The issue isn’t pickleball. It’s planning.
Prince Edward County is once again finding itself arguing over the location of six pickleball courts. Unfortunately, that is the wrong debate. The real question isn’t whether pickleball deserves new facilities. It clearly does. Participation in the sport has exploded across Canada, and municipalities everywhere are investing in new courts to meet demand.
The real question is whether Delhi Park—the County’s largest and arguably most important urban green space—should be redesigned one project at a time, or whether the community deserves a comprehensive vision before another permanent decision is made. That distinction matters. Because once a public park is incrementally developed, there is rarely an opportunity to put it back together again.
The Delhi Park Community Connections Active Transportation Plan involved a landscape architect, a municipal task team, three public meetings, a survey, stakeholder sessions and youth engagement. It also considered environmental constraints, accessibility, safety, existing park uses and community priorities. The strongest public theme was reportedly to keep the park natural and honour Marsh Creek.
However, the County’s project is specifically an active transportation plan, not a complete park master plan. Its principal purpose is to formalize pathways, improve pedestrian and cycling connections, and make routes through the park safer and more accessible. The County describes a proposed network of approximately 5.8 kilometres of accessible paths and 0.8 kilometres of active-recreation trails.
A Park Without a Plan
One of the most striking observations made during the recent Environmental Advisory Committee meeting came from landscape architect Victoria Taylor. She wasn’t arguing against pickleball. She was arguing for planning. Her concern was that Delhi Park, a 31-acre public space serving multiple community functions, has no comprehensive master plan guiding its long-term evolution. That should concern everyone.
Municipal parks are among a community’s most valuable public assets. They support recreation, biodiversity, cultural heritage, mental health and community life. Decisions affecting these spaces should ideally be made within an overall framework rather than through a series of isolated projects responding to immediate needs. Without a master plan, each decision may appear reasonable in isolation while collectively moving the park in a direction no one intentionally chose.
Planning Before Building
The proposal also raises broader planning questions. Have all realistic alternative locations been evaluated? Would the fairgrounds better accommodate a facility that naturally generates noise, lighting and increased vehicle traffic? Have environmental, noise and wildlife studies been completed before selecting a location? Has the community been asked what it wants Delhi Park to become over the next fifty years?
These questions are not arguments against recreation. They are arguments for better planning. Good planning begins with understanding what a place should become before deciding what to build there.
The Cost of Incremental Decisions
Municipal history is full of examples where communities gradually transformed parks without ever making a conscious decision to do so.
A parking lot here.
A building there.
Additional lighting.
Expanded paved areas.
One project after another.
Each approved because it seemed reasonable on its own. Decades later, residents look back and wonder when the park they once knew quietly disappeared. This phenomenon is well understood by urban planners.
It is known as incremental land-use change. Rarely controversial in a single decision. Profound when viewed over a generation.
A Better Way Forward
This debate presents an opportunity rather than a problem. Before committing another permanent use within Delhi Park, the County could undertake a comprehensive master planning exercise that examines:
- recreation needs;
- environmental protection;
- active transportation;
- cultural heritage;
- biodiversity;
- accessibility;
- future population growth; and
- community priorities.
The result would not simply determine where six pickleball courts belong. It would establish a shared vision for the entire park. That vision could guide decisions for decades.
This Is About Governance
Municipal government works best when individual projects fit within a larger strategy. Too often, communities begin with projects and only later ask what the overall plan should have been. Delhi Park deserves the opposite approach. The question before Council should not be:
“Where should six pickleball courts go?”
It should be:
“What should Delhi Park be fifty years from now?”
Only after answering that question should permanent decisions about land use follow. Because parks are among the few public spaces a community holds in trust for future generations. Once lost, they are almost impossible to reclaim.