Perched on a prime piece of real estate on Miami's picturesque Biscayne Bay waterfront, the Biscayne 21 condominium has been the subject of a legal tug-of-war between a developer intent on replacing the aging tower with luxury housing and a small group of residents determined to stop it.

Last month, the Third District Court of Appeals decisively sided with the condo’s eight holdouts who have been blocking the condominium’s demolition by Two Roads Development. Two Roads has asked the state Supreme Court to hear the case—a request that is pending. "With the Florida Supreme Court, there's no guarantee that they will hear a matter," attorney Glen H. Waldman, with the law firm Armstrong Teasdale, who represents the holdout condo owners," tells Realtor.com®. "It's up to them, their discretion, whether they will hear this or not, and our expectation is they will not." Realtor.com reached out to attorney Susan Raffanello, who represents Two Roads, for comment and was awaiting her reply. For now, the 13-floor, 192-unit apartment tower in Miami’s Edgewater neighborhood stands empty and "uninhabitable," according to Waldman, with multiple units having been stripped of windows and other features in preparation for demolition that never came.

Biscayne 21 in Miami, FL, is a waterfront condo offering unobstructed views on the Bay of Biscayne and the Port of Miami.

 

What happened to Biscayne 21?

Built in 1964, Biscayne 21, located at 2121 North Bayshore Drive, features tennis courts, a large pool, a barbecue area, ample parking, and, perhaps most importantly, more than 830 feet of water frontage offering unobstructed views of Biscayne Bay, the Port of Miami, and Miami Beach.

Beginning in 2022, Two Roads Development went on a multimillion-dollar shopping spree, buying up nearly all the units at Biscayne 21 with the intent of terminating, or dissolving, the condominium, tearing it down and replacing with a trio of gleaming high-end apartment towers.

Despite facing pressure from the developer and real estate agents to sell, eight owners dug in their heels.

According to Waldman, those who refused to part with their properties were motivated by a couple of interconnected considerations.

"This is America. You pay for your home, you pay all your taxes, you pay your association fees, you pay your mortgage. You have a right to live there," says the plaintiffs' attorney. "The problem is that the amount of money that Two Roads was offering—and this is the case in almost all termination cases— was far below what it would require for these people to relocate to another condominium on the water with a beautiful view like they had at Biscayne 21."

What complicated matters for the developer was the fact that unlike some newer Miami condos, Biscayne 21's condo rules, known as a declaration, required 100% of owners to approve the condo's termination.

Determined to go ahead with the dissolution, Two Roads took over the condo board, changed the language in the declaration lowering the threshold of termination approval from 100% to 80%, and paved the way for the tower to be torn down, according to a 66-page lawsuit filed by Waldman on behalf of the holdouts in 2023.

The complaint accused Two Roads of rendering the holdouts' votes meaningless in an attempt to skirt the unanimity requirement written into the condo board's original governing documents, but a lower court sided with the developer.

"They kicked our people out of the building and started to dismantle the building," says Waldman, revealing that some of his clients ended up having to rent because they did not have the means to buy another property.

Waldman appealed the verdict, and after some legal wrangling, the Third Court of Appeals issued a ruling in favor of the Biscayne 21 holdouts.

An opinion issued by the court July 10 denied Two Roads' motion for reconsideration of an earlier pro-owner decision and found that the the trial court "erred" in failing to recognize that the developer violated the voting rights of unit owners who refused to sell.

"[The judge] made it clear that one vote means one vote, one vote counts," says the lawyer.

There has been much hand-wringing in Miami's developer circles over the decision, with critics arguing that it would hamper the ability to terminate aging condominiums in order to make way for new developments.

But Waldman contends that much of the criticism is mere "hype" fueled by developers looking to sway lawmakers to change legislation in their favor. He insists that the appeals court's opinion is very narrow and applies strictly to condos that have governing documents like those of Biscayne 21 with a unanimous vote requirement.

"Most do not," he stresses. "This is not a sweeping, overriding ruling."