A Florida legislator who doesn’t represent Miami Beach is pushing a measure that could wipe out the city’s ability to regulate upgrades at Jeffrey Soffer’s waterfront resort.
David Borrero, a Doral state representative, tacked on a win for the billionaire developer in a massive bill that would create sweeping new land-use and development regulations across the state.
Borrero’s amendment to the bill would strip city boards’ authority over variances and special exceptions that apply to 20 percent of land occupied by “large destination resorts.”
That neatly applies to Soffer’s Fontainebleau Miami Beach, defined as hotels with more than 500 rooms and an average occupancy rate of at least 70 percent for the past three years.
Aventura-based Fontainebleau Development’s plans to add 37 cabanas and 11 waterslides at the iconic 1,504-room landmark has drawn opposition since November from residents, city activists and some Miami Beach elected officials. The slides would be connected to a 10-story aluminum tower.
The Miami Beach Historic Preservation Board postponed voting on the plan three times, most recently on Feb. 10 at the developer’s request.
Borrero worked with a lobbyist from Corcoran Partners representing Fontainebleau on the amendment, the Miami Herald reported. Borrero did not respond to requests for comment.
Fontainebleau Development representatives did not specifically comment about the lobbyist’s involvement. In a written statement, the firm said it “engages with policymakers at the local and state level on issues that affect reinvestment and competitiveness.”
The developer still plans to bring the pool upgrades request before the city’s historic preservation board, the statement said. Borrero’s legislation “is separate from — and not necessary for — the application,” it said.
Fontainebleau Development also noted the state bill is broad in scope, applying to any other qualifying property in Florida.
Based on the measure’s language, other sites that could benefit include the Trump Organization’s golf resort in Borrero’s home district, and Eden Roc Miami Beach, the hotel adjacent to Fontainebleau Miami Beach.
“This proposal is about allowing a historic resort to responsibly maintain and modernize amenities for its guests,” Fontainebleau Development’s statement said. “When non-elected appointees disregard established code and applicable law, it creates uncertainty for property owners and employers who rely on predictable standards.”
Fabian Basabe, the state representative for Miami Beach, said Borrero added the amendment to the bill on Monday shortly before it was scheduled for a vote by the Florida House of Representatives’ state affairs committee.
“The amendment was added late and did not receive full committee vetting,” Basabe said. “Major policy changes deserve proper review, especially when they are narrowly tailored and affect a built-out community already facing infrastructure strain.”
Borrero told the house committee that he drafted the amendment because some historic review boards “unreasonably restrict simple upgrades to properties.” His measure, which was approved in committee and is headed for a vote by the full House, would require local governments to administratively approve variances and special exceptions for large destination resorts.
Basabe said he “reached out and spoke with a representative associated with the Fontainebleau at the Corcoran Group” after the committee meeting.
“I made it clear that I had serious concerns about bypassing established review procedures and that process integrity matters, especially in a historic community like Miami Beach,” Basabe said. “Rules should apply evenly, major changes deserve proper scrutiny, and infrastructure capacity must be part of the conversation before additional approvals move forward.”
On Tuesday, Miami Beach City Commissioner Alex Fernandez sounded the alarm in an email blast to residents.
“Decisions that have always been made by boards applying objective standards and informed by public input — could instead be dictated by a preemption imposed from Tallahassee,” Fernandez wrote. “This represents a fundamental erosion of our historic preservation protections.”The city commission was set to vote on a resolution by Fernandez to oppose the amendment. In a text to The Real Deal, he said the measure’s “overly broad language” has “dangerous implications” for Miami Beach’s regulatory authority.
