A Manitoba judge has reserved his decision in a legal challenge brought by Granite Curling Club against the City of Winnipeg, after the club’s lawyer argued the city’s approval of a bylaw tied to a proposed housing development was “fatally flawed.” Court heard the curling club, which operates on city-owned land, learned in early 2025 that the city planned to subdivide the property into two lots—with its west parking lot earmarked for rezoning to accommodate a future 11-storey, 111-unit residential development. The club says the development would eliminate roughly 45 of its 80 parking stalls, which it describes as essential to its operational viability. The city has partnered with non-profit developer UWCRC 2.0 on the project, which is part of a broader push to accelerate housing construction and unlock $122.4 million from the federal Housing Accelerator Fund. The proposed bylaw received first reading in March 2025, but after drawing sufficient objections, it was referred to the Manitoba Municipal Board. The board ultimately recommended the city allow the bylaw to proceed to second and third reading—provided that, before any development permit is issued, the city work with the club to establish an “adequate parking plan in order to support the ongoing operational sustainability of the club, to the satisfaction of the Granite Curling Club” and relevant city department directors. City officials, however, advised council it could proceed with the rezoning regardless, arguing the board had no authority to impose a condition on a development permit and can only make recommendations in respect of the proposed zoning bylaw. “There has to be respect for cherished institutions and heritage institutions in the City of Winnipeg, and you don’t, simply because there’s federal funding available, … railroad this process through,” said James Mercury, the curling club’s lawyer. Mercury argued the court should quash the bylaw, pointing to a provision in the city’s charter at the time, that stated council must not pass a proposed zoning bylaw referred to the Municipal Board unless it “conforms to the recommendations” made by the board. He contended that council exceeded its jurisdiction by approving the bylaw without first ensuring an adequate parking arrangement was in place. “We assumed the city would do one of two things, and this is my submission to have two options: conform with the recommendation, or don’t pass the bylaw,” he said. “What they did instead was choose to manufacture a third option, which was selectively pick the recommendations mid paragraph that they liked, ignore the rest and pass the bylaw.” Mercury also argued the city acted contrary to another Charter provision requiring zoning bylaws to be consistent with applicable secondary plan bylaws. In this case, he said that bylaw was CentrePlan 2050, which calls on the city to explore the feasibility of redeveloping the parking lot adjacent to the Granite Curling Club in a manner that supports the club’s operations. He further argued the process violated “every basic principle of procedural fairness that one can imagine in administrative law.” Mercury said the club and its legal team were not permitted to make public presentations to council immediately before the final decision because city officials maintained the public hearing process had already occurred. “It is regrettable it has come to this point,” Mercury said. “On behalf of my client, they want to work with the city hand in hand going forward, and unfortunately, that has not happened. This is proceeding very, very quickly.” Arguing for the city, lawyer Kalyn Bomback said the parking question and the rezoning decision are separate issues. “The city does take the position that not only did council have the jurisdiction to make this decision but… it was also correct in the circumstances of this case,” Bomback said. She noted that council passed a separate motion immediately following the bylaw decision, directing the public service to work with the curling club on parking solutions as part of negotiations on a new lease agreement, which are currently on a month-to-month basis. “The city council decision was reasonable … It has consistently acted in good faith. It has consistently made efforts to work with the Granite Curling Club,” Bomback said. “The city has always intended to ensure that some kind of parking arrangement can be done to ensure the sustainability of the ground. There’s never been a dispute about that.” Bomback also noted that while the actions outlined in CentrePlan 2050 are not binding, the city has explored that feasibility and says discussions are ongoing. ‘An adequate parking plan’ Richard Mahé, the city’s land enhancement administrator, told reporters the city has proposed a parking arrangement that would provide a total of 70 dedicated parking stalls — a reduction of approximately 10 from the current configuration. The proposed layout would include a new on-street parking option on Granite Way with 15 stalls, 24 stalls at the east parking lot, a new vehicle approach with 11 additional stalls, and 20 stalls retained on the west parking lot. “I think it’s certainly an adequate parking plan... we feel (will) address their needs,” Mahé said, adding that those spots would not be shared with the housing development, which would have its own dedicated parking. Granite Curling Club secretary Christian Pierce, however, said the plan still isn’t adequate. “Those (stalls) don’t account for any during construction, which will be at least two seasons. We’ve gone back with the city on suggestions, and we haven’t heard any new updates on that,” he said. Pierce also raised concerns about whether some of the proposed stalls would truly be dedicated to the club, and noted the risk of tenants and guests of the adjacent development occupying spots intended for curling patrons. With construction potentially beginning as early as August, Pierce said the club may seek an injunction if that occurs before a court decision is issued. “We’ve asked the city not to proceed with the development until this (court) process is played out. They haven’t formally agreed to that, so the Granite will explore all options necessary if they start building,” he said. Manitoba Court of King’s Bench Justice Amiram Kotler said he hopes to deliver a decision in the fall.
