(Dec 18, 2006)

There is much research happening at the University of Guelph that many people either don't know about or don't understand. But at the Guelph Turfgrass Institute it is clear to anyone driving by that the researchers there test grass, varying varieties of it which can be seen from the road. As with all research, it may not interest everyone who sees it, but it serves a purpose. That's why it is so concerning that the province may be ready to off-load the land as part of a bigger property sale to a developer. If this is what is at play, it seems sound planning is not at work here.

The turfgrass institute, which is part of the university, was established in 1987 in partnership with the Ministry of Agriculture and Food and the turfgrass industry. It is well known in Guelph, due in part to the visible nature of its outdoor test samples, and works to include the public in its operations. The university hosts an annual open house for its trial garden, located at the turfgrass centre, allowing the general public to take in 1,400 square metres of 500 varieties of plants. There is also the Guelph Turfgrass Institute Homeowner Hotline, which amateur gardeners can phone for lawn-care recommendations, as well as an online newsletter.

With talk of pesticide bans dominating council discussions in many municipalities, including Guelph, the work of the turfgrass institute is especially important. Ongoing research at the centre tests non-chemical pest control options and natural ways to treat grass diseases. A demonstration test site at the centre compares conventional chemical pesticides with non-chemical and other alternative treatments. This work is not hard for the public to grasp, and is research that has the ability to assist in municipal planning.

Public Infrastructure Minister David Caplan said last week the province is working with Guelph and the university to determine the best course of action for the property. If the proposed sale were to go through in the near future and development to occur on the property, with little to no public airing, there are serious questions about what the government considers sound planning.

Development, especially of the residential variety, is a touchy subject in Guelph. Over development was rolled out by many council candidates leading up to November's municipal election as something to be stopped. The turfgrass institute is one of only a handful of similar centres in North America. Council must make its thoughts known on this file as soon as possible, before it goes any further.

GUELPH (Dec 18, 2006)

The province is inviting an Ontario Municipal Board battle if it promotes land in Guelph's east end for residential development in an effort to wrench up its value, a city councillor believes.Ward 5 Councillor Leanne Piper noted the city has already said, through the exhaustive York District Land Use study, it wants to see the former Guelph Correctional Centre property used as employment lands.However in the legislature last week, Halton MPP Ted Chudleigh alleged the provincial government is planning to close the adjacent Guelph Turfgrass Institute "in order to sell the land to sweeten a real estate deal to a local developer." In a press release issued later that day he said selling the land for houses ignores its value for research.Agriculture Minister Leona Dombrowsky did not dispute Chudleigh's allegation, saying only that "no final decisions have been made" about what to do with the 150-acre turfgrass institute property on Victoria Road."I have a lot of concerns with that possibility," Piper said on the weekend. "It's all about money and short-term gain."Piper is sure the province would like to sell the GCC property, and perhaps the adjacent turfgrass institute lands, for residential development because the property is worth more that way."I've always felt the province and the city need to work together to do what's in the best interest of the community, and not what's in the best interest of the provincial coffers," Piper said. "The province wants to be able to maximize revenues from the land. They're looking completely at the value of the land, but the long-term value to the city is being forgotten."But she said if the province persists in an effort to have the land rezoned for residential development, despite the city's wishes, "it's just setting up an OMB (Ontario Municipal Board) appeal."Ward 1 Coun. Bob Bell is also unhappy with the province's rumoured intentions for the lands."I think the city should have a say, if the lands are sold, in what the end use is to be," Bell said. "I don't think it's a good idea for the province to be doing our zoning for us."How's the province going to get around the city if the city just determines it's not going to be residential?"Lise Burcher, who also represents Ward 5, said while she is aware the province has talked about selling the reformatory lands, Chudleigh's suggestion the turfgrass property could also go on the block "came as a real shock."Burcher called the provincially owned lands "a tremendous resource within our boundaries," and said she would strongly oppose proposals to turn them into subdivisions."I certainly would see residential (development) as a very narrow-view scenario," she said. "We can put houses anywhere."I would think there are far better opportunities we could pursue in terms of employment lands . . . or institutional sorts of uses," Burcher said.

Bell noted the land's proximity to nearby abattoirs and the city's wet-dry plant, as well as wetlands on the jail property, likely makes them unsuitable for houses.Instead, he suggested the properties could be ideal for institutional or light industrial uses such as financial institutions or high-tech manufacturing."It's one of the most unique large properties we have in the Guelph area," Bell said, noting the city should consider buying it from the province. "We need that bait if we're going to catch a big fish."

stracey@guelphmercury.com

Why isn't province talking to city hall?

SCOTT TRACEY

DARREN CALABRESE, GUELPH MERCURY A battle is brewing over suggestions the province might sell the Turfgrass Institute. Scott Tracey writes the province needs to be clearer about what it's considering.

(Dec 29, 2006)

This year came in with a turf war brewing in the city's north end, and appears set to go out with another one shaping up on the eastern side of the city.

This week, James Gordon, president of the Guelph Civic League, said his citizen's group will publicly oppose any attempt by the province to sell the Guelph Turfgrass Institute lands on Victoria Road.

In laying down the gauntlet, Gordon trotted out the best local example of us-versus-them land-use planning; the decade-long, but ultimately unsuccessful, effort to prevent Wal-Mart from setting up in Guelph's north end.

But Gordon noted, correctly, a major difference between the Wal-Mart battle and the potential fight over the future of the turfgrass lands.

"The whole Wal-Mart issue divided our community," he told my colleague Brian Whitwham. "A good percentage of people thought it would be a good thing for the community, and others thought it wouldn't."

True enough. And while it remains to be seen whether Wal-Mart's opening seven weeks ago will be good for Guelph, there is little to suggest a reported plan to sell the turfgrass lands would be anything but negative for the city.

The most obvious impact would be the loss of the Guelph Turfgrass Institute, or at the very least the loss of 15 years of research and development in the event the institute could be relocated.

Everyday citizens of Guelph might be able to swallow this loss if there was a viable reason why the Turfgrass Institute had to move. Whether scientists find a way to make better putting surfaces, after all, ranks significantly below lower property taxes, proper garbage collection and, if it snows, snow removal, in the minds of most citizens.

But the only reason so far offered to consider selling the lands is to pad the province's coffers by allowing it to get more money from the sale of adjacent jail lands. This does not meet the sniff test.

The other problem with the whole suggestion is how Guelph residents found out about it in the first place.

Halton MPP Ted Chudleigh alleged in the legislature recently the province was involved in a "secret land deal" that would see the turfgrass lands sold "to sweeten a real estate deal to a local developer."

"Nonsense!" I wish someone in government would have said.

Even a, "You're misinformed, kind sir," would have been OK.

But instead, neither Agriculture Minister Leona Dombrowsky nor Public Infrastructure Minister David Caplan denied the allegations.

"It is my understanding that no final decisions have been made with respect to the particular property," Dombrowsky said in her best non-committal politician speak.

Closer to home, Guelph MPP Liz Sandals said there have been "very, very preliminary" talks about the future of the lands.

Sandals explained the adjacent Guelph Correctional Centre and Wellington Detention Centre lands, which are also owned by the province and currently for sale, are not appealing to developers with the two empty jails sitting upon them. The MPP suggested the province might sell the turfgrass lands to recoup the costs of demolishing the large buildings.

Most in Guelph realized some time ago the province would very much like to not be in the former-jail ownership business. But since Chudleigh dropped that bombshell it has become clear few around city hall realized the future of the Turfgrass Institute was also in question.

"We are not working with the province to dispose of the Turfgrass Institute lands," chief administrative officer Larry Kotseff told council recently. "I want to dispel any rumour that we're working with the province."

That's encouraging for those of us who would like to see those lands stay just as they are. But it still doesn't explain how the province can apparently get well into discussions about what to do with a 300-acre parcel of land in the middle of Guelph without letting the city in on the talks.

"I'm wondering who they're consulting if it's not the citizens of Guelph," Councillor Gloria Kovach said recently. "And who is making these decisions?"

A darned good question that. Hopefully it, and others, can be satisfactorily answered without an expensive Ontario Municipal Board hearing.

Scott Tracey's column appears Fridays. He can be reached at 519-823-6068 or by e-mail at stracey@guelphmercury.com