Developer withdraws 4‑story West 49th Street project after neighborhood outcry

At the March 11, 2026 meeting of the City of Hialeah Planning & Zoning Board, the applicant for a proposed four‑story, 28‑unit mixed‑use building at 291 West 49th Street withdrew the application after a high volume of opposition from nearby residents and contentious board debate.

Planning staff told the board the project sought a special‑use permit to expand the Neighborhood Business District (MBD) overlay and a suite of variances: to allow residential units on the ground floor, to permit up to 89% of units below the city’s 700‑square‑foot minimum (with some as small as 500 sq ft), to reduce the 15‑foot street setback to about 6.91 feet, to provide 35 parking spaces where 43 are required, and to reduce pervious area to roughly 6.3% where 30% is normally required. Staff noted the developer submitted a parking study that estimated a peak demand of about 33 spaces and recommended approval with conditions tied to incentive points under the MBD code.

Architect Manny Rios responded to neighbors’ concerns and said he was willing to meet with residents to adjust the design. “I’m willing to meet with a representative of theirs in the hallway, exchange my business card, and see what kind of rapport we can establish,” he told the board, adding he wanted to “make everybody happy as much as we can.” (Architect: Manny Rios.)

Residents who live directly behind the proposed site urged the board to reject the project. Dalmar Flores, who identified himself as a homeowner at 270 West 50th Street, said the building would eliminate privacy for his children and neighbors and would worsen traffic and safety in a neighborhood with few exits. “I strongly oppose the construction of a 4‑story apartment building behind my home due to...privacy, safety, property values, traffic, and the overall character of our neighborhood,” Flores said during public comment.

Other speakers raised similar concerns about parking spillover, noise during construction and after occupancy, and the project’s scale next to single‑family homes. Board members asked the applicant to meet with neighbors and scrutinized the parking study, ground‑floor residential design and balcony placement; some members urged eliminating balconies facing the residential properties to improve privacy.

During deliberations the applicant requested a deferral to meet neighbors. The board debated motions to deny the deferral and later debated a motion recommending denial of the application to the City Council. Before the board completed final action on the merits, the applicant formally withdrew the application from the docket. The chair confirmed the withdrawal means no approval or denial was recorded and that any future submission will require fresh notice and posting to affected properties.

The withdrawal ends the matter for now but does not preclude a resubmission. Staff said neighbors within the statutory notice radius and properties posted at the site will be notified if the applicant files a new application. The architect told the board he would meet with neighborhood representatives before preparing another design.

Next steps: the applicant may return with a revised proposal; any new filing will be subject to the same public‑notice and posting requirements.