Guelph to ask province to step in over rezoning debate for land near Kortright Waterfowl Park land

An 8-hectare parcel of land near Niska Road in Guelph, Ont. was photographed in Dec. 2025. (Dave Pettitt/CTV News)

Guelph’s city planning committee heard impassioned pleas from some members of the public who want to see a 20-acre parcel of land redesignated and protected as green space.

The land at the heart of the debate is part of the Niska Land Holdings. Although the overall lands include the former Kortright Waterfowl Park, the specific parcel of land advocates were speaking about during Tuesday’s meeting is found south of Niska Road and east of Pioneer Trail. The city designated that land for residential use in 2012 and it is currently owned by the Grand River Conservation Authority (GRCA). It has been used as an agricultural field for decades and is not open to the public. The land was used to support the Kortright Waterfowl Park by generating revenue through agricultural leasing opportunities.

In January, the City of Guelph and the GRCA announced they were working on an agreement that would allow the city to buy 126-acres of land including the northern and southwestern parcel of the Niska Land Holdings, but the 20-acre parcel of land was not part of that consideration.

However, many advocates worry about what will happen to that smaller portion of land if it remains under its current residential use designation. They urged councillors to redesignate the area as green space and open park land.

However, city staff noted that even if the redesignation was granted, it does not guarantee a set future.

“Redesignating and rezoning the land would not result in the transfer of ownership of the Subject lands to the city. Therefore, the proposed redesignation and rezoning does not impact the City’s parkland inventory,” a report by city staff said.

The report also noted that if the city went forward and redesignated the lands without first completing a study and obtaining a request from the owner, the GRCA, the decision could be appealed through the Ontario Land Tribunal (OLT).

Staff recommended refusing the proposed redesignation.

“Site Specific redesignation and rezoning should also only occur with consent of a property owner,” the report said.

Dozens of delegates appeared during Tuesday’s meeting, urging the city to go forward with the redesignation anyway. Many spoke about the importance of maintaining green spaces and parkland and about their strong desires to protect the adjoining Kortright Waterfowl Park lands.

GRCA letter

A letter, sent to the city from a legal team working on behalf of the GRCA, expressed concern about the city’s choice to consider rezoning the land.

“Although the GRCA is not driven by land values or revenues in the same manner as a residential developer, the expected sale proceeds from the sale of the Parcel [of land] for residential development would be of significant benefit to the watershed for, amongst other things, future flood management infrastructure needs, purchase of ecologically significant lands, and capital maintenance of existing flood and erosion infrastructure,” the letter read, in part.

The legal representatives said if they city continues to have a keen interest in the land, they could offer to buy the parcel at a fair market price.

The letter also said if councillors decided not to accept the staff recommendation to refuse to redesignate the property, the GRCA “reserves its rights to address any such action by all legal means at its disposal including before the [OLT].”

Decision

After the delegations had their say over the course of more than 6 hours, and following a brief recess, Councillor Cathy Downer put forward a motion that would withdraw the application to redesignate the land and to, instead, direct staff to send a letter to the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing and invite the province to meet with community advocates to consider a provincial rezoning decision for the lands.

“There’s a lot of history here, but today we’re dealing with a land use decision that doesn’t include the history of all of the things we’ve been talking about here because that’s not in consideration. If this was appealed to the OLT it would be not part of their consideration. They would be looking at planning rationale,” Downer said. “If anybody’s been following the OLT lately, there is a significant risk that we would lose that completely.”

She also noted the city could take on significant financial risk if an appeal was made.

There were also concerns about what could happen to the tentative agreement to buy the Kortright Waterfowl Park lands if the relationship between the city and the GRCA soured.

“We also have the risk of losing the 126 acres of which includes the original Waterfowl Park and the protected lands on the south side and the field that could be playing fields,” she continued. “To me that it too significant a risk for these 20-acres on the other side.”

Councillor Dan Gibson echoed her concerns about the risk the city could take on if it rejected staff’s advice.

“I wanted to acknowledge everyone who’s delegated tonight. I don’t think any of us take your comments lightly. I think we understand the desire of the community,” Gibson said. “Looking back to 2012, I hope and wish that most of us look back and wish [the decisions to rezone to land for residential use] had been different, but they are what they are. I think that it’s important that there’s a different channel for this advocacy. I’m hopeful that we can make our way with the province.”

Councillors voted unanimously to accept Downer’s motion.