the Springs Town Center.

The dilapidated theater was so ugly, so bad, we had to accept a new development with insufficient parking.  That was a false choice back then and it’s a false choice once again.

The excuse that this project won’t need parking because the employees will be provided busing and ride sharing, is just that.  An excuse.  Who says these employees won’t have a local girlfriend / boyfriend that comes to visit with a car?  Who says these employees won’t rent a car during an extended stay?  Who says the employee won’t lend their apartment to a local friend that has a car.  C’mon?  Let’s be real.

Build a project with sufficient parking.  Period.  End of story.

We have a parking problem.  Why would we entertain yet another project with insufficient parking?

Councilwoman Bravo feared, “this might become something else should this business model fail.”

The City Planner argued that the City of Miami Springs can use a “Conditional Use” to regulate the operation.

We believe the City Planner is looking at the use with the best intentions in mind.  But it’s short-sighted.

How long will the building last?  Easily 50 to 100 years.

How long will the business that is providing employee sponsored housing last?  Ten years?  Twenty years?  One year?  Nobody knows.

I think it’s ridiculous to allow a conditional use for employee sponsored housing when there’s no guarantee this type of housing will last.  Why allow a building to be constructed with insufficient parking (for up to 16 micro units) for a use that won’t match the life of the building?  In other words, if the business goes bankrupt, is sold, moves, etc. what happens next?  We’re stuck with a non-conforming building with insufficient parking once again.

For the record, we do not support any project that does not have sufficient on-premise parking, or at least pays the City of Miami Springs a fee to offset the lack of on-premise parking.  This proposal clearly does not have sufficient parking and does not pay to offset that lack of parking.

Councilman Fajet stated, “We should be open to the creativity of it…It’s an elegant solution.”

If you tell me that the employee sponsored housing would last 50 years, I might be able to support this.  But I’ll give you two key companies that nobody in Miami Springs thought would ever go out of business:  Eastern Airlines and Pan Am.  Those were two great American companies that employed hundreds of Miami Springs residents.  They both went under.

So why would we accommodate a decent idea, but one with no guarantee of longevity?

What’s the vision for the Gateway Overlay District?

Wasn’t the vision to increase retail and restaurants?

When was adding an employee sponsored hotel, I mean housing accommodations, a part of our goal for the Gateway Overlay District?  How will this give us a long-term benefit?

Is this the best we can do?

Is this the best idea for the property at 30 Canal Street?  Are there not other ideas of what can be built?

They can build a complex like 29 Palmetto Drive and build ground floor parking.  Yes, that might need a variance, but that’s no different than what 29 Palmetto did.  And it would provide plenty of parking and could allow for office space, retail, residential, or a mix thereof.  By comparison, 29 Palmetto Drive has a lot of 12,500 sq ft.  30 Canal Street has a 10,000 sq ft lot.

Divided City Council

Councilman Walter Fajet made a motion to direct the city staff to create the process of conditional use and to allow a conditional use for employer provided housing accommodations as a conditional use within the district.   Councilman Santin seconded the motion.  Here’s the vote:

• Councilman Santin:  Yes
• Councilwoman Bravo:  No
• Councilman Fajet:  Yes
• Councilman Vazquez:  Yes
• Mayor Mitchell:  No

What’s Next?

This doesn’t change the uses allowed within the Gateway Overlay District or the greater central business district.  It just directs the City Staff to craft legislative changes that would allow a conditional use to move forward within the district.

Of course, you have a say in the matter.  If you like the idea of a quasi employee sponsored hotel, let the City Council know you like it.  If you don’t like the idea of an employee sponsored living accommodations being built within the district, let your city council know.

This council has been very good about listening to the residents.  But they can’t listen if you don’t speak up.

What do you think?

Let us know in the comments section below.