Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Administrative Appeal topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Board continues rooftop entertainment appeal at 605 Lincoln Road to July 10 after parties request time to secure counsel

Board of Adjustment, City of Miami Beach · June 10, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

An appeal of a planning director interpretation about rooftop entertainment at 605 Lincoln Road was continued to July 10 after the applicant’s attorney withdrew and asked for more time to retain new counsel; the condominium association opposed a long delay.

The Board of Adjustment continued an administrative appeal involving 605 Lincoln Road to the July 10 meeting after the applicant’s counsel told the board the firm had withdrawn and asked for time to retain new representation.

Attorney Carter McDow said his firm had filed the appeal on behalf of Upper Upper Deck LLC but recently withdrew, and he requested the continuance so the applicant could hire new counsel and review the complicated record, which includes litigation among condo owners. The appeal challenges a planning‑director zoning interpretation that entertainment is not a permitted use on the building’s roof deck.

The applicant, Gerald Buena, told the board he wanted the hearing delayed while the parties pursue a settlement and emphasized that a final board decision “could be used eventually against us” in ongoing litigation. He asked the board to hold the matter until at least July so he could secure counsel and present arguments with representation.

Representing the condominium association, attorney Mickey Morero said the association opposed another long continuance after two years of proceedings and warned that some settlement efforts had stalled. The association argued the appeal stems from the applicant’s request for an interpretation and that the association has a strong interest in a timely resolution because the resulting decision could affect building use and safety requirements.

The city attorney and planning staff said the city was prepared to proceed but did not object to a continuance if the board wished to allow more time. The board voted to continue the appeal to July 10 so the applicant can obtain counsel and either press the appeal or reschedule as needed.

The continuance leaves in place any separate enforcement or magistrate actions tied to the property; the board provided that a further continuance could be considered if necessary.