Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Student Housing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning board backs changes to allow limited student housing in parts of TSNA, raises parking to 0.5 spaces per bed
Summary
The Planning Board recommended staff’s TSDD/TSNA amendments with board edits: allow off‑campus student apartments on select parcels north of US 1 that front Red Road, permit limited accessory retail/food fronting 57th Avenue capped at 20% of ground‑floor frontage, and raise the parking requirement to 0.5 spaces per bed. Staff will coordinate final language with the City Attorney to avoid Live Local Act triggers.
The City of South Miami Planning Board voted to recommend changes to the downtown TSDD/TSNA rules to accommodate off‑campus student housing on a narrow set of parcels and to tighten associated parking and accessory‑retail provisions.
Tres Moniz, representing Subtext Acquisitions LLC, asked the board to adopt friendly amendments so that two parcels fronting Red Road north of U.S. 1 could be developed as off‑campus student apartments under the new form‑based scheme. "The property is literally across the street from the University of Miami," Moniz said, arguing the location is suited to student housing and that limited retail accessory uses would serve residents and campus activity.
Staff and counsel outlined the core choices. Mark Albers, consultant for the planning staff, said one path is to treat off‑campus student housing like a commercial, hotel‑type use for density calculations so the code need not be rewritten to alter residential density. The City Attorney cautioned that the draft language must preserve accessory uses as "subordinate and incidental," language intended to avoid triggering the Live Local Act. "The Live Local Act ... uses that same phrase, subordinate and incidental," the City Attorney said, urging careful drafting to ensure accessory retail remains incidental and does not alter the mixed‑use status the act addresses.
On parking, the board accepted staff’s recommended increase from 0.25 to 0.5 spaces per bed. The Chair summarized the change: "The parking is gonna be 0.5 for every bed," and explained that staff’s recommendation responded to real‑world occupancy patterns at an existing student housing project near the metro rail where staff said about 60% of residents have cars.
Board members debated how widely to allow accessory retail and where to locate it to avoid "commercial bleed" into residential streets. Members coalesced around limiting accessory retail/food and beverage to parcels fronting 57th Avenue and capping such accessory uses at no more than 20% of the ground‑floor frontage that faces 57th. They also asked staff to limit the size of accessory commercial spaces so that the provision supports small coffee/food uses rather than larger commercial anchors.
During the discussion, developer representatives described a proposed by‑right project that would be a six‑story multifamily building with 263 units, about 720 beds and 428 structured parking spaces; they said the design steps down to three stories toward the adjacent single‑family neighborhood. Board members cited that project as evidence that student housing demand exists near the University of Miami and argued the proposed code language should channel student occupants into purpose‑built housing rather than into single‑family neighborhoods.
A motion to accept staff’s proposed edits plus the board’s amendments — including the 0.5 parking‑per‑bed minimum, the 20% ground‑floor cap for accessory uses fronting 57th Avenue, and direction that staff work with the City Attorney to avoid triggering the Live Local Act — carried. The board will forward the recommendation, and the revised language, to the City Commission for final action.
The board also directed staff to refine draft language (including precise square‑foot or percentage limits for accessory uses, and formal findings that accessory uses will remain subordinate and incidental) before the commission hearing.
