The Miami City Commission voted 3-2 during a special meeting late Wednesday to delay a decision until May 24 on whether to grant the project's developers a major-use special permit.
It is the second time elected members of the commission deferred a decision on a permit application that apparently meets all city codes and requires no variances. Appointed members of the Planning Advisory Board approved the application in a 4-2 vote on recommendation of city staff.
The applicant, Brickell Bay Village Ltd., modified its original application in light of heated opposition from area homeowners who argue the project is too dense and negatively impacts the aesthetics of neighboring properties such as the Atlantis, the 18-story condominium building containing the landmark square of open space in the middle of the building.
"This (proposed) building really isn't the right building for the lot," T. Sinclair "Tory" Jacobs, president of the nonprofit Brickell Homeowners Association, tells GlobeSt.com. "We don't have anything that dense in the area."
Besides the homeowners association, the Atlantis Condominium Association opposed the application by Brickell Bay, whose general partner is BCOM-BBV Inc., a partnership between Michael Baumann and Aslan Palachi.
Originally, the condominium association in the neighboring Bristol Tower, a condominium building to the south of the proposed project, also opposed the application until the Brickell Bay developers scaled back the project in the 2000-2100 blocks of Brickell Avenue from 421 units to 359, 650 parking spaces to 510 and the floor area ratio by about 87,400 sf.
The meeting Wednesday night attracted more than just a vocal crowd of property owners, Jacobs says. Supporters of the Brickell Bay project, all conspicuously wearing pro-union T-shirts, attended the hearing. Apparently financing support for the project is coming in part from a pension trust fund, though GlobeSt.com was unable to confirm the speculation.
The 3-2 decision on the application now gives the Brickell Bay developers until May 24 to propose additional modifications to the project. It they don't modify the proposal, the developers could face the possibility of rejection at the May 24 meeting. If that happens, the development team would have to either refile the application and start again or pursue other alternatives.
"Hopefully, they'll come to a meeting of the minds," Jacobs says.
Want to continue reading?
Become a Free ALM Digital Reader.
Once you are an ALM Digital Member, you’ll receive:
- Breaking commercial real estate news and analysis, on-site and via our newsletters and custom alerts
- Educational webcasts, white papers, and ebooks from industry thought leaders
- Critical coverage of the property casualty insurance and financial advisory markets on our other ALM sites, PropertyCasualty360 and ThinkAdvisor
Already have an account? Sign In Now
*May exclude premium content© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
