16 thoughts on “SWG Community Presentation re: Future of the Golf Course is now up

  1. 1. What is the current financial state of the golf club/course?

    2. If the community pays for the golf course, what happens if the golf course runs on deficit? Do the community need to pay more in addition to the $6,000,000?

    3. I think the golf course is open to anyone who are interested to join the club. Why must only Stonebridge community residents pay for it? How about other nearby communities like half-moon bay, Chapman mill, manotic etc?

    1. Hi Minnie,

      1. We cannot disclose what we learned from the Mattamy financials because we signed NDA’s. Also, much will change over 10 years – whatever the financial situation today, it may be different in 2029. Another data point: we spoke with several people in the industry over the last little while and often hear that golf in Ottawa is a “break even business”.

      2. The levy would raise more than $6m. It’s intended to cover the purchase price, any associated fees (legal, real estate, etc.) and a small buffer for operating expenses. That said, there is no provision for operating the course at a loss. It’s too early to say 100%, but our best guess is the course would close and turn into greenspace if it can’t be run profitably.

      3. Stonebridge residents are the ones most impacted here: property values, vistas, traffic, density, etc.. Other communities are highly unlikely to support a levy.

      Hope that helps!

      Ron

  2. I’d like to thank all of the SWG members for putting so much time and effort into this. I really was not expecting such an outcome. Now I’m going to say something which may not sit well with many. I’d like to thank Mattamy for coming to the table with the genuine intent to find a compromise.

    I was at the meeting and I listened to some say that Mattamy had won. In my mind if they had really won, we’d eventually see all the golf course lands infilled with new homes or worse. Realistically it is their land and I doubt we’d ultimately win a fight against further development given the Ontario Municipal Board’s history. Would another builder have been willing to find a compromise? Have a look at the very costly legal fights underway with several ClubLink owned properties for comparison purposes. Apartment buildings and office space on Glenn Abbey – imagine those in our community.

    I do sympathize with our neighbors who would be impacted the most by the proposed development. As a community member I would vote against this if I thought the rest of us were throwing them under the bus. Looking at the proposed plan though, even they would retain their golf course view. Those residents would see the backs of homes across the greens which is admittedly much less appealing, but not unlike what many of us see already.

    I may be overly pessimistic about the worst-case scenario here. But I’d happily spend a dollar a day on the levy to not have to worry about this anymore.

    1. Exactly Mike. You have a really well-informed view and you hit all the important points. Really appreciate you sharing your thoughts for others. I encourage you to share your thoughts on Facebook as well.

      Cheers,
      Ron

  3. Hi Ron,

    Thank you for your information! It’s good to hear different opinions and get more information before the vote! since you raised the idea of property values, I am interested to know if Mattamy had done a comparative analysis on the impact of the following two scenarios:

    1) The community spent $6 million to buy the golf course. In the worse case scenario that the golf course would need to be converted into green space. How would it negatively impact the Stonebridge community’s property values? Also, would the city use tax dollars to build the green space or would the Stonebridge community (as the owner of the golf course) need to pay more levy to build the green space?

    2) The community doesn’t spend the money to buy the golf course. In the worse case scenario, Mattamy builds housing on the golf course. How would it negatively impact the property values of the Stonebridge community?

    I have nothing against Mattamy, but I feel like I don’t know enough to make an informed decision as part of the community. I appreciate your information!

    Many thanks,

    1. Great questions Minnie. Mattamy has not done an impact assessment on property values, nor will they. It’s not required as part of their application process.

      We’ve discussed this quite a bit within the SWG and consulted 3rd parties. Opinions are very subjective and it depends on the location of your property. My recommendation would be to consult someone with experience in this domain (like a realtor) with regard to your specific property.

      That said it’s our opinion, in general, that a long term guarantee of green space or golf course will have similar impacts on property values. Golf has caché, but green space might appeal to more people. Both have significant positive impacts to property value. If Mattamy were to develop the golf course it would have a negative impact much greater than the levy amount you’d have to pay.

      Apologies for the vagueness. Just don’t want to say something that isn’t 100% accurate. I’m sure a realtor would be happy to drop by and give you free advice.

      I will add these questions to the list of feedback so we can perhaps include more info in a future communication.

      Cheers,
      Ron

  4. Hi Ron,

    Sorry, I also forgot to ask if the Golf course turned into green space, is the city going to maintain it or is the Stonebridge community (as the owner of the golf course) need to pay more levy to maintain it as well?

    Many thanks,

    1. Another great question Minnie. I’m not 100% sure so let me get back to you. Again, I don’t want to say something that isn’t 100% true. What I can tell you is that the levy has a start date and an end date. Once residents vote it’s cast in stone – there is no way to extend the end end date.

      Cheers,
      Ron

  5. Hi there. First, congratulations on all the hard work related to this proposal. My only question is how the boundary was determined regarding who would pay the settlement? Wouldn’t some properties west of Greenbank also potentially benefit from this proposal? Thanks so much

  6. So if we are paying to buy the golf course in 10 years (through a tax levy) are we now owners of the course, and entitled to income?

  7. We’ve followed with high interest the developments since last year’s first meeting. The compromise reached between the parties is, in our opinion, an innovative and constructive solution, and far better one than we had expected.

    Congratulations to all those who put their hearts and time into working to find a solution that is in the best interest of all Stonebridge home owners.

    As to the proposed levy, we do not consider this as a cost to us but a worthwhile investment to secure the continued enjoyment of our home and its surroundings.

  8. We, my wife and I were at the July 30th meeting and found it very encouriging.As residents of the Walkers Ridge area we support the proposed levy as a means of keeping the Golf Course active. We have played the course a few times over the last few years but dont intend to in the future, being in our 80’s. However we realize the impact on our home value.

  9. I do not understand why wouldn’t City buy the golf course at 6 mln today and be done with this ? City owns parks and recreational land, it might as well own the golf course , besides it keeps collecting high property taxes BECAUSE of golf course.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.