Sunny Isles Beach has won its five-year-old court battle with Publix Super Markets.

The Third District Court of Appeal decided that Publix was evasive about its plans to build a new supermarket and condominium complex.

In 2006, the Publix chain submitted a plan to Sunny Isles Beach, stating that the supermarket had purchased 17.13 acres of land, and proposed to build a 378-unit condominium complex and a grocery store at 18320 Collins Ave. – the site of an existing Publix.

But city officials rejected the application, saying nearly 14 acres of the site was in Dumfoundling Bay, underwater just west of the store.

Publix wanted to use the 14 acres in an attempt to meet city density requirements – which lays out the number of condo units a property owner can build based on the size of the site.

“They cannot use underwater land for density purposes,” said Hans Ottinot, attorney for Sunny Isles Beach.

In 2007, the grocery-store chain sued, hinging its lawsuit on the idea that a 2004 Sunny Isles Beach law allowed underwater land to be used for density requirements.

The law allows property owners to keep development rights if some of their property become submerged. It was an attempt to protect owners from problems such as erosion and hurricanes.

A circuit court agreed with Publix, but the city appealed to the appellate court, which dismissed the circuit court’s ruling.

Sunny Isles Beach officials “are extremely elated that the court was able to issue a compliance with the city’s zoning code,” Ottinot said “The City Commission supports smart growth policies and the site plan filed by Publix was inconsistent with smart growth policies.”

“Publix claims to be a good corporate citizen, and if they are such a good corporate citizen then they should follow the laws and ordinances of our city but instead they decided for probably a minimal investment…,” the city is quoted in the Third District Court of Appeals document released Oct. 19.

Aside from its underwater property, Publix still owns 3.5 acres of land

If the submerged acreage is taken away, the project would lose around 100 units from the condo complex, Ottinot said.

“While disappointed that the Third District Court of Appeal overturned several rulings in Publix’s favor, our focus remains on providing premier service to our customers.” Publix said in a statement.

“Hopefully, we will be able to work with Publix to provide our residents a new store and a better development plan for the area,” Ottinot said. “The ball is in Publix’s hands.”