Hialeah board recommends replacement of car‑wash canopies, forwards variance choice to council after neighbor objections

The Hialeah Planning & Zoning Board recommended sending to City Council a staff‑preferred option for a variance application at 5350 West 12th Avenue that would demolish both existing canopies at a shopping‑center manual car wash and permit construction of a new 560‑square‑foot aluminum roof where a previously permitted 256‑sq‑ft canopy sits.

City staff told the board the site has a long enforcement history and that an unpermitted 460‑sq‑ft metal roof was built without permits; staff recommended the demolition of the unauthorized canopy and offered two options to the board: (1) demolish the illegal 460‑sq‑ft canopy and retain the smaller permitted canopy, or (2) demolish both and allow construction of a new canopy consistent with the 1989 approval. "The existing 460 square feet aluminum roof will be demolished immediately," staff said as part of the options presented, while also noting demolition and permit processes still require proper permitting before removal.

Applicant representative Cesar Mestre said the owner and property manager accept staff’s options and "agree with the conditions and the alternatives," adding the applicant is prepared either to keep the smaller permitted canopy and remove the illegal one or to pursue permits for a new 560‑sq‑ft canopy. Two identical letters from nearby business owners and neighbors were read into the record opposing both expansion and continued operation; the letters cited zoning violations, noise, traffic, loitering and alleged negative impacts on public safety and property values. One objection read in part: "I strongly urge the planning and zoning board to please deny the variance request for both the expansion and continued operation of the manual car wash business. Upholding zoning laws and protecting the character and safety of residential neighborhoods must remain the city's priority."

Board members expressed frustration about repeated compliance problems at the site and questioned whether past proffers had been honored. Counsel and staff clarified that the use remains a legal nonconforming use under a 1989 special‑use permit while structures and unpermitted additions are the subject of the current variance. After discussion the board voted to recommend approval of the staff‑preferred option (demolish both structures and build a new 560‑sq‑ft canopy) and to forward that recommendation to City Council; the clerk recorded a roll call with mixed yes and no votes and the motion carried. The council will take final action at a future meeting.