I am writing to you today because many of you reached out over the past several days—and especially today—describing frightening and upsetting experiences related to construction activity on the former Kanata Lakes Golf Course lands. I want to acknowledge, plainly and clearly, that what you are describing is serious, and that your concerns are valid.
I have received multiple reports from residents whose homes were shaking due to heavy machinery associated with the construction of a new access road on the lands. Several people told me they were caught completely off guard, had no advance notice, and had no opportunity to carry out pre-construction surveys or document baseline conditions of their homes. Some residents called in tears. That should never be dismissed.
I have also received numerous written concerns about the disturbance of mercury-contaminated soils, the potential for mercury aerosolization, and the risk that drainage patterns could be altered on lands that have historically functioned as a critical stormwater management system for surrounding neighbourhoods. Many of you correctly noted that restrictive covenants exist on these lands that prohibit disruption to drainage patterns. These are not abstract planning concerns—they go directly to public health, environmental safety, and the protection of your homes.
Today, an environmental professional engineer who previously provided expert evidence during the Ontario Land Tribunal proceedings wrote to City staff expressing serious concern that site disturbance and the importation of fill are occurring without the necessary soil quality data, and without addressing environmental conditions that were central to the Tribunal’s consideration of the site. He reiterated that disturbing soils without a full understanding of contamination presents unknown risks to neighbouring residents and the surrounding environment. I consider this correspondence highly significant. You can read his letter here.
I have also been advised by the City’s General Manager of Planning that the road currently under construction is not asphalt, but a geotechnical access surface, and that staff understood this access to be consistent with measures discussed previously to try to limit mercury disturbance. However, I want to be very clear: this explanation does not negate the impacts residents are experiencing, nor does it resolve concerns about vibration, soil disturbance, drainage alteration, or the lack of advance notice and precaution.
Separately, many of you are aware that the development proponents have recently sent strongly worded letters to community and municipal organizations, including the Kanata North Business Association and the Association of Municipalities of Ontario. I want you to know that these letters do not change my role, which is to advocate for you, to insist on transparency, and to ensure that duty of care and precaution are applied when people’s health, homes, pets, and the environment may be at risk. The links to the letters written by the developers’ proponents and my response to one of the letters, are below.
As your Councillor, I am taking the following steps immediately:
- I am bringing forward a motion on Wednesday related to the construction of this road and the impacts being reported by residents.
- I am continuing to press City staff on vibration impacts, environmental risk, drainage protections, and the authority to pause work if conditions warrant.
- I am ensuring that professional concerns raised by qualified experts are formally on the record and cannot be ignored.
- I am documenting, carefully and thoroughly, what residents are experiencing in real time.
I know this has been deeply unsettling. Please know that you are not alone in raising these concerns, and that they are being taken seriously. I will continue to update you as events unfold and as Council and staff respond.
If you are experiencing impacts to your home or property, please continue to document what you are seeing and feeling, and send that information to my office.
Thank you for taking the time to write, call, and speak up—especially when it has been so stressful to do so.
Sincerely,
Councillor Cathy Curry
Kanata North Ward
City of Ottawa
Letter from Minto’s and Morguard’s proponents to Kelly Daize (Executive Director at the KNBA)
Dear Ms. Daize:
We are writing in response to your February 3, 2026, newsletter, in which, as Executive Director of the Kanata North Business Association (KNBA), you urged members to contact the Premier of Ontario and Minister Fedeli in opposition to the approved redevelopment of the former Kanata Golf and Country Club lands at 7000 Campeau Drive.
As representatives of the project proponents, we find it deeply concerning that the KNBA – an organization dedicated to advocating for the business community in Kanata North – has taken such a firm stance against a development that is fully lawful, has been exhaustively reviewed and approved through due process, and will deliver much-needed housing to support the very workforce and economic vitality your association champions.
Your newsletter contains several significant misrepresentations of fact, raises unsubstantiated fears, and appears to disregard the binding decisions of independent tribunals and courts – core principles of the rule of law that underpin confidence in investment and business growth in our region.
These are not merely our assertions; they reflect the clear and repeated conclusions of authoritative bodies:
- In its March 2022 merits decision (OLT-21-001620), the Ontario Land Tribunal (OLT) explicitly found that the redevelopment “represents good land use planning,” “is in the public interest,” and is “consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and conform[s] to the policies in the City’s Official Plan.” The Tribunal further described the proposal as representing “good neighbourhood planning.”
- Despite sustained opposition, these findings were upheld through multiple appeals, culminating in the Supreme Court of Canada declining to hear further challenges.
- In its final order of January 27, 2026, the OLT confirmed that all prerequisites and conditions from the 2022 interim decision had been met, approved the zoning by-law amendment and draft plan of subdivision outright, and expressly criticized the City’s argument that the development would “never proceed” as “surprising and troubling.” The Tribunal cautioned against the imposition of unreasonable conditions intended to frustrate provincial planning objectives.
Contrary to the claims in your newsletter, the approved plan preserves approximately one-third of the site (more than 20 hectares in the latest revisions) as permanent public open space, including expanded parks, wooded areas, and natural features that will provide year-round community access and enhance local green infrastructure – far exceeding mere preservation of the status quo.
Regarding assertions of mercury contamination, flooding risks, and related environmental threats: these issues were thoroughly examined during the OLT hearing process, supported by expert evidence. The Tribunal determined that they are appropriately addressed and 2 mitigated through rigorous conditions of approval, in compliance with Ontario’s stringent environmental regulations. We remain fully committed to environmental stewardship and regulatory compliance throughout implementation.
While we value positive relationships with the Kanata North business community and recognize the importance of quality of life in attracting and retaining a talented workforce, we must all uphold mutual respect for independent adjudication and the finality of legal decisions. The OLT and courts exist precisely to resolve land-use disputes through evidence-based, impartial processes, and their rulings are binding on all parties.
We will continue to collaborate constructively with the community, City representatives, and stakeholders to ensure the development delivers high-quality homes for Kanata families while contributing positively to the broader neighbourhood.
In the interest of accuracy and fairness, we strongly urge you to communicate promptly with KNBA members to correct the record, clarify the settled legal status of the project, and refrain from disseminating further misinformation that could undermine public confidence. We remain open to constructive dialogue.
Sincerely,
Andrew Tamlin ClubLink
Brent Strachan Minto
Steve Grandmont Richcraft Homes
Cc: The Hon. Doug Ford, PC, MPP, Premier of Ontario
The Hon. Vic Fedeli, PC, MPP, Minister of Economic Development, Job Creation, and Trade His Worship Mark Sutcliffe, Mayor,
City of Ottawa Councillor Cathy Curry, City of Ottawa
My response to the proponents’ letter
Dear Ms. Colbert,
Thank you for your correspondence regarding the Kanata Lakes lands and for copying my office.
I want to be clear at the outset that while I acknowledge the finality of the land-use planning decisions rendered through the Ontario Land Tribunal process and the courts’ decision not to entertain further appeals, acceptance of those outcomes should not be misconstrued as endorsement of the redevelopment or as a withdrawal of Council’s previously stated public-interest concerns.
As you are aware, Ottawa City Council adopted a motion earlier this year—moved by me and passed by Council—that articulated serious and longstanding concerns regarding the urbanization of the former Kanata Lakes Golf and Country Club lands. That motion set out Council’s view that these lands have historically functioned as essential open space, formed a core component of the original planning framework for Kanata Lakes, and were reasonably relied upon by residents as enduring green infrastructure. While the Tribunal ultimately reached a different conclusion, Council’s articulation of those concerns was made in good faith, grounded in planning history, reliance interests, and the public interest.
Importantly, the concerns now being raised are not limited to abstract questions of land use. The subject lands function as a critical component of the stormwater management system serving surrounding neighbourhoods. Homes back directly onto these lands. Portions of the site are affected by documented mercury contamination, and residents have long been advised that disturbance of such soils carries a risk of mercury aerosolization—a toxic exposure pathway with potential implications for human health, pets, wildlife, groundwater, and downstream ecosystems.
Against that backdrop, the current construction-phase activities raise serious and legitimate concerns. Residents have reported heavy vibration affecting their homes, a lack of advance notice that would have allowed them to document baseline conditions, and anxiety regarding the disturbance of contaminated soils in close proximity to where people live, walk, and recreate. These are not matters resolved by zoning or subdivision approval; they are real-time public health, safety, and environmental issues that arise during implementation and demand careful oversight and precaution.
With respect to your request that the Kanata North Business Association “correct the record,” I would note that independent organizations are entitled to communicate with their members and elected officials about issues that affect their community. It is not the role of City Councillors to direct or constrain such communications, particularly where residents are experiencing tangible impacts and expressing reasonable concern.
My role, and Council’s role, is not to promote this development, but to ensure that:
- risks to residents, pets, and the environment are not minimized or dismissed;
- precaution and duty of care are meaningfully applied where contamination is present;
- stormwater and environmental functions of the lands are not compromised; and
- community members are treated fairly, informed in advance, and protected from avoidable harm.
I remain committed to constructive engagement, but also to continued scrutiny where public health, environmental safety, and community trust are at stake.
Sincerely,
Councillor Cathy Curry
City of Ottawa
Letter from the developers’ proponents to the President of the Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO)
Mayor Jones:
We are writing on behalf of the proponents of the approved redevelopment of the former Kanata Golf and Country Club lands at 7000 Campeau Drive, in response to the Association of Municipalities of Ontario’s (AMO) February 9, 2026, letter to the Attorney General of Ontario concerning municipal parkland, possession, greenspace contracts, and related court decisions.
As an organization dedicated to representing Ontario’s municipalities and promoting sound governance, it is profoundly concerning to see AMO lend its voice to a position that directly undermines a project that has been rigorously reviewed, approved, and upheld through the full spectrum of Ontario’s land use planning and judicial processes. Your communication appears to echo unsubstantiated claims about the erosion of municipal authority, historical “agreements” for perpetual greenspace, and the need for legislative overrides – assertions that not only misrepresent the facts of this case but also disregard the binding authority of independent tribunals and courts.
These concerns are not speculative; they are grounded in the unanimous determinations of authoritative bodies. In its March 2022 merits decision (OLT-21-001620), the Ontario Land Tribunal (OLT) explicitly found that the redevelopment “represents good land use planning,” “is in the public interest,” and is “consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and conform[s] to the policies in the City of Ottawa’s Official Plan.” The Tribunal also described the proposal as exemplifying “good neighbourhood planning.”
These findings were sustained through appeals to the Ontario Superior Court and Court of Appeal, with the Supreme Court of Canada declining to grant leave in 2025. Most recently, in its final order of January 27, 2026, the OLT confirmed that all conditions from the 2022 decision had been satisfied, approved the zoning by-law amendment and draft plan of subdivision, and explicitly criticized the City of Ottawa’s suggestion that the development would “never proceed” as “surprising and troubling.” The Tribunal cautioned against any efforts to impose unreasonable conditions that could frustrate provincial planning objectives.
AMO’s letter, by advocating for legislative changes to address perceived vulnerabilities in parkland possession, greenspace contracts, and court rulings – implicitly targeting outcomes like those in the Kanata case – raises serious questions about the organization’s role. As a collective voice for municipalities, AMO should champion the integrity of Ontario’s planning system, which vests decision-making in expert tribunals like the OLT precisely to ensure evidence-based, impartial resolutions free from political interference. To instead push for statutory amendments that would effectively nullify or circumvent these decisions is not only an affront to the rule of law but also risks eroding investor confidence and the predictability essential to economic growth across the province.
Contrary to any implications in your correspondence, the approved plan preserves approximately one-third of the site (more than 20 hectares) as permanent public open space, including expanded parks, wooded areas, and enhanced natural features that will 2 serve the community year-round – delivering tangible greenspace benefits while addressing Ottawa’s acute housing needs.
Issues such as stormwater management, potential contamination from historic site use, and environmental stewardship were exhaustively litigated before the OLT, with expert evidence confirming that they are fully mitigated through stringent conditions of approval and Ontario’s world-leading regulatory framework. We remain steadfast in our commitment to these standards.
While we respect AMO’s mandate to support municipal interests, we urge the organization to uphold mutual respect for due process and the finality of legal determinations. The OLT and courts are the mechanisms designed to resolve precisely these disputes, and their rulings bind all parties – including municipalities and their associations.
In the interest of accuracy and responsible advocacy, we strongly encourage AMO to review its position and communicate promptly with provincial representatives (cc’d below), the City of Ottawa, and any member municipalities that may have been in receipt of your communication, to correct the record on this matter. Continuing to propagate narratives that challenge settled law could undermine public trust in Ontario’s planning framework and the very institutions AMO purports to defend.
We remain open to constructive dialogue on how approved developments can align with broader municipal goals for sustainable growth.
Sincerely,
Andrew Tamlin ClubLink
Brent Strachan Minto
Steve Grandmont Richcraft Homes
Cc: The Hon. Doug Downey, PC, MPP, Attorney General of Ontario
The Hon. Rob Flack, PC, MPP, Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing
David Corbett, Deputy Attorney General
Martha Greenberg, Deputy Minister, Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing
His Worship Mark Sutcliffe, Mayor,
City of Ottawa Councillor Cathy Curry, City of Ottawa