Two Roads Pays $50M to End Biscayne 21 Buyout Fight in Edgewater

A Miami-Dade circuit docket shows Two Roads Development agreed to pay $50 million to ten holdout condominium owners at Biscayne 21 in Edgewater, ending litigation that started in 2023 and clearing the developer’s last legal obstacle to demolishing the 61-year-old waterfront tower, according to Miami-Dade Circuit Court and appellate records.

Why it matters

Biscayne 21 is now the clearest test case for how bulk condo buyouts actually resolve after Florida tightened its post-Surfside safety and reserve rules. Two Roads affiliate TRD Biscayne LLC bought a majority of the building’s 192 units in 2022, then had the condo association lower the termination-vote threshold from unanimous consent to the state law floor of 80 percent. Ten owners led by Angelica Avila sued, and Florida’s Third District Court of Appeal ruled in their favor, finding the lowered threshold stripped individual owners of their veto over termination. The Florida Supreme Court declined to take up the case in October 2025, leaving that ruling as binding precedent across Miami-Dade and Monroe counties. For anyone underwriting a bulk acquisition now, majority control does not shortcut a holdout fight. It can still take years and a premium payout to close.

The numbers

Two Roads paid $150 million for its majority stake in Biscayne 21 in 2022. The holdout owners filed Miami-Dade Circuit Court case 2023-016774-CA-01 that May, and the fight ran through Third District Court of Appeal case 3D23-1616, decided March 2024 and revised on rehearing in July 2025, before the developer settled with the ten remaining owners for $50 million combined at the end of August 2026, according to court dockets. That is roughly a four-year run from bulk purchase to closed litigation.

What’s next

With the holdouts settled, Two Roads can move to demolish Biscayne 21 and build its planned Edition-branded replacement on the Edgewater waterfront in Miami. The bigger effect lands on the next developer’s underwriting model: the Third District’s ruling means a bulk buyer cannot vote away a holdout’s veto by amending the declaration after the fact, so any acquisition banking on an 80 percent termination threshold needs to budget for the possibility that unanimous consent, and years of litigation, is still the real bar.