March 18th, City Hall showcases how to try and save face while controlling outcomes with voting

The Outcome of the Public Meeting of the City of Greater Sudbury Council’s Planning Committee…

A vote to give a second consideration to the design of Dalron Subdivision, was not supported by Council’s Planning Committee.

More time for Council to consider if a safer and ultimately better design could be found, was voted down by three of the five Councillors (P.F/no, R.L./no, B.L./no, J.L-A./yes, F.C./yes. Those who voted no, saw no issues with the subdivision, as it was recommended by City Staff in the report put forth by Wendy Kaufman
Planning Services Division. Those who voted yes, saw that there was a need to give the plan of subdivision more time to explore some alternatives.

Councillor R.L of the Committee was seemingly frustrated with the fact that the Public Consultation could potentially remain open and potentially lead to the further adjustment of the plan of subdivision to address issues raised by the feedback from the community. ( mainly about the safety of allowing the limited design of the Foresdale connection ) As we tried to make it clear and evident in all our reports and emails and feedback that the design was not safe, the community’s consultations were futile in getting through to the City and Dalron’s agent, Tulloch, represented by Kevin Jarus. Jarus’ insistence that they knew what was best, and what was good design and planning, was presented with little to no regard for what was brought up.

Councillor P.F. went as far as to say that the families of Forestdale deserve to have a through-way, to serve as a secondary route, even though, we were offering an alternate view point of a possible new design that included a fire-road access, which they all seemingly ignored, (for now). Besides, we haven’t had that secondary access for over 40 years, so why would access as a full through-way be justified like that now. Just ridiculous Councillor P.F.. Save the Cities $$$ now, like you campaigned on, by not insisting on costly infrastructure that will set the City up for Claims of liability, and build long steep ramping roadways that will be prone to terrible winter conditions, and super high maintenance to prevent hazardous driving condition (seeing as that northern part of the proposed road allowance and Foresdale extension, would be a steep and icy roadway that gets little Sun in the winter.

So long as Forestdale is slated to become a full through-way to the future developments that would also be a connection to a divided highway, at Maley Drive Extension, this design is clearly bad planning by the developer and the City.

And so much for ‘Community Safety’ and their so-called ‘good planning’. So many points and notices were given by people from the community commenting on this, that it was far more than just clearly a hazard to connect Forestdale, it was a prime example of a bad planning decision by City Staff, Developer, and Committee to approve it.

And just as we had questioned in our article that questioned whether Council would be able to look past these safety issues raised, they did exactly that, and said “Public Comment has been received and considered and had no effect on Planning Committee’s decision as the application represents good planning.”
https://pub-greatersudbury.escribemeetings.com/FileStream.ashx?DocumentId=52813

Of all the feedback, given, none of it had any effect on Planning Committee’s decision

Here is a list of the feedback they received just on this round, let alone the feedback already given over the past decades.

The City Staff Report, also looked past all these concerns, and pushed for a recommendation on the plans:
https://pub-greatersudbury.escribemeetings.com/Meeting.aspx?Id=664130d7-305b-4856-a14e-fe9d6404d55e&Agenda=Agenda&lang=English&Item=29&Tab=attachments

See the Dalron Royal Oaks Subdivision Report to be discussed in it’s shorter version here

The report provided a recommendation regarding an application for rezoning and an application to redraft the existing draft approved Royal Oaks/Nickeldale plan of subdivision and update where necessary those conditions that together form the draft approval that is applicable to subject lands.

So from the perspective of the City’s duty to consider public well-being, safety and benefit, with this vote they have tried to close the book on the Public Feedback, and now it will be up to the Developer to proceed with development according to this latest redraft of the Plan of Subdivision, having been rubber stamped by Council for the go ahead.

This is not to say that Dalron, can not, or will not consider alternate designs as they begin to really move inwards onto the lands as they indicated that they are actually good to go either way ( a Cul de Sac or open through-way) on Forestdale.

In a very strong point, one of the residents simply stated, that in the City’s report it was said, that topography deemed it necessary to see a cul de sac on Street ‘B’, but the topography of the Forestdale top area, did not…?

This was very good point, but, good points about design and safety, seemingly made no difference in swaying the dug in Council’s ultimate position.

They further blatantly used a site specific policy against cul de sacs, from OP Section 20 (applicable to South End Sudbury only), but did not consider the necessity of Section 20 stipulation for full comprehensive Site Concept Plans. And that they said that the new plan which has that Street B cul de sac, that’s Ok, but a unique new one that can be better plowed with a fire road access to add a second emergency corridor, on Forestdale was not OK (nor was it to be considered by extending some time to the study of it’s validity)

Furthermore, the fact that the allocated green space in the new plan was ok as natural parklands, but deemed not suitable to the full public and perhpas not ideal for the primarily Seniors geared residential developments at 1500 block Montrose. The City’s adherence to the Design of Public Spaces Standard of the AODA pointed to by City Leisure Services, should have had the effect of a reconsideration of where and how those paths and inter-links could be better located, but that too was also not considered further.

Council basically played their position, and basically showed us all how Council works in this City; it doesn’t really care to discuss its decisions and finding with the public. They just want the public to think it has a say, but that say only goes so far as the City says it goes.. basically nowhere

And the City says, safety issues and issues of how the subdivisions could be designed better is really up to them, and the developer, and what they public says has “no effect on Planning Committee’s decision “.

So there you have it.. many years of effort trying to inform the public of what is going on, and years of public feedback in Sudbury, by the community of people who are living in and around the areas to be developed, goes to to the City, and has no effect, except to make the Councillors eager to close the public consultation.

For more information regarding your voicing of concerns, and/or objections, an opportunity to speak to the Members of the Planning Committee, and how to submit comments, you can see by this situation and outcome, that as much as you speak up in Sudbury, good luck in trying to speak truth to what they perceive to be in themselves their embedded power to control the outcome, regardless of what you say.

And some friendly advice to the citizens of Sudbury, if you have concerns about safety for your children on poorly routed street design, or you have an issue with designs that totally lack a balance of residential lot and road fabric, with public spaces and livability, and you see any value whatsoever of retaining any established ecological green space, make sure you find an economic and monetary angle to it, because, as Dr. David Robinson, put it, there is one, but you need to be able to see it from the eyes of an intelligent and astute individual like him, to know what it is.

That’s that. However, we are going to continue our quest to find something good in the future of Sudbury planning, and like panning for gold in the Vermillion, maybe a small speck of it will one day be found.

If you have any constructive thoughts and ideas of how we can design one, great new Subdivision in Sudbury, please send them to bethecommunity at our gmail address will be happy to receive them and showcase them, as alternatives to the present designs.

And if you want your feedback to be appended to some agenda, as a pdf that no one will read.. and nothing to be considered as it should…

Then you can try what we used to advise as the direct public feedback to the City Staffer who is responsible for the file, as it was here given to please phone or email, Wendy Kaufman, Senior Planner, Planning Services
at 705-674-4455 ext 4318 and raise your concerns
and / or
Submit a letter / email to
[email protected].
and
[email protected]

and
‘CC’ing the members of the Planning Committee, might get you a question or two, raised, and then, defeated by the Council’s easy sense of no accountability to it whatsoever…

[email protected]

The Plan as it stands, as of March 18th, 2024 without any Concept Plan for the Montrose North section, and without concern for the Safety of your families on Forestdale, as it pertains to the risks and hazards associated with significantly increasing the traffic up and down this particularly limited design of roadway, as the City Council deems it good planning to send more traffic through it.

New Dalron re-draft of Royal Oaks Nickledale Plan of SubDivision March 2024

Jump to the Zoom Audio stream zoom meeting with Dalron Rep Kevin Jarus of Tulloch Eng.
Jump to read the re2021 Letter to the Community
Jump to current Dalron Nickeldale Site Plan of Subdivision
Jump to issues with Green Space Deletions
Jump to issues with Traffic Impact no-Study and Connection to Maley Ext Concerns
Jump to issues with Promises made with the 2014 Villages of Montrose Conceptual Master plan

Our Good Ol’ Community feedback as was given, and not considered

*** The Official Plan for Greater Sudbury states..

1.3.1 A Healthy Community

” It is a Council priority for Greater Sudbury to be a Healthy Community offering a high
quality of life to its residents.

The City recognizes the link between the physical design of communities, health and
quality of life. ”

***
The Provincial Policy Statement (PPS), issued under section 3 of the Planning Act of May 1, 2020 states “Long-term prosperity, human and environmental health and social well-being should take precedence over short-term considerations.”

***

With many such subdivision proposals things can change. It seems that ‘our’ subdivision plan is unfolding and it leads to perhaps the situation where we lose near every part of what is on that private property owned by the developer, but so far it has been kindly granted to community activated ecological greenspace use. We are grateful for this access and we know that change happens, we are not opposed to development per say… A design of the subdivision that is perhaps able to better integrate some of these livability features and ecological highlights and natural features that exist in this space just below the boundary of Forestdale Drive’s cul de sacs would be greatly appreciated.

The Provincial Policy Statement, issued under section 3 of the Planning Act of May 1, 2020 states “Long-term prosperity, human and environmental health and social well-being should take precedence over short-term considerations.

And this why we have to begin to address the issues with the design and liveabilty of proposed subdivisions, and measure the true impacts their design would have on the existing and surrounding neighborhoods .

The current plan has deleted near all the longstanding community activated greenspace and it’s embedded multi-use trails, and completely removed the existing ecological buffer zone.

And this is to be expected to a large degree, when we are looking at a plan of subdivision on it…

And we are aware that a complete ecological green space deletion, in itself, is by all measures, not ideal design, and, in some ways that negatively affects the well-being of the community.

However.. there is some green space allocation potential in it, and we would truly appreciate a chance to examine it careful with the developer in a very rational and open way, so as to limit the negative effects of its entire deletion, and perhaps find a very wonderful way to maximize the benefit from the spaces and places and connectors, that we could stitch into the plan.

Completely unacceptable community design is devoid of all features that would help enhance the health, well-being and livability of the community, but it is our hope that ideal design can become more foundational in the view of the developer, and even in the principles of the Official Plan of Greater Sudbury.

Our intention with the re2021.com site is two-fold:

To better help direct the community to share their living experience and view of the current iteration of the plan, as a form of beneficial feedback to City Staff, (Alex Singbush and Wendy Kaufman, Department Heads and Staff, and ultimately to Council’s Planning Committee as well. But really, its a conversation that is being shared with the Developer.

As we began this journey the over-arching concerns included issues with the following aspects:

1. LOSS OF ALL the LONG-STANDING COMMUNITY ACTIVATED GREENSPACE / and MUTI-USE TRAILS

We were concerned about losing every bit of that activated greenspace. The deletion of an ecological space that buffers, and connects our community, and contributes to our community health and well-being, is a considerable concern.

This greenspace has been looked upon by the community as a great natural space, and we tried our best to keep it maintained and stewarded (activated) for decades.

More greenspace and access to the walking trail was promised to buyers in the Villages of Montrose development.

We realize how much activated greenspaces such as this, is a very important feature in a neighborhood.

When an activated and naturalized greenspace that can be used for walking, hiking, biking and family outings is locationed, ideally, it serves as an ecological support buffer, but it can also serve as a socially integrative connecting space/corridor between an existing community or neighborhood, and any new builds that woven with it, as great design.

As such, we do not yet actually see the perfected allocation for the any% parkland in the proposed new subdivision’s plan. To be perfectly locationed, or woven integrally into the plan, it requires a slight modification of perspective, but we are very sure that it definitely pays back dividends to the developer in terms of their excellence in design.

However we also believe that it is something that we can evolve over time if we continue to work towards it, together. Good things happen when the right modes and opportunities coincide.

For decades already, the community has been grateful to access, use, stewarding and maintaining the southern most area of the proposed building site where this existing forest walking corridor is tread in. But we understand that sometimes even then, perhaps, the ecological corridor is not in the best place, as per the true exploration of the bioregional features of the site. And, we completely understand that a particular design is a continuous balancing of site specific design constraints or limitations imposed by factors beyond just an appreciation and desire for appropriate design, and community livability, and we would like to support the further exploration of it’s potential to inform the eventual development.

The developer’s view of design parameters are understood to be greatly influenced by expectations, costs, and also conformities, to City requirements and policies.

Therefore, we would like to ask that the parkland (greenspace) allotment; whatever the developer deams to be in the best design and location, be explored with along with a focused community advisory panel, that is able to think through the current best design, and perhaps tweek it just perfectly to achieve that perfect balance that satisfies the highest potential for the site development within the balanced and rational consideration of all aspects a developer has to contend with, when building such an involved project.

Also we ask that the developer and City embrace the aspect of community ability, to steward (activate) such green spaces or areas of natural capital that are found to be most favorable to the site plan at its evolving design excellence.

Let the community build value (natural capital) into that allotment. Any ecological zone, whether an open social space on beautiful Sudbury bedrock, a lane way connecting streets, a peastone path, a multi-use forest grove, or any natural capital ecological circuitry embedded into a site plan can be stewarded, maintained and made continuously better and more integrated by the hands, minds, and hearts of the community within which it is located.

We have not taken access to the developers property, for all these years, in any entitlement. We saw it as an ecological sacred space, and ecological responsibility within which we tried to find a forest walking trail that we then, nurtured and tried to take care of.

Therefore we have not taken it for granted, we have embraced a responsibility to steward it, and, have greatly appreciated it. We thank Ron Arnold and the Dalron Company for that.

We do however ask the developer consider a possible re-allocation of some of these sacred ecological spaces and that we might be able take a walk about with the developer, to reflect upon the siting and location of some of these features that hold the highest value as natural capital within the plan’s design potential, as we the community see here.

There are several, perhaps even non-contiguous spaces and places, that have a Mother Oak, or a Pine grove Circle, or some little nooks and spots which are the strongest points of that sacred ecology. It is all sacred ecology in one way of seeing Nature, but there are extra special little spaces and places that would be absolutely beautiful to preserve.

We see a way to do this without having to come into any discordance with any parameters set out by the view of the design from the City, or Developers perspective.

PROMISES MADE?

Well…

There once was a ‘Villages of Montrose’ Conceptual Plan.

And the vision for at that time, by the Patriarch of the Dalron Company, was wonderful.

“Dalron president Ron Arnold said that while developers are required to set aside at least five per cent of residential land for parks, they opted to set aside 20 per cent instead, for Villages of Montrose.”

“The development will include walking trails, ponds and several parks.”

“Our goal is to get a quality neighborhood that everybody will enjoy,” he said.
Source

We honor that sentiment, and it would be great if we could embrace it for the subdivision to come, in the future. We respect, and truly honor the intention and integrity of Ron Arnold and his vision for that land.

Even though times and conditions in society change and call for adaptations to the visions we like to hold dear, we can still embrace the sentiment and let it help live on in the evolution of the plans we do eventually have arise from it.

The ultimate questions we have had been thinking about:

What is appropriate in Subdivision Planning as a feature that increases SAFETY and how can the design of the new development reflect and support it.

As an example of this, we are concerned with the design and implications of the plan as it pertains to the connection of Forestdale Drive, and Montrose Ave. to the new development. And, how does this proposed subdivision potentially connect to the Maley Drive Extension? And how does this design reflect a safe and sensible approach to what the residents see in living there experience, as particular parameters that are actually are to some degree potential risks and liability to the community’s health, well-being, and safety?

There is much to say about safety. Traffic, cars, kids playing, pedestrian families walking up and down hills, against a backdrop of blinding sunlight obstructing views beyond the dip of an apex of the horizon, etc… and community safety.

We do understand that a community design that will be built up with new homes, will have some impact on the existing communities, but we would like to do everything possible, design, and feature wise, to greatly limit and prevent that possibility.

We would rather that it harmonizes with the community, without impact. The design, site plan, road and lot fabric all somehow connect to Maley Drive Extension, and somehow connect to Montrose Ave, and in current planning also connect to Forestdale Drive. If this development connects directly or with a minor 50m curve in the road, to Maley Drive Ext, it’s still a direct connection, to a divided highway. And that in itself, is a considerable concern to people living down on Montrose. It is a community safety concern.

Furthermore, Forestdale Drive is a slightly unique situation all unto itself. It has been projected to connect to this future subdivision, for a long time, but every one qualified to see it, seeming failed to see the situation there as accurately as it really is.

Let this be known, because, it is a risk not worth taking, to connect Forestdale Drive to the Subdivision.
There is a particular concurrence of factors there that make it completely unsuitable and in fact, unable to support the connection.

Even if we leave aside the narrowness of the street (27 at full max. not even that in winter conditions), the fact that it has no sidewalk, and the non-ideal roadway underlay at the top half after the apex of the hill, there is a steep slope that requires a bit of extra speed to make it up that hill, in winter, and it is slippery in both directions.

But even worse, is that the apex of the hill subsides and leaves you blind to oncoming traffic. And even worse, is you can not see at the time when many people return from work, as the Sun is perfectly aligned to create a lot of direct glare, that anyone who lives there, knows. Because you are angle upwards into it, it makes it really hard to see what is on the road ahead.

So, that is not a good place to add more traffic coming down the hill. Very bad place to add traffic, in fact.

So, what can be done about it.. well, for one, a realization, finally, that maybe it doesn’t actually need to be connected.

Maybe better to connect it at top to a more contained cul de sac, that can be designed very interestingly. A cul de sac that can be plowed by City Plows, which is seemingly why the City doesn’t really look as favorably on some cul de sac designs.

Interestingly, a cul de sac at the top of Forestdale would actually be a blessing in disguise for the rest of the subdivision plan..

And this too is a very real consideration, because the Forestdale Drive connection actually imposes a very limiting constrain on the subdivision’s site fabric of roads and lots.

If re-designed with this in view, then one sees a much better design, with better flow and better options, and Forestdale Drive could still be connected via a small fire road access point from a perfect integration on the level of the cul de sac that merges into the subdivision below.

The potential re-design of the plans site, lot and road fabric could create a very efficient, compact, and also complete new development, without all that chaotic hard cornered lot triangulation, that in one place sees one corner side lot stretching from one street to another, even though its not the corner lot.

This non-ideal design is not in the developers best interest if they want to design a pocket community layout of up to 199 units south of the Hydro lines. The way the plan currently connects to Forestdale Drive actually disturbs and limits the possibilities, the developer can can design.

And this is a major reason why, the plan has changed, so many times over the years.

A connection to Forestdale Drive is driving further risks and limitations into the model, constraining a better design variance.

Not to mention again, that it need not be designed to connect. There really is no need to do so. To mitigate the risks and limitations it imposes, it can be designed else-wise.

Actually with no stream of new traffic but still a small connection ( a fire road access point, which would also serve as a fully accessible biking / walking interlink), the plan is enhanced exponentially, in both feasibility, cost savings, efficient infrastructure, and all sorts of other potential benefits.

And this is why Forestdale Drive might just might be the factor that fixes and harmonizes the Plan of Subdivision, in a way no one was expecting. Which as always in such situations, would be great.

To further harmonize the Plan, one must be able to conceptualize and see the proposed plans in three concurrent phases connecting to the Maley Drive Extension, and that would be a thoroughly sound perspective for the City and to the Developer to have.

When considered as one project there are many implications and concerns that can be optimized for savings of cost to the developer and to the City, while actually mitigating risks, and resolving community concerns.

Seeing a whole design potential fully and completely can greatly improve the final overall design. Liveability within the new development, and the safety, and maintenance of the well-being of the existing community, is one aspect of design, but good design, is truly functional and beneficial design, that serves the City’s growing needs, and the developer’s evolving vision, as market and economic factors influence the timelines that drive the developments progress.

A major point of concern or contention with Montrose’s connection to Maley Ave. Ext.. is that consideration of what a full meaning of the term ‘meandering’ of Montrose Ave. really means.

Even Council put forth a direction for Staff to explore and it led to a Travel Demand Analysis, but not actually a study of roadway meandering, and certainly not a study that much helps the developer see a level of the whole design potential from the City’s perspective.

The reason Council agreed to a meander, is because the meander deterred a straight through-put of traffic from Maley Drive Extension (a divided highway) to a residential development area. And this makes sense. Some form of meandering can, in fact, serve a better design.

It’s all about traffic safety. And that safety concern has been raised by a transportation consultant, but a full Transportation Impact Study, as mandated by Council, didn’t really manifest, so we have to trust that a straight on connection to Maley would not be ideal (especially for the residents of the 1900 Montrose Block and all Montrose South residents.

In fact, the 2014 The Villages of Montrose Conceptual Plan that was enthusiastically applauded by community, as it was also viewed as a solution to the traffic safety concerns because it had a major Montrose meander.

That Conceptual Plan of the ‘Villages of Montrose’, was also presented as a whole plan of the entire site fabric between Forestdale Drive and Maley Drive Extension. It was that vision that Ron Arnold had, that really was quite wonderful. But of course as times change, so do Conceptual Plans, but it would be nice to see one, evolving concurrently as a phased in multi-projection of what the Site is looking to grow up into.

That Conceptual ‘Plan of Subdivision’, was never officially submitted to planning. And even though it presented a vision, that alleviated many of the concerns of residents in the neighborhoods that surround it. It wasn’t somehow a viable plan to fully express, at that time when, the plan was changed to something akin to what we have on the table today.

It had a lot of green space, it had trails, and the significant meander of Montrose Ave. but it had an apartment high rise, and a connection to Forestdale Drive. So it was was it was.

This plan currently before Planning Committee is now evolving a completely different direction. However, we trust that the City and the Developer will be joined in further exploration and Site Plan Agreements, and their ongoing adjustments based on new market and economic factors, will also allow room for further community feedback given with the intention to help inform the process with perhaps some value in the extra perspective.

As we move further into the development timeline, the areas just south of the Maley Drive Extension, hold some very good potential design ideas that as well, have not yet been fully explored and conceptualized.

Council can not reasonably expect that the every possible option has actually been explored, and frankly, very rarely does that ever happen, but it is not beyond our capacity to do so.

Is this new plan attached to any 2024 adjusted Concept Plan, and if it is not, then might we ask that we work towards that before we completely firm up the City’s resolve to stamp and define all the conditional approvals and requirements that it sees as its responsibility to the developement and planning process for this new Sudbury Development.

Of course we want the development to proceed in a manner that makes sense to the City and the Developer, but, we would ask that it proceed (as conditions allow), with a clearer concept plan of what the whole design is going to be.

And this would be a great place to express something, that perfect aligns with the statement just made.
A personal statement from the view of this particular perspective. I originally was thinking that if this area would be ideal if it geared towards a Senior (with all respect to the Seniors, and Elders of our community) Centric design; mixed with a young family affordable modern living design. And the thinking for this was that as people in older but decently sized homes in Sudbury, that are 40+ years old, are sometimes a bit more work and a bit more to keep in perfect shape. But, they were family homes, and they are good family homes, they often come with good lots, and sound and nice design. And there quite a few that could feel like an empty nest, too big for just the two or one parent that is thinking what to do with their situation.

So to allow for the release of those homes to the market, and get into something nice, warm, cosy, and easy to maintain, might be ideal. But, what the Senior actually needs, is a really good community design. One that really enhances the livability and the access to community amenities, and benefits. And the mix of the duplexes for families that need that space and that kind of style and newness, is also there. And that creates a very good synergistic effect across the social fabric of the community, not to mention the design is actually driven towards betterment by catering it to these two demographic groups.

A conceptual plan and whole view of the design parameters and opportunities, or options, allow for these kinds of considerations to be integrated. But when we just slice up the land into a lot and road fabric without actually having the vision of what you really want that community to grow up into, then, you can’t help that evolve as best as you could have.

So perhaps we could in some ways, agree to agree that design, is a big word, and the implications that stem from it require our deepest and best coordinated efforts. The City, the Community, and the Developer can, work in that coordinated and integral manner, and if they do, let’s be assured that it will be the better design outcome for it.

Council and City, and Developer, are in the drivers seat for this process. Staff makes recommendations to approve or adjust incoming plans and when everything is working nicely across all Departments responsible for commenting on any presented plans, those plans might very well seems to be in alignment to the OP, the PA, and a bevy of other by-laws, regulatory standards, and economic models that are in place to guide the development of the City, and the province in an agreed upon and structured systems of protocols. However, one aspect of what we really need to get right, is public input.

Sure, there are many forums and opportunities for it, but is it truly making a difference in the way things are developing. Is it actually helping add value into the real equation that is driving factor behind how things develop and what is developed? YES, and NO.

The whole civic process needs to inform the community of everything they should be informed of, but also the Civic duty is to care, and become well informed.

So, maybe, the City and the Developers, are actually braced in a holding pattern that gives them a bit of control to move regardless of what the public thinks, says or does. Is that because they see the public’s input often resembling a kind of imposition, uninformed, and out of touch with the actual reality of the finer aspects of what really factors in most strongly… when decisions really need to be made, the public often doesn’t have much to say, except for when they are in some feisty opposition to something, or they see some things that they just don’t fully understand, but think they do? Well, i personally tend to give our community much more credit than that, and we can very clearly see around us, in our communities a great deal of expertise, competence, understanding, and real ground level know-how, and capacity. This is often untapped civic potential, but fully tapped economic leverage. Everyone is doing their job, their skills and aptitudes are being expressed, and if it is really well aligned within the context of the City, it grows well, as a result of it.

Therefore, we as a community need to express our full civic duty, and also help our Developers to develop well, and help our City to grow well. The future of this City requires it. In fact, growth is nothing but seeing the issues and adapting the perfected solution sets to fit those issues, together in a way that if conducive to the well being of the future form of that City. And every City is a fusion of developments, that are put together as best they can be, but often, when things are not perfectly aligned, then the future reflects it.

We do believe strongly that much more time, consideration, and community input can be leverage to create real value for this proposition of a City that wants to grow well, and sustainably into the future.

Examining the concerns and implications of any connection between Maley Dr. Ext and Forestdale Drive, and Montrose Ave., is going to be an exercise in adapting the perfected solution sets to fit those issues that still exist in the present plan, while being the best way to develop at current costs and current market demand and economics of building out the infrastructure and services that need to be in place to support the community that is being developed.

At this site, Re2021, our intention is and will remain to change this site, from a site of some objections, and critique perspectives, of what may be seen as the processing and decision making on the part of Council, City Staff, and Developer, to a platform that affirms design excellence, and affirms the evolution of the true Civic potential to have a public that can truly put forth value into the equation that is readily being expressed in the growth of this City into a better and more integrated design potential, for the improvement of community, for and, of us all.

Together in a way, conducive to the well being of the future form of this Greater City of Sudbury, we will find the every solution set and relay it to those who feel it can be of value in their decision making process.

*** We do believe that in light of these considerations, perspectives, concerns and issues the current draft subdivision plan should remain a bit flexible, and open to change, to adapt, and integrate with more time for it to evolve organically into what best it can be, by the time actually ready to be expressed..

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The older 2021 proposed Dalron subdivision plans are superimposed over the satellite view of the area (below) showing the cleared areas where the development preparations have already started, but the ecological integrity of the site is for the most part still intact. This will change, we can perfectly understand the way things are currently done.

However, the point must be made, that it is still an open canvas, and in reality, the ways things are done can go through rapid shift, by technology and new information.

As you can clearly see, there’s enough room for the planned subdivision and ecological integration, with small public spaces, green corridors, groves, and pathways that will serve the community’s benefit and well-being.

Let us recognize the opportunity to do it right, before we do anything wrong.

This satellite image of the Nickeldale area with the walking trail area, the trail in green, and the suburb plans overlayed, shows the scale of the opportunity that we would like to continue to help evolve and nurture toward the becoming one of the very best new subdivisions Sudbury has to offer.

Here’s an alternative design we see as better than what was presented..

We kindly ask the holder and Developer of these lands, to factor in the re2021.com site in your view, of what we can do, and what we could do, with this property. And towards Council and it’s Planning Committee, and City Staff, that works so hard on all these things, to make them go as best as you are able, we also say thank you for taking our considerations to heart, and we hopefully will have further opportunities to share what we will try our best to co-create whatever we have to relay, as value, and not just some opposition to what must proceed in some ways get accomplished.

*We will do our Civic duty to serve to help add value to the equation of efforts that go into and towards a movement of intentional exploration for excellence in 21st century suburban design that will enhance the livability and thrivability of the Greater Sudbury region.*

We have to think about the living environment, its patterns of sustainability, think about community health, think about enhancing design, and think about better urban systemics, but we will look at this from the very much more informed lens of realistic approachment, and effective strategies that can create value where it can be seen, and felt as the benefits that extend into this beautiful City for all to enjoy a living experience within.

A City Planning Division that is very responsive to the community’s living experience, will help us move towards better suburban design, and we will do our very best to help in whatever way we can to help developers like Dalron Construction see that we are against a development, we just want to help make it world-class without extra cost. Is that possible. Yes, it is. Let’s build for a brighter future for all of Sudbury.

With that said, we are going to explore the posts and pages of this website, and re-examine everything that has been written within. It will also evolve to reflect our growing understanding of all the things were learning and figuring out, and getting a better and more honest and accurate view of. please accept that not everything that was shared was shared with the same mindset that eveolves over time. Just like Plans can change, so can mindsets and the information and views that stream from them.

We look forward to sharing much better views and ideas with you all as we continue along this path of discovery and integration.

A couple of thoughts on how we looked at the Natural landscape on this proposed development site.

Why do we seem to care so much about some trees and a forest trail, and these natural spaces we’ve been so grateful to have within our community?

In some ways it is a sign of the times. We are coming back to nature to find the answers, and re-balance the unhealthy separation from it.

We honestly also do believe that WALKABLE NATURAL COMMUNITY SPACES CONTRIBUTE TO PEOPLE’S PHYSICAL AND MENTAL WELL-BEING.

We recognize the intrinsic value of embedded urban forest environments, and how they contribute to the well-being and harmony of built up residential neighborhoods.

We know that good design includes natural elements, and spaces that take into account what people need from their living environment.

WHY IS a NATURE TRAIL SO IMPORTANT TO US?

It is a decades old and stewarded access point to that nature we need to connect to. And when it is easily accessible at the boundary zone of your subdivision or community, nestled close to the neighborhood, it serves a sacred purpose, that helps us be better human beings. This particular land that will be developed on in some way, is at a higher elevation, and it has a forest, and more open, but still very natural and walkable areas with a unique re-forested ecology. It has a many little sacred areas, and a terrain that people in and around the community cherish and enjoy on their daily walks.

It is a forest with serveral paths that connects Montrose Blvd. to the end of Magnolia Blvd. which leads on to the the New Sudbury Historical Trail.

It is a unique four seasons walking experience and much nicer than walking under the power lines down below in the northern part.

All the northern most lots, in the existing neighborhood off Forestdale Dr. back onto this greenspace, and have direct access to the Trail. And they love it, and really do wish to preserve some of it in some way.

And all the homes in the southern part of the new subdivision could have some of this ecology, and rest assured, they would love it too. It adds value and benefit to any resident, and to the entire subdivision as a model development, if some aspects of its highest natural capital value can be integrated properly into the new plan.

TO SUDBURY PLANNING SERVICES

We look at the inclusion of all these liveablity features, and we know that good urban design is a policy framework being outlined in the Official Plan.

Such considerations as we have been speaking of, can become the hallmark attributes that would make these upcoming suburbs nicer, healthier, more integrated, and more resilient.

We need you as the Division of Planning Services, within the Department of Growth and Infrastructure for Greater Sudbury, to see to it that a greater responsibility for defining the appropriate design and livability of our City translates into the ordinances that developers could see more supported incentivization behind. And of course, we need those ordinances to evolve and be aligned with community needs.

We also need Planning Services and the planners within, to step back and recognize that the ‘compact and complete’ communities you want to see develop, are sometimes not the ‘complete’ community ‘designs’ you are allowing and encouraging to develop.

If you look carefully at the work these developers and the engineering company land use planners are proposing, you will find that something is missing. These subdivisions are in themselves little communities, and they should be seen as such, however they are not complete, they are only really trying to be compact.

They are missing important livability features, one of which is and integration of community activated ecological spaces.

A deeper consideration of the environment in which we want to live, is needed.

Development plans very often do not reflect a design that is aligned with the current mindset that has been evolving towards sustainability, ecological stewardship, and community health. As a subdivision building society, we have to design for the future not the past.

We can not just take an area and blast it all away for the underlying infrastructure, and then compact the rubble and make roads and lots for further development and expect a well designed new neighborhood to thrive there.

Incentivize and encourage the integration of elements and features that enhance and affirm livability, aka elements that will support a healthy, resilient, and happy neighborhood community.

We need City Planning to liaison between what we as the community are realizing, as we live in these developments, and what you, as city planners, help mandate and relay to the developer, beyond the official plans and such.

We are reasonably expecting that the new communities that you will approve to be designed and broken ground on, should take livability considerations seriously, and so include these livability features.

We can see more clearly now what is needed. This is the age we are in. We can better value the seemingly intangible factors that make up a healthy, resilient and well-serving community. And good design stands clearly above design that is not.

WHAT DO WE THINK DEVELOPERS SHOULD CHANGE?

The times are urging change in the way developers view the design of subdivisions, as more than just a development of residential capacity on their land.

The change needed is in the deeper consideration of the better integration of livability features, like embedded ecology, naturally healing places, and integrated areas that people can access for socially cohesive community activity, and this all brings better peace of mind.

We need developers to understand how their plans impact the already established community, and how the new community will feel living in it, ten-twenty years down the road.

Developers need their land use planners and designers to look at the design of their plans, as more than a compact layout of roads and lots.

We need developers that are more responsive to the new ways of thinking about community design.

And even though they own the land, the land is still a common natural heritage, so we need developers to take deeper consideration of long term conservation and preservation of certain unique parts of what they own. We need them to understand how seeing the sacred ecological aspects of that natural capital is already embedded into their site. It’s really seeing what to leave standing, and what to connect to what and how that will integrate with the design ethos and conceptual framework of the intentional design that is put forth into that plan.

The proposed plan might be called Royal Oaks, but those Royal Oaks are there now, but they will not be there if the subdivision goes ahead as planned, and if developers use the old ways to build everything out. There are new ways that actually are able save a few Mother trees and some areas as community assets like a small Pine grove, or a space that is just great to sit and watch the sunset from.. things like that make a big difference in the way a new community can look and feel, by design. Good design, is all it takes. It costs no more, and pays way more back in value, real and perceived.

We need developers to to invest in their communities by building with and promoting better design.

Appropriate design that is in line with today’s understanding of sustainability, appropriate materials, and design modalities like an evolving living buildings as a standard are the future. Sooner or later, it will be so.

So much of Sudbury is on bedrock. Drilling into the bedrock and integrating a closed loop geothermal heat pump that loads heat into the ground in summer and then draws the heat into the homes in winter is an ideal system for these areas. That appropriate technology reduces the energy demand of those homes by up to 80%, and that’s just one of the things that developers could do, to really up the game and show true design excellence.

The people who might consider buying a home in these new subdivisions will always appreciate better design, better technological innovation, and features that support that true ‘welcome home to nature’ feel, with a direct route and access to that nature from their streets,backyards, or common spaces.

WHAT IS OUR EXPECTATION?

Since good urban design is referenced in the Official Plan of Greater Sudbury, and we ask that it is reviewed in the light of the times, and the information about it, which is now more readily available than it ever was.

The future look and feel of Sudbury depends on the way you design it, so what you do, influences what Sudbury is seen as. Will the future be one where a business exec somewhere in Canada or the world, quickly sees that Sudbury really isn’t a good place to invest and move some business and being to, or will they see something special in Sudbury, something that stands out, above the norms of northern towns and what they are able to become, with what they got. We people see Sudbury as a place they want to bring their business and their families.

Master plans are big over-arching documents, but they are sometime not enough.

We need to address the deeper issue of design, and incentivize integration of healthy community elements like natural spaces, green lined inter-linkages, and places that connect the community, and preserves at least a modest amount of ecological green-space that already has scientifically proven benefit and value value to the community’s well-being.

What we are asking for here, is a perfect example of something that will not cost any significant increase in money, nor cause any significant decrease in tax revenue, nor would it be difficult for the developer to implement. It is simply something that will enhance the area design, and serve the community with value for many decades to come.

In matters of urban design, we know that we can do just a little bit better in this day and age; and it’s really time to give things like this a second thought, and a better plan.

And it fits nicely into the new motion recently passed that will approve the creation of an ‘urban forest master plan’ which relates to the current desire for climate moderating effects and measures and the need for public access to embedded urban forest ecology.

WHAT WILL THIS MAKE BETTER?

As a society yearning to go forward, we should strive to do things that will make this world better… And that kind of starts within each community. More accurately within each and every one of us. And to know better, is to make better.

Keeping a natural feature, trail, grove, sacred space, or any other place where natural elements are integrated in some way, into a suburban design makes it a super-design, and the building of more roads and more subdivisions, is a good thing when it is done with super-design.

If we just keep squeezing and pushing nature to the boundaries of our communities, we are removing access to it, and that comes with many negative repercussions.

Nature trails placed further away from home is not where the majority of the people want to go. People love to walk around their neighborhoods. People love to walk through green spaces, and we especially enjoy and cherish walking paths like the one we had access to for so long. It is nestled right inside our community, giving us access to a unique New Sudbury upland forest re-growth ecology, and all the goodness that is in that. So keeping the Nickeldale Forest Walking Trail was a way we saw our community better.

PRESERVING THE TRAIL WOULD BE A BEAUTIFUL ARNOLD FAMILY LEGACY

Name it what you will, but let’s save something that perhaps could become the Dalron Nickeldale Forest Walking Trail in New Sudbury. It could be stitched into the plan in a non-contiguous fashion, and inter-linkages pop in and out of street to street inter-linkages and WOW, what a beautiful legacy project that could be.

Below is a satellite image of the wider walking trail area, with the walking trail we got so used to having right there,highlighted in green, but as things change, let’s try make them even better some how. Let’s keep looking at it and seeing how it would work perfectly and in the best design. A design we could proudly point to and say, ‘Yeah, that’s some good design they got there in Sudbury…’

The proposed subdivision plans, as they are as of Sept, 1, 2021, leave no part of that forest ecology… It’s all gone. Sadly for some and probably for much of that ecology will be disrupted, but can we design into it, with it, or through it in a very new mode of development. That would be interesting to explore from that perspective; new possibilities might become a reality.

So, please, if at possible, let’s keep some aspects of this naturally regenerated and re-forested succession forest ecology around, and let’s show a better example of how we develop new subdivisions in Sudbury.

Dalron Construction, and Greater Sudbury Planning, let us know how can we help. We extend whatever our further expertise in land use planning and good design, can bring and we’d love to work with you to see this work out right.

We thank you for sharing this time, and consideration, and trust that you are seeing that there is time and space to truly design this subdivision, and please let’s agree that it can be still be worked on, re-drafted, and better integrated for cost, efficiency, value, and enhanced benefit to all.

We can be reached at [email protected]

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

An older version of a kind of expression trying to express : something

WHAT VALUE A TRAIL LIKE THIS CAN BRING INTO A COMMUNITY?

When we walk this path we are getting great exercise. We meet people along the way, we talk, we connect and we build relationships that help us be a stronger, healthier, and more integrated community.

And there’s plenty of other value in the things to do along that trail…

It’s a magical place for kids. Along this trail, there are many stone-stacked-inukshuk-like guardians, one of which, is called the ‘Sudbury Rock Eater’. These stone stacks inspire the children to play and experience the stones on the bedrock. They make their own little stone art guardians. Children love exploring nature up close. Countless families have walked that path and had great benefit in doing so together. It’s quality time outdoors, but still close to home.

The moss and tree covered stone outcrops along the way are great places to explore a bit, take in the view, or just relax. Families can pick blueberries, collect labrador tea, and even find the edible boletes family mushrooms, that grow there.

Nature is there.
The northern flying squirrel has been sighted, and we thought we heard an eastern whip-poor-will. Kind, old porcupines, squirrels, martens, hares, chipmunks, foxes and and many birds and other forest creatures make that unique place their home. It’s a precious forest ecology. It’s a special place. It’s community accessible nature up close. It’s an education about nature in a walk from one side of the neighborhood to the other.

It’s a precious little gem of an area in New Sudbury.

And here’s the real rub, these special places are so intrinsically intertwined in how people feel about where they live, that sometimes we don’t even realize how important that space is to us, until that special place is no longer there, and then ‘it suddenly feels so different’ and somethings missing that you can never get back. It’s an invaluable part of the community for that reason alone.

It naturally makes the community feel more complete.

This is a community benefit that increases the value of our homes, and makes the community what it is.

Spaces like this walking trail and the small corridor of ecology around it, are community assets. And the community recognizes that.

And that’s why communities everywhere should safeguard and nurture their precious natural spaces. These spaces serve the community in a very real way.

But must we say it…

This Forest Walking Trail is special.

A little forest walk here, can help people feel better. It settles emotions, relieves tensions, and alleviates anxieties. It’s a healing space.

Walking this path is a healthy thing to do. The air is fresh, naturally ionized, and walking on varying natural ground terrain helps people maintain the finer balancing muscles that need to be exercised as we age.. Otherwise we become unsure of our strength and struggle to keep good balance. It’s a place that induces health and fitness. People know this and they walk the trail because it’s the only accessible trail around that exercises these finer balancing muscles.

People walk, jog and bike on this trail. Families use this trail for quality time with each other. People walk their dogs along this trail. It’s a safe and people friendly trail.

There’s just a hundred reasons why this little natural forest walking trail makes a big difference in the community.

And there’s a hundred reasons why City Planning and the developers should consider how to integrate it into the subdivision plan.

And of course, let’s not forget to say how very grateful we are to the landowners for the decades long implicitly granted access to this space. We respect that, and appreciate it.

We truly cherish this area, and it is our hope and wish it is not all cut down, made inaccessible, blasted and then developed with asphalt roads and crushed gravel lots all over it.

We hope that you as the City, and you as the partners in it’s development, see the sacred beauty and natural value in this ecological buffer and walking trail corridor that is so precious to us.

Please, leave a naturally intact green-spacing trail there. Leave it for the kids to grow up walking that trail, just like we did.

Not everyone that uses the trail has received any notice of the plans, so please share this site and the detailed development plans within, so that more community feedback gets to the City Council, the Planning Service Division, and ultimately to Dalron to help them make the Plan even better, if possible.

“Long-term prosperity, human and environmental health and social well-being”

The Provincial Policy Statement (PPS), issued under section 3 of the Planning Act of May 1, 2020 states “Long-term prosperity, human and environmental health and social well-being should take precedence over short-term considerations.”

We agree with the PPS.

The over-arching concerns are as follows:

Issue #1.

Traffic and Connections to a New Subdivision and Maley Dr. Extension

THE APPROPRIATENESS the SAFETY and the SITE FABRIC DESIGN is a major CONCERN

We are further concerned with the design and implications of the plan as it pertains to the connection to Forestdale Drive, and Montrose Ave, and how this proposed subdivision would potentially connect to the Maley Drive Extension.

This is all about SAFETY.

Our Major residential Safety Concern is with Forestdale Drive’s proposed connection to a new subdivision and divided highway. See https://re2021.com/our-major-residential-safety-concern-with-forestdales-proposed-connection-to-a-new-subdivision-and-divided-highway/

This is a major safety concern to all the residents and families of this narrow and sloping roadway.

Opening up Forestdale Drive, would increase the risk to the children and families who walk up and down the hill’s roadway. There are no sidewalks and the roadway is only 8.6 m wide and much less in the winter with the snowbanks narrowing the roadway even more.

For comparison, Grandview is 10.3m wide and has an extra, side walk , and Montrose is 11.6 m wide. Roadways were designed to be connector roadways, Forestdale was not.

Not only was the top of Forestdale Drive not designed for more traffic, it was heavily bermed up, and elevated, and many homes are now dealing with the consequences of having rubble and slag supporting the roadways and their lots. The top of Forestdale Drive is not designed to support a new roadway, and new lots. Ideally all issues with Forestdale Drive can be resolved and managed by terminating the top development in a small cul de sac.

There is absolutely no need to connect Forestdale to a new development regardless of how long that idea has been tossed around and injected into application of subdivision plans, without due regards to the safety hazards that would pose for the community.

Building out the top of Forestdale Drive with a connector to a new subdivision of a proposed 455 semi-detached homes connected to a divided highway, not only fundamentally changes the fabric of the neighborhood, but it poses a very well founded safety concerns for the children and families who already have to be extra careful and considerate when using the roadways.

It is a major safety liability to the City to allow for Forestdale Drive to become a through way connector road. This is the notice from the knowings and experience of the residents of the street; they all know and see the potential dangers and problems that would arise as a result of Forestdale being a connector through way with increased traffic.

SAFETY of Residents is the major concern here.

***But the design and orientation of Forestdale Drive roadway poses it’s own limitations and risks to all drivers, coming home from work, going up the steep hill directly into the brightness and glare of the Sun, decreases visibility greatly, and as the apex of the hill obscures down flowing on-coming traffic, and pedestrians, this is not a connector roadway able to sustain any more traffic than a small cul de sac at the top.

Any connection to a build out of new subdivision is a man-made hazzard to residents, all drivers, all vehicles backing up into the roadway, all pedestrians, and all the kids walking to and from their buses on the main through-way on Grandview and Montrose. Furthermore wintertime conditions on the road are precarious and one must very often speed up to make it up the hill.

Forestdale Drive is too narrow, has no sidewalks, it is obscured by slope, apex of hill, and sunlight in the westery direction, and very often subject to slippery conditions, greater narrowing and snowbanks (in winter).

Traffic and community safety. The design, site plan, road and lot fabric all somehow connect to Maley Drive Extension.

Check out the alternative area design plan, done by the re2021 team and the ‘Be the community’ network.

* SEE THE ALTERNATIVE PLAN *

Dalron Construction, and Greater Sudbury Planning, let us know how can we help. We extend our further expertise in land use planning and good design, and we’d love to work with you to see this work out right.

We thank you for sharing this time, and consideration, and trust that you are seeing that there is a better way to design this subdivision, and agree that it can be re-drafted with the elements the community needs embedded within it.

We can all be reached at [email protected]

Not everyone that uses the trail has received any notice of the plans, so please share this site and the detailed development plans within, so that more community feedback gets to us, the Planning Service Division, and ultimately to Dalron to help them make the necessary adjustments to the plan.

The Plans: Dalron Nickeldale Montrose Royal Oaks Subdivision