Delano Residences & Hotel Miami

Delano Residences & Hotel Miami is planned for 400 Biscayne Blvd, downtown Miami: 90 floors, 421 units, ranging from 311 to 1,760 square feet. The architecture is credited to Carlos Ott and CUBE3, interiors to Meyer Davis. Status is listed plainly as "planned" — this is not a building under construction, it is a building with a design team, a brand license, and a sales contract.

The amenity program, per the developer's own materials, includes two restaurants (one described as a "sky restaurant"), a Rose Bar, an observation deck billed as Miami's first, a sky pool roughly 800 feet up, a full-floor spa, and a members' club. None of this is independently verified in the evidence; it is the developer's description of what is planned, not a record of what exists.

A Biscayne Bay Tribune item from March 2026 quotes a developer or brand representative calling this "Delano's first branded residences" and framing the Biscayne Boulevard site as a natural extension of the brand's Miami Beach identity. That is a marketing claim about brand strategy, not a claim about construction progress or financing, and should be read as such.

Completion is targeted for 2031 — five years out from the second deposit date cited in the contract schedule. That is a long runway, and long runways in pre-construction Miami condominium projects carry their own set of open questions, several of which are unanswered here.

Unit sizes run from 311 to 1,760 square feet, a span wide enough to cover a studio and a large three-bedroom in the same building. Nothing else about the unit mix — bedroom counts, floor plans by tier, view exposure by stack — is in the record.

On price, there is nothing to report. Price from, price to, and price per square foot are all unpublished. That means there is no way, from this evidence, to say whether this building is priced in line with downtown Miami new-construction comparables, above them, or below them — the price-vs-comps score of 5 reflects exactly that absence, not a neutral judgment.

The deposit structure is specific: 10% at contract, 10% in October 2026, 10% at groundbreaking (targeted June 2027), 10% one year after groundbreaking, and the remaining 60% at closing (targeted 2031). That is 40% of the purchase price collected before a shovel is confirmed in the ground and before the building is complete.

HOA dues per square foot are not published. Percentage sold is not published. Rental policy — whether short-term rentals are permitted, restricted, or barred — is not published. A buyer weighing carrying costs or exit flexibility cannot get an answer to either question from what has been made available so far.

The project record does not name a developer. That field is blank in the evidence supplied. What the legal filings do establish is that litigation concerning "the developer" in this dataset involves an entity described as a PMG affiliate — so the developer appears to be connected to PMG, though the project itself does not confirm this directly.

All three litigation items in the record concern a different property entirely: 398 NE 5th Street Condominium Association. Two suits were filed by the PMG affiliate against that association — one over a disputed garage storage lease and $35,000 in alleged unpaid rent, another alleging the association withheld roughly $773,000 in hotel-management fees and mis-billed assessments as part of what the filing calls a fraudulent scheme. A third suit, filed by the association against the PMG affiliate over declaration language on voting and leasing rights, was dismissed with prejudice and settled.

None of this concerns Delano Residences & Hotel Miami. It is disclosed here because it is the only litigation record tied to the developer scope in the evidence, and rule of this publication requires separating it clearly from the building under review. Treat it as background on a counterparty's litigation posture elsewhere, not as a signal about this project's execution.

On actual track record — number of projects delivered, average delay against promised completion dates, defect litigation, lender defaults, year founded — there is nothing published. The developer_track_record score of 5 sits at the scoring midpoint precisely because none of the inputs that would move it off the midpoint are available.

HOA dues per square foot are unpublished, so the carrying-cost score of 6 is built on a midpoint assumption for that line item, offset by one real point in the building's favor: because it is new construction, it faces no Florida SB-4D milestone structural inspection within the next ten years — the inspection regime that has driven special assessments at many older Miami-Dade condominiums. That is a genuine, dateable advantage of buying new.

On deposit protection, Florida law requires escrow of only the first 10% of a buyer's deposit. This contract collects 40% before closing — the four staged 10% payments through groundbreaking and the one-year-after mark. Whether the developer voluntarily escrows any of the remaining 30%, or releases it for construction financing as permitted once past the statutory floor, is not stated anywhere in the evidence.

That gap is the reason the deposit-protection score sits at 3. It is not a claim that the money is unsafe — it is a statement that the safety of roughly three-quarters of the pre-closing deposit is undocumented in what has been published, and a buyer should ask for the escrow agreement, not the brochure, before wiring a second check.

The address is 400 Biscayne Blvd, downtown Miami. That much is fixed. What is not published is transit walk time, FEMA flood zone designation, or any protected-view status for the tower — all three are listed as missing inputs behind the location score of 6.

The one concrete nearby data point is the Waldorf Astoria Hotel & Residences Miami, under construction to the southwest, 100 floors and roughly 1,049 feet tall, targeted for 2027 completion, with a noted partial view impact. A tower of that height going up before Delano's own targeted 2027 groundbreaking is the kind of fact that can reshape which units carry unobstructed bay or ocean sightlines and which do not — and it is the only adjacent-development data point in the record.

Beyond that one tower, the evidence does not show what else is permitted or planned on the surrounding blocks. In a downtown Miami corridor where several supertall towers are in various stages of planning at any given time, that is a meaningful blind spot for anyone buying specifically for a view at this height.

The delivery-risk score of 3 is the low point of this file, and it is earned honestly: the project is at "planned" stage, groundbreaking is a target rather than a confirmed date, no construction lender is identified in the evidence, and the completion horizon runs to 2031. That is a five-plus-year bet on a building that has not broken ground.

The deposit-protection gap compounds it. Forty percent of the purchase price is due before closing, only the first 10% carries a statutory escrow guarantee, and the actual escrow treatment of the remaining 30% is not disclosed.

Pricing itself is unknown — no price floor, no ceiling, no per-square-foot figure — which means a buyer cannot yet judge value against comparable downtown Miami product, only against the developer's own description of the amenity package.

Set against all of that, the honest summary is that the primary risk here is not a bad number — it is an absence of numbers. Of the fields this kind of review normally checks, four are verified and twenty-one are not. That ratio, more than any single figure, is the risk.