By Coral Gables Gazette staff

Coral Gables residents living alongside the site of the proposed off-leash dog park near the Coral Gables Branch Library are urging the city to pause the project, saying they were never notified before the Commission approved it on Nov. 18. Three letters submitted this week to the mayor, commissioners and city manager outline concerns about process, safety, design, and neighborhood impact, and ask the city to reconsider or relocate the project.

The letters come from residents on Riviera Drive and Cadima Avenue, two streets that border the open-space parcel selected for the dog park. Each states that the residents only learned about the proposal after the commission’s discussion and vote.

Concerns over noise, daily disruption and long-term maintenance

In one letter, Riviera Drive resident Jeff Wright wrote that he “respectfully but strongly oppose[s] this proposed location,” saying decisions that affect daily neighborhood life should involve “the voices of the people who will bear the day-to-day impact.” Wright listed concerns about noise, sanitation, traffic, property values, and the lack of a clear maintenance plan. He wrote that a dog park “will inevitably introduce persistent noise from barking and increased activity,” describing the potential impact as disruptive to neighborhood character. He also questioned who would handle ongoing “maintenance, waste removal, and enforcement of rules.”

Cadima avenue residents cite lack of notice and unequal buffer design

A second letter, from Cadima Avenue resident Jose Antonio Val Cohen, states that “the property was not posted,” no notice was sent to neighbors within 500 feet, and “there was no neighborhood meeting” prior to the Commission vote. He wrote that immediate residents “had zero opportunity to participate before the Commission discussion,” calling the absence of engagement a “significant oversight.”

Cohen also raised concerns about the draft design, noting that preliminary plans show a 25-foot landscape buffer on one side of the park but only a 5-foot buffer facing Cadima Avenue. He wrote that placing a dog-park fence with such a narrow setback directly in front of homes “contradicts the City’s own standards of beauty, uniformity, and neighborhood respect.”

His letter also cites the area’s existing congestion from the library and Youth Center and describes potential safety risks. He wrote that the block already experiences “heavy activity,” parking pressure, and tight sightlines, and that adding an off-leash facility could “create safety risks for the small children who live and play on this street.”

Abutting homeowners cite procedural failure

A third letter was submitted by residents whose home directly abuts the open space. Ted and Grace Ma, who live on Riviera Drive, wrote that the neighborhood is “shaken by an unexpected situation” and that they discovered the proposal only “after a resolution has already been adopted.” They stated that none of the immediate neighbors “received notice, postings, courtesy flyers, or any communication regarding the proposed dog park.” Their letter says this lack of outreach “removed the very people most impacted from the process.”

The Ma letter underscores concerns for toddlers and small children living on the block, calling the proposed location “serious risks that were not considered.” The letter notes that the parcel “directly abut[s] single-family homes,” rather than being separated by major streets or larger buffers. It lists impacts including persistent barking, odor, late-evening disturbance, loss of residential tranquility, and potential property-value effects. The letter also reiterates concerns about the unequal buffer in early conceptual designs.

Residents request a pause, notification and consideration of other sites

All three letters ask the city to postpone implementation, notify immediate neighbors, host a neighborhood meeting, and re-evaluate both the design and the suitability of the location. Several recommend exploring alternative sites that do not directly face or abut single-family homes.

City officials have not yet announced any changes to the project or the public process following the submission of the letters.

Supporters framed the project as widely desired by area residents

The comments by neighbors who oppose or at least ask the city to rethink aspects of the proposed park are in stark contrast to the discussion at the November 20 commission meeting, where the issue was put forth as one with almost unanimous approval.

At that earlier meeting, resident Mary Powell spoke on behalf of supporters and presented a petition signed by more than 225 neighbors, a figure that commissioners referenced repeatedly as evidence of broad community backing.

“This isn’t a divided issue,” Powell told commissioners. “It’s one where residents are showing extraordinary unity. They’ve asked for this, they’ve signed for this, and they’ve shown up for this.”

She said a centrally located dog park was the kind of quality-of-life investment “great cities make,” calling the proposal “the right project in the right place at the right time.” Powell also noted that more supporters had planned to attend but were unable to be present after the meeting time changed, saying some older residents and parents with children in sports had to leave.

Powell urged commissioners to vote in favor of a “permanent, thoughtfully designed off-leash dog park at this site,” calling the amenity a significant benefit for local families, dog owners, and surrounding neighborhoods.

Mayor emphasized unprecedented support and the effort behind the proposal

During the November 20 meeting, Mayor Vince Lago echoed Powell’s comments, saying he had “never seen so many people in support of one item” in his 13 years in office.

Lago framed the dog park as a solution to ongoing friction between residents who want more spaces to exercise dogs and residents frustrated by off-leash activity in areas not designated for it. “We’ve had this conflict,” he said, describing recurring complaints from both dog owners and non-dog owners about rule enforcement and park use.

The mayor credited Vice Mayor Rhonda Anderson, who sponsored the item, with engaging residents extensively and “bridging the gap” between competing concerns, comparing the effort to the city’s door-to-door outreach during the Alhambra Circle sidewalk project. In this case, however, a grassroots effort to inform the neighborhood of the impending dog park apparently did not include the next door neighbors to the proposed park.

The mayor highlighted the number of neighbors who attended the November meeting and said the project reflected what the neighborhood “really wants,” pointing to residents he recognized by name in the audience.