By Coral Gables Gazette staff

A group of roughly 15 to 20 residents who live closest to the proposed dog park across University Drive from the Coral Gables Library gathered Dec. 20 to organize their opposition and air frustrations over what they describe as a lack of due process in the city’s decision-making process.

The meeting was held at the home of Dr. Sara Cortes, who lives directly adjacent to the triangular parcel between Riviera Drive and Cadima Avenue. Cortes said every resident in attendance opposed the park. “Around 15 to 20 people, and nobody was in favor,” she said.

Commissioner Melissa Castro, who was invited by one of the residents, attended the meeting. Castro was absent for the November commission vote that approved moving forward with plans for the dog park, a decision made while she and Commissioner Ariel Fernandez had left the meeting which ran late due to a police officer memorial service earlier that day.

Castro said she already asked city staff to place the item back on the next commission meeting. “How do you approve a park without asking the neighbors, especially when it’s essentially in their backyard?” At last month’s meeting, dog-park supporters filled the commission chambers and presented a petition with more than 200 signatures. But residents living closest to the site now question how many of those signers actually live in the surrounding neighborhood.

Cortes said neighbors have begun circulating their own petition, starting with homes immediately adjacent to the park site and working outward. “We want to be very specific,” she said. “These are the neighbors who deal with the traffic, the parking, the library patrons, the youth center. Do you really want to add more strain to this area?”

José Antonio Val Cohen, who lives on the 500 block of Cadima Avenue with his family, said the meeting underscored how unified the neighborhood is. “Everybody at that meeting was on the same page,” he said. “We love dogs. Most of us have dogs. We use the park to play, to picnic with our kids. This isn’t about being anti-dog. It’s about location and quality of life.”

Val Cohen said he met with Mayor Vince Lago last week, who he said was under the impression that neighbors supported the park at the proposed location. “The mayor told me he thought the neighbors had agreed to this,” Val Cohen said. But that was not true, at least for the residents who live closest to the park, and will be most impacted.  

He added that the petition shown at the commission meeting gave residents pause, since the addresses have been redacted by the city clerk. When contacted City Clerk Billy Urquia explained that the clerk’s office blacked out addresses in “the interest of providing the requested records promptly and at no cost.” He said the clerk’s office could provide the addresses if it directed staff to go one-by-one and verify that the addresses could be provided, for a small charge that would cover personnel time.

 Still, residents who oppose the park are certain that those who did sign the support petition do not live closes to the park. “We had no idea where those signatures came from,” Val Cohen said. “My house is right in front of the park. I have coffee outside every morning. I know who comes and goes. If there’s already parking and traffic from people who don’t live here, imagine how much worse it will be with a dog park.”

Val Cohen went on to say that traffic and safety are among the biggest concerns, especially along Harlano Street and Cadima Avenue. “It’s a very quiet area,” he said. “You already have cars cutting through and speeding during certain hours. I don’t want my life to be going outside every day telling people they can’t park here or to slow down.”

Castro said she was struck by how many nearby residents had not been notified before the vote. “None of these residents were informed,” she said. “Some of the people who signed the petition don’t even live in the area, while all the immediate neighbors are opposed. That matters.”

She said she reassured residents that she would help bring the issue back for a fuller discussion. “I told them, don’t worry everything you’re saying, I feel the same way,” Castro said. “If this needs to be rescinded and go through the proper channels, then that’s what needs to happen.”

For Cortes, the issue is ultimately about process, not politics. “In the end, we’re all still going to be neighbors, whether you live a mile away or right next door,” she said. “We just want the process to be done correctly. If the city is going to make a decision that affects our daily lives, we deserve to be part of it.”

City clerk, attorney have yet to respond to question about public meeting

Neither Urquia or City Attorney Cristina Suarez have yet to respond to a question about the possibility of the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board can hold a public meeting for nearby residents who say they have not had a meaningful chance to express their opposition.

The board voted to direct city staff to ask the city clerk whether they could hold a special meeting with the public earlier in December. The Gazette contacted both the city clerk and city attorney more than 11 days ago, but no response on the question has been given as of press time.