When Coral Gables Planning and Zoning Board member Sue Kawalerski cast the lone dissenting vote on the University Station Rapid Transit District Overlay, her frustration was not just about the project. It was about the process.

Her question—“Are we doing this just because?”—cut to the core of a civic contradiction: If the city commission can overrule its own planning board, why have one at all?

The board had just voted 5–1 to recommend that the city move forward with a rezoning proposal allowing high-rise, mixed-use towers up to 120 feet on five parcels along South Dixie Highway, across from the University of Miami’s Metrorail station. The plan, championed by County Commissioner Raquel Regalado, is part of the broader Rapid Transit Zone (RTZ) initiative designed to promote denser, more walkable neighborhoods near mass transit.

But the conversation at the July 2 board meeting had less to do with whether this vision fit Coral Gables—and everything to do with whether residents have any meaningful say in how the city grows.

A system that bypasses deliberation

It’s easy to understand the discomfort. On one side are developers and county officials invoking buzzwords like “15-minute city” and emphasizing the need for housing near transit. On the other are residents who question the scale of the project, the likelihood of increased traffic, and whether local infrastructure can keep up. In between sits the Planning and Zoning Board—a body tasked with advising but often ignored.

Planning board members are appointed by the city commission to review development proposals, zoning changes, and comprehensive plan amendments. Their role is to assess long-term impacts and offer guidance rooted in both public input and planning expertise. But their votes are non-binding. The commission is free to override them—and frequently does.

In this case, the city commission had already voted in favor of the zoning overlay on first reading. The board’s vote, effectively, was a formality.

This is solely validation.

No brakes on a race car

Supporters of the RTZ overlay argue that Coral Gables must stay engaged to avoid worse outcomes. Under state laws such as the Live Local Act, developers can bypass local zoning altogether if cities refuse to act. That’s a sobering reality. But using that risk to justify every new project weakens the foundation of local governance.

If the city planning board’s role is merely to recommend—and its input can be dismissed not only by Tallahassee or the county, but by the very commission that appoints it—then the board is no longer shaping policy. It is absorbing blame for outcomes it does not control. That’s damage control, dressed in procedure.

This isn’t a debate between neighborhood preservation and urban expansion. It’s a question of civic integrity. Will Coral Gables chart its own course, or simply administer decisions made by developers, the county, or a commission that no longer heeds its own advisory bodies?

There is no denying that real estate drives the South Florida economy. But treating zoning as a one-way ratchet toward density—regardless of long-term consequences—is like building a race car with no brakes. What could possibly go wrong?

A path to relevance

This editorial is not a call to abolish the planning board. It is a call to empower it.

One option is to require a supermajority on the city commission to overturn board denials. Another is to require commissioners to explain in writing how and why their decisions diverge from the board’s recommendations. At minimum, the city should reinforce the board’s role in long-range planning—especially for projects that reshape entire corridors.

The University Station overlay may prove defensible. Building housing near transit, if enough people actually use it, is a smart policy. But as Kawalerski and others rightly pointed out, approving major zoning changes without a clear sense of how they fit into the city’s broader vision—its infrastructure, its identity—undermines public trust.

The residents of Coral Gables are not against progress. They are asking the questions any responsible city should ask: What are we building, for whom, and what are we losing along the way?

The Planning and Zoning Board should not be ceremonial. It should matter.