By Coral Gables Gazette staff
Although giving residents a first look at the preliminary design of a controversial proposed dog park across from the Coral Gables Library on University Drive and gathering their input was the specific purpose of a community meeting held Feb. 19 at the nearby War Memorial Youth Center, opponents of the park had a different idea.
Most of the roughly 50 residents who attended were against building the park in their neighborhood and used the meeting to make their objections known, even while acknowledging that the session was focused on design rather than reconsidering the decision itself. Many speakers opposing the park began by stating how close their homes were to the proposed site, with distances ranging from directly abutting the proposed park to nearly 1,000 feet.
Several said they were never notified prior to the City Commission’s approval of the park in November and had not received door hangers announcing the meeting they were attending, despite city officials saying notices had been distributed diligently.
The majority of opponents came from the University Green Neighbors Association, a recently formed nonprofit created to oppose the project, and wore green shirts to signal their membership.
Coral Gables Commissioner Melissa Castro, who recently sponsored an effort to repeal the commission’s approval last November of the dog park, attended the meeting.
A week earlier, the group filed a lawsuit seeking to block the city from moving forward with the park. They largely sat on the left side of the theater, while a smaller group of residents who supported the park gathered on the right.
Jose Val, a member of the association and the named plaintiff in the lawsuit, spoke last, criticizing both the project and the process that led to its approval.
“This is a collection of individuals and families, learning to ride bikes or skate, young families with strollers, wheelchairs rolling, people walking their dogs,” Val said of the green space. “We’re not here to debate whether a dog park is good or bad, that’s your business. But it becomes our business when you want to put a dog park in our neighborhood, and we clearly don’t want it.”
Val accused city officials of imposing “a disproportionate impact on a small group of residents” and said neighbors’ concerns were “repeatedly ignored.”
“We expect city staff to act transparently,” he said. “They didn’t even talk to us. They didn’t knock on doors.”
Opponents lay out objections
Other speakers raised concerns ranging from traffic and parking impacts to environmental effects and what they described as a flawed approval process.
Resident Bill Rivenbark, who said his home is about 125 feet from the site, questioned whether converting the parcel into a dog park would violate longstanding restrictions on its use. He said the property was designated decades ago for overflow parking serving the nearby library and community facilities and argued that removing that function could worsen parking shortages during large events and early voting periods. He also said he never received a door hanger notifying him of the meeting, and joked that even his dog objected to the dog park.
Attorney and former commission candidate Tom Wells criticized both the need for another dog park and the cost to taxpayers. He argued the city already had more dog park resources than comparable communities and warned that defending the recently filed lawsuit would add further expense. Wells suggested political motivations were driving the project, calling it “built for voter approval, spending city money for votes.”
Lynn Guarch Pardo, who said she lives about 840 feet from the site, questioned whether the city had conducted proper planning before approving the park. She said the city should first develop a comprehensive dog park master plan and ensure such facilities do not interfere with other community uses or abut residential properties. She noted that the city’s 2021 Parks and Recreation Master Plan did not identify dog parks as a priority.
Other residents raised concerns about safety, traffic congestion and environmental impacts. Lino Fernandez said the site sits along a busy corridor already serving the library, Youth Center and nearby schools. Sara Cortes, whose property line borders the parcel, said green space provides essential mental and physical health benefits and urged the city to find alternative locations. Maria Ross and Rose Bauer asked the city to consider the impact on wildlife, including foxes, birds and other animals that inhabit the area.
Proponents focus on community building
Although outnumbered, several residents spoke in favor of the project, emphasizing the social and recreational benefits of dog parks.
Ken Roberts, a resident who uses Salvador Park dog park, described how such spaces foster a sense of community. “We’ve gotten to know our neighbors,” Roberts said. “We’ve had dinners together, gone to baseball games, celebrated holidays. It builds relationships.”
Maggy Hernandez said dog parks improve quality of life and create social hubs for residents. Others noted that not all residents can easily travel to more distant dog parks and that the new facility would provide a convenient amenity within walking distance.
William Arthur, who said he is not a dog owner, nonetheless supported the project as a civic investment. “We can’t always think just about ourselves,” he said. “It’s an amenity that enriches the community.”
Civil discourse and design parameters
City Community Recreation Director Fred Couceyro opened the meeting by asking residents to remain respectful and civil. Despite strong emotions on both sides, the discussion remained largely orderly.
Deena Bell-Llewellyn, the city’s assistant director of Public Works for Greenspace Management, presented preliminary design plans showing two separate fenced areas for large and small dogs. The design preserves the site’s mature banyan trees and incorporates landscaped buffer zones with native plants along the residential edge to reduce noise and visual impacts.
The park would feature double-gated entrances for safety, landscaped fencing consistent with other city dog parks, and artificial turf in the small dog area. Existing trees would be protected, and invasive plant species removed.
Bell-Llewellyn said the design aims to balance recreational use with environmental preservation and neighborhood compatibility.
Couceyro encouraged residents to submit additional feedback via email (parksprojects@coralgables.com) and said the design will be posted on the city’s website for two weeks. The project will then proceed through approval by the city commission, with further review by city boards, permitting and bidding before construction. The final project cost has not yet been determined.
Lawsuit adds new dimension to dispute
The meeting came just one week after the University Green Neighbors Association filed a lawsuit in Miami-Dade Circuit Court seeking to halt the project.
The suit alleges the city violated its own zoning rules and failed to provide proper notice and due process before approving the dog park. It also claims the parcel is legally restricted to passive recreational uses and overflow parking and cannot be converted into an active dog park without additional approvals.
The lawsuit names the City of Coral Gables as the defendant and asks the court to invalidate the commission’s approval and block further development.
With legal proceedings now underway and design plans still in development, the future of the proposed dog park remains uncertain, but the intensity of community opposition and support suggests the debate is far from over.
This Post Has 34 Comments
Our commission should represent the citizens they serve. Those most impacted by their decision regarding the dog park were not notified prior to the approval of the dog park. We live close to the dog park and only found out about the park after the commission had approved it. I will also appreciate clarity on the cost to make the dog park and the maintenance of the dog park to taxpayers, which I am not informed of.
does it occur to you that some of the people they represent want the dog park? the land does not belong to you by proximity. it belongs to all of us. we all pay taxes, not just you. you want control of the plot by proximity, not by legal ownership. I do agree the process was flawed, but that’s Vinny Lago’s Coral Gables. Citizebs come last.
Respectfully, with no need to insult you, indeed the land belongs to all of us. Agree the process was flawed, but if you are not being affected by the proximity, then open your backyard to the dog park. I am supporting those that are very closely impacted by the dog bark next to their homes. As good neighbors we should also have the mindset to think of others.
next time when notices are left at the door, they should take a picture of the notice on the door as evidence that the people were notified..I guarantee you these people were notified and they just threw away the notices and just lie and claim they never recieved them…Next time take a picture and their claim flies out the door…People tend to lie a bit
Please be respectful and don’t call ethical individuals liars when they are saying the truth.
How do you know they are ethical?..Or are you just assuming they are ??…Show me one person that has never lied???…I guarantee you there are people that recieved the notices and are outright lying to sway the court…Please don’t be so sanctamonious..Some of the worst serial killers in history were mild mannered upstanding individuals with the darkest of secrets..There is an old saying “the brighter the picture,the darker the negative”…Just because your neighbor has a smile on his face doesn’t mean he’s an angel..Don’t be so gullible..
Who ate you and why do you always go against the residents of the Gables, protecting our horrible Lago, Anderson and Lara leadership?
There’s no conspiracy to lie about getting fair notice, which should be months in advance. The notified weren’t fully delivered, whether as a purposeful strategy or mistake isn’t clear. What is clear is that Lagos and his goons are making decisions for themselves using our tax payer money as essentially a campaign contribution to win votes. Coral Gables has fallen so far I no longer brag how nice it is to live here.
“Honesty is Best”….an excellent analogy.
By the way, when was the last time anyone representing “the city beautiful” bothered to check on Orlando Capote’s “health, safety or welfare” ?
Yeah, never.
Don’t get in their way.
No one’s safe.
Mr. Menendez, you should stick to things you know that are 100% accurate before you start calling people liars. I live a half a block from the proposed dog park and I can tell you with 1000% accuracy, that not one home on our street received a “door hanger” notice. I have a Ring doorbell cam, so I see everything.
Several of my neighbors on our street have stated that same thing. The City of Coral Gables NEVER provided one word or notice to the residents who are most impacted by this dog park, and I am an avid dog owner and dog lover. But I WILL NEVER take my amazing little Yorkie to any dog park.
The City of Coral Gables has FAILED the residents that pay their salaries!!! Gone are the days of honest, respectful elected City leaders with integrity.
Now our elected leaders try to sneak in things to a vote before the residents know anything about it. They know the process; they choose not to abide by it.
So, when you start calling people liars without knowing the REAL truth, please go look in the mirror because the only one lying here is YOU!!!
I’m surprised that I, and so many of my fellow Harlano Street residents, were caught out by the sharp-eyed (& equally sharp tongued) Mr. Menendez. It was not easy getting so many people to claim they’d never received the door hangers from the city. Some would say it was like herding cats, but that probably doesn’t apply here…
I’m reminded of a famous expression from a very popular TV show, Mr. Menendez: “What a Nimrod!”
Jose, Thank you for your comment. I was on the fence, but your candor has convinced me to formally oppose the construction of the dog park.
As an owner & resident on Camilo Ave, I, too, can attest that we received zero notice from the city regarding the proposed dog park. We are fed up with the city continuously ignoring our voices. The city fails to mage traffic on our street in its existing condition. Following the construction of the speed bump on Aledo Ave, the speeding and cut through traffic on Camilo has become unmanageable and unlivable. In spite of 9 children living on the street between LeJeune and University and countless events of drivers nearly hitting children, the city has done NOTHING. The city created the problem and has failed to propose any solution – Why in the world would we have confidence that the city can manage the additional traffic generated by the dog park when they fail to manage it in its current state?
This, of course, is in addition to the wasted tax dollars, environmental concerns, noise pollution, and noxious odor that will result from the construction of the proposed dog park – but I digress.
Jose Menendez, it has been my experience that people who always think others are lying, are liars themselves.
As to your comment that you are “reacting to ignorant people that blame others with no logical or tangible evidence of wrongdoing”, then you must 1. Not be paying attention, 2. Need to go look in a mirror so you can recognize “ignorant people”.
I wonder if your name is actually Jose Menendez.
That is libel Mr. Jose Menendez. This is uncalled for and a lack of respect. Go watch the meeting we had show of hands for those who did and did not receive the hangers. If you listen to the arguments with attention you’ll see we did our homework. All you are doing with these inflammatory comments is calling more attention to the issue. You clearly did not listen
It is a sad day in our city when residents press a lawsuit against our own leadership. Jose, I doubt seriously that all these people received a notice and threw it away. Who are you protecting over and over again? Lago, Anderson and Lara have shown no regard to the citizens of the Gables and have disrespected us over and over again. Not disclosing facts about your involvement with anyone developing an area in our City like the Garden of the Lord shows you do not belong in any position within our City. This dog park needs to be out of our neighborhoods. It is not your home, investment or neighborhood. I am so sick of these 3 autocratic leaders that I pray someone recalls every single one of them. You need to be out of our City.
Ohhh the horror of a dog park..All our leaders are trying to do is make use of a useless area to benefit our faithful companions…By the way I was born in Coral gables and lived here all my life and seen it grow…Growth is unstoppable, no matter if you like it or not..I’m sick and tired of you people blaming Lago and Rhonda for the developements and growth happening in Coral gables..Its obvious you people don’t look at the “why ” its happening…Blame Covid for the overdevelopement..Perhaps you didn’t realize the amount of people from around the country that have moved and are moving to South Florida from california and New york due to the ridiculous policies and (taxes) of their local and state governments…Lago cannot stop developements..You are blaming the wrong guy…You say that I’m protecting someone??…I don’t need to protect anyone…I’m reacting to ignorant people that blame others with no logical or tangible evidence of wrongdoing..A witch hunt..No matter who was mayor you would have the same thing happening..Get your head out of the sand and see the bigger picture…
Wow, are you for real? You need to zip it because nothing you have to say has any meaning to us. It’s always the blame game without realizing who has brought down our beautiful city. There should be no dog park next to homes. We do not need the increased traffic, people coming to our streets from other places, npise, cost and fleas. You support a dog park? Then open your backyards for one.
I fully agree this has become an autocracy. I’m happy to sign on to a recall. The city has been in decline from a livability standpoint under Lago.
My concern is the cost for the dog park and the maintenance of it with Tax Payers money! Why not only put some benches in the area for the use of the entire neighborhood! The children, dogs, old people can enjoy the are and build new friendships!!!
Totally agree. Let’s listen to the taxpayers, because it is our money.
A Dog park? So, what has always been a pastoral green space gets a black fence that will be a joyous place for dogs & owners from wherever, not just residents of Coral Gables. A dog lover myself, I steer clear of the designated parks because I’ve witnessed dog fights in Coconut Grove – note: I drove into the Grove to check it out. My own small dog was rushed by a much larger dog off a leash – I was terrified and furious. My dog and I often walk past the dog park on Venetia, but we won’t go in when larger dogs are there. Has anyone considered that dogs, human babies, and senior residents aren’t always compatible? Not to mention that poop bags aren’t “cleaning” poop off the grass, and the smell of dog urine, particularly in summer, is disgusting. The idea of a park with benches, indigenous flowering plants, narrow paths, and discreet benches is far more inviting for all residents. Dogs on a leash can share the space, but it should be a peaceful place for all living beings.
Amen.
👍👍👍👍
The city does not enforce its own code. Scooters, ebikes, bikes and skateboards imperil pedestrian’s life in Miracle Mile and Ponce de Leon continuously in spite of its being forbidden by city code. But there is no enforcement.
Having more and better spaces for our dogs is essential. A dog park where we can finally let them run off-leash near home is important. Families have changed, and so has the understanding of how important these spaces are for creating new ways of communities.
Then open your backyard
“The claim that the city needs ‘more and better spaces for dogs’ isn’t just unnecessary, it’s borderline absurd. As a dog owner, I actually laughed out loud reading it, assuming it was satire.
We already have miles of sidewalks and expansive public parks perfectly suited for leashed walks. My dog is perfectly happy with the infrastructure we already have, and I, for one, don’t want to harm the people living there. It’s antithetical to civil values. Local government exists to improve the quality of life for everyone, not to subsidize niche amenities for a specific group of pet owners. Using public tax dollars to carve out exclusive zones for dogs isn’t ‘progress’; it’s a waste of resources that should be used for the entire community, not just some singular dog owner who thinks everyone’s tax dollars should be used to benefit him (no matter the quality of life stolen from others).
Use your back yard or put it in your neighborhood
There is green space owned by the City of Coral Gables beside City Hall and the Farmers Market with no adjacent houses. If it is so critical to have (and pay for) another dog park in Coral Gables, then put it there so that all of the residents with dogs who live in the Miracle Mile high-density area (e.g., 18-story Regency Parc) will have a close dog park to walk their dogs and bond with their neighbors. Having a dog park for residents owning homes with fenced-in backyards who do not want the dog park makes no sense. Resident lawsuits are a hallmark of a Lago-controlled Commission – WAWA and now the University Green Neighbors Association. WAWA cost @ $556,000. And here we go again. When Lago’s PAC sends out emails about somebody else on the Commission misusing City money, it is intended to distract from the enormous waste that we suffer under Lago’s rule. Maybe he could get his PAC and real estate developers to contribute money to the City rather than to his re-election campaign. We are only 10 months into Lago’s new reign over the City, and residents are suing. Let’s see if he wastes more of our money suing the Coral Gables War Memorial Youth Center Association, Inc.
No one has mentioned the fact that your property value will go down, if a “Bark Park” is put in your backyard. I don’t think many prospective buyers would buy a house next to a dog park. Would you, who are in favor of this park ??
MG,
Rhonda Anderson says Bark Parks will increase property values. Thank you for your common sense comment. I wouldn’t buy a home adjacent to a Bark Park, and obviously neither would you. Maybe she would…
Dogs are getting way too much attention.
I have not been following the Dog Park process until recently… has anyone suggested utilizing a portion of the youth center fields? It has dedicated parking, and is already fenced in.
Use the Youth Center
Dedicate a portion of the youth center fields as a dog park. It currently has parking and fencing.
I truly don’t understand this city leadership’s obsession with dogs. Too many people have them unleashed as is. I don’t want to be a victim of a pitbull attack