By KEVIN BERGER, Local Journalism Initiative
Not wanting to defer a number of other projects currently in the works, City of Martensville councillors have opted to push a proposed community engagement around the local dog park until later this year.
At their February 17 meeting, Martensville councillors passed a motion to defer a consultation on the dog park until it can be potentially picked up by a new ‘Green Spaces’ committee, which is expected to be formed sometime in 2026.
Previously, councillors had received a presentation at their January 13 meeting from resident Pamela Warren around a number of issues at the city’s dog park, which is located just off of Range Road 3053 and is accessible via the pedestrian bridge behind Glenview Cove.
Warren indicated that motorized vehicles like snowmobiles and ATVs sometime travel through the park, potentially endangering local dog-owners. She also highlighted issues with cyclists riding in the park and confusing/contradictory signage.
She requested that council implement a ban on bicycles and motorized e-bikes within the park, install fencing around the area to prevent dogs from running away, establish a dedicated zone for small dogs to play in, and put up better signage about what is and isn’t allowed in the park.
At the February 17 meeting, City Manager Tanya Garost indicated that updating signage is going to be established at the park and will likely be in place by springtime.
However, before embarking on any other bylaw changes or plans to put up fencing, administration wanted council to sign off on a community engagement similar to what was done around a possible ban on ATVs in Martensville.
Garost noted there is actually nothing in their bylaws prohibiting ATVs, snowmobiles or bikes from travelling through the dog park.
She said they’ve also received some correspondence from residents indicating they like to ride their bikes through the park, either accompanied by their children or their dogs.
Putting up fencing would also be a fairly costly undertaking, with Garost offering up a ballpark figure of around $100,000 to install a fence around the entire park.
“It would not be inexpensive,” she emphasized.
With all that in mind, administration would prefer to have more public consultation on the dog park. Similar to the ATV consultation, the goal would be to establish open and transparent communication that gathers meaningful feedback, encourages community participation, and provides city council with a clear understanding of user needs and expectations.
The problem, however, is that this project is not in the city’s 2026 work plan and is not identified specifically in the 2025-2029 Strategic Plan.
If council wanted a consultation to move ahead, Director of Recreation and Planning Roxane Melnyk would have to spearhead the project, Garost indicated.
“There’s a bunch of pieces of work on her desk right now that would have to be set aside for this work to occur,” she said.
Mayor Kent Muench said he was generally in favour of fencing in order to improve safety and make for a better user experience, but this matter was not on the city’s radar until it was brought up last month.
“I’m not prepared to defer things that are already happening. And I’m also not prepared to hire someone else to do this work,” he said.
“I want to see it go forward, but I don’t know how that’s possible currently … There is a process of how we budget and how we work plan, and this is out of step with that.”
Councillor Darren MacDonald said this issue had two different parts: the fencing and the updates to bylaws.
Regarding the fencing, he noted that it was not in the five-year capital plan and mid-February was not the right time to be revising that plan.
On the bylaws, he said he had heard from a number of individuals on both sides of the issue when it comes to potentially banning bicycles within the dog park. For that reason, he was more in favour of a consultation on that point.
In response, Garost pointed out the city is intending to put together a Green Space Committee in 2026 that could look into the matter.
“We could certainly park it with the Green Space committee…for them to give us some recommendations on how they think we could start to move forward, or what they suggest to be priorities for it,” she said, noting there will be some community members recruited to that committee.
Other councillors indicated they favoured leaving the matter to the future Green Spaces committee.
“If we don’t have the time and resources, I’m fine to leave it for that committee to review and determine the best path forward without totally disrupting all the work we already had planned,” MacDonald said.