WALKERTON – Brockton’s dog park was years in the planning before a location in Lobies Park was selected for a pilot project that’s still underway. After two years, there’s still work to be done, and that work may involve a new location.
At the April 14 meeting of Brockton Council, several neighbours who live in close proximity to the current dog park were present to voice ongoing concerns. Heather Stark served as the spokesperson for the group.
She touched on a number of issues the group had listed in a letter sent to the municipality.
After first noting she has no problem with dogs – she loves dogs – and the neighbours all “like the idea of the dog park,” she said the Lobies Park location is not the right place for it.
In addition to flooding and fencing issues, she said, “There are many weekends we are not able to enjoy our property.” Issues include garbage left by dog park users, noise late in the evening, parking problems, people and dogs coming onto their private property, and attacks by unleashed dogs. She related how one neighbour was cornered by an aggressive dog and was forced to use his bike as a defensive shield. She also said she’s had loose dogs in her yard.
Stark concluded her presentation by saying, “It doesn’t make sense to spend more tax money on this.” Coun. Greg McLean commented on the broad base of concerns, and asked what is the prime one.
Stark made note of the safety concerns with fence blocking access, and the inability to enjoy their own properties. These, combined with the added frustration from not having had any input into the selection of the location, are concerning to the neighbours.
Coun. Mitch Clark noted he’d spoken with Stark and the others in the fall, commenting that this is a pilot project and it’s important to have all the pros and cons.
Coun. Steve Travale spoke of the “detailed” letter sent by the group. “I can understand your frustration,” he said. He commented that the information in the letter will help in the decision-making process.
“Your feedback is valuable,” said Coun. Tim Elphick. He said there “is a desire to have it (the dog park) in our community; the question is where.” He noted the dog park has been discussed since 2016.
Following the presentation, council discussed the staff report on the dog park pilot project. Council finally approved a motion to table the report, which will be brought back to council in May, with information that includes alternate locations.
One possibility that got quite a bit of support was East Ridge, possibly on land currently owned by the municipality and earmarked for a new arena at some future date. While this would not be a permanent site, it could buy some time for a decision to be made on location or ending the pilot project.
Colleen Gillis, director of community services, answered a number of questions from council, including the current status of the dog park (closed due to flooding).
In response to a question from Travale, she said the financial investment in the dog park so far has been modest – an estimated $3,000 to $5,000, for signage and temporary fencing – while there would need to be an investment of $50,000 to $60,000 for permanent fencing once the location for the dog park is determined, plus issues including that of accessibility that would have to be addressed.
Deputy Mayor Kym Hutcheon liked the idea of taking another look at the location at the top of Jackson and Colborne streets – the half-moon.
Gillis said that area was a bit too small.
Clark asked about the location at the end of Willow St. – no fencing would be needed; it could just be an off-leash dog trail.
He was told this is a “very high-traffic trail” that people might not want to share with dogs.
Travale raised the possibility of East Ridge as a possible location.
Elphick asked about the feedback on the park from users. Is there a demand? If not, and given the concerns expressed, perhaps “the conversation should end here tonight.”
Gillis said users were surveyed in 2025, and there were 53 respondents. Staff also monitored the dog park and noted there were on average 15-20 dogs per day, with an average of three or four in the park at a time.
Another possible site proposed by Travale was the Bradley School House.
A location in one of the hamlets was also proposed.
As stated in the report, a number of possible sites have been looked at over the years, in addition to Lobies Park, including land near the groundwater treatment area, the former Energizer property, areas behind the community garden, the halfmoon at Ben Park, land near the Gun Club and fish ladder, Cunningham Park and River Bend Park.
The report stated that it was challenging finding a site without issues in size, access, parking, safety, maintenance, flood risk, surrounding land uses and servicing limitations.
A dog park subcommittee was formed in 2017. In 2024, Lobies Park was chosen as the site for the pilot project, based on available open space, municipal maintenance presence, visibility, and access to seasonal washrooms and water.
While user feedback was generally positive, there were concerns expressed by nearby residents. Staff and council members met with the neighbouring residents in October 2025.
The report noted a number of the concerns expressed.
In response to flooding, the report noted a key concern is some neighbouring property owners use the dog park land for emergency access during floods.
According to the report, emergency services advised that “municipal parkland cannot be relied upon or considered an emergency access or emergency exit route for private properties during flood conditions.” However, staff have moved some potential obstructions, like picnic tables, and the dog park’s temporary fencing can be moved.
Noise and other concerns were also discussed in the report, which stated that staff will increase public education regarding hours of operation and etiquette through signage and social media. There could also be some site-specific design measures to mitigate noise.
A major concern is after-hours use of the park, and staff have recommended improved signage saying the dog park is closed at dusk, along with monitoring the site by staff.
There were complaints about lack of public consultation and notification. The report stated “more formal consultation processes should … be established at the outset of any future permanent recreational facility project.”
By Pauline Kerr, Local Journalism Initiative Reporter
Original Published on Apr 24, 2026 at 09:42
Recent Comments