A message from the Stonebridge Working Group (SWG):

Dear residents of Stonebridge,

The Stonebridge Working Group (SWG) would like to thank everyone who took the time to review and submit feedback on the proposed solution regarding the future of the Stonebridge Golf Course, which was presented to you at the community meeting on July 30th, 2019. 

Since the meeting, SWG volunteers have made themselves available to address hundreds of questions on SCA social media channels, the SCA website, email, phone and through numerous scheduled public in-person sessions including three open house Q&A sessions and multiple resident group meetings. The SWG remains open to meeting with resident groups and others as needed.   Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) have also been created on the SCA website for residents to refer to as new questions arise. 

As stated at the July 30th meeting, the purpose of the survey conducted from July 30th to August 20th, was to gauge community sentiment on the proposed solution to secure the longevity of the golf course and limit any further development on the lands past Mattamy’s Phase 16 as well as on the option to finance this solution through a levy.   A series of open-ended questions included in the survey offered concerned residents an opportunity to share their thoughts and concerns in more detail. We are taking into consideration all the feedback received as we continue to work with Mattamy and the City to develop a more complete proposal.   

As promised at the July 30th meeting, the SWG is providing you the survey results.  While we can’t share open-ended individual responses for obvious privacy reasons, we are definitely able to provide an aggregate summary of the two main questions. Please keep in mind that this was not a vote but rather a method for the SWG to collect feedback on the work done to date and to see if there is enough support to keep moving forward. We are also fully aware that some resident opinions may have since changed based on discussions with SWG members and/or responses to your follow-up questions.

Survey Results

Responses were collected from 1368 individuals between July 30th and Aug 20th, 2019. After applying a filter to only include homeowners living in Stonebridge, the total number of responses used for analysis purposes was 1039, which is a significant sample size for a community of approximately 3300 households.

Survey Question: What is your first reaction to the proposed solution?

  • Very positive: 27%
  • Somewhat positive: 29%
  • Neutral: 8%
  • Somewhat negative: 15%
  • Very negative: 20%

Survey Question: If a vote on the levy was to be held today, how likely would you be to vote in favour of it?

  • Extremely likely: 29%
  • Very likely: 19%
  • Somewhat likely: 16%
  • Not so likely: 12%
  • Not at all likely: 25%

Based on the above, the SWG feels that the community has demonstrated enough interest in the proposal to move to the next step, which is to ask the City to administer a community-wide vote on the levy. In the meantime, we will continue to make improvements, where appropriate, to the proposal in order to address as many remaining concerns as possible. We are still planning on organizing another community meeting in the early fall to provide you with further details.

Kind regards,

The Stonebridge Working Group (SWG)

 

5 thoughts on “SWG Proposed Solution – Community Survey Results

  1. I just know that Community will buy this Golf Course. I Very negative to say: Community can not buy it. Because it will need countless money to buy and keep it. Those costs will put on homeowners, it is not fair!

  2. The survey results should be interpreted with great caution, especially when the survey sample is subject to several defects:

    First, this is not necessarily 1/3 respondent poll because the survey doesn’t restrict multiple submissions. It is possible that an individual in favour of the proposal filled in many surveys to inflate the share.

    Secondly, the representativeness of the sample was not considered——think about our senior residents who are not familiar with online survey.

    Thirdly, the survey sample was not randomly drawn. Due to a lack of effort in information, a great number of residents are not aware of the survey, especially those whose houses are not facing the golf course.

    Given these caveats, the survey results could be misleading.

    Anyways, even if there is a vote, we should vote on the development of Phase 16 in the first place.

  3. I am sorry, residents of Tamarack’s Half Moon Bay community don’t consider themselves as part Stonebridge community. Don’t ask us to pay your levy.

  4. I don’t know if the committee was elected by the residence of Stonebridge. I am wondering if ever this committee can make deals or even negotiate deals with the builder representing all residence in the community.

    It against our will to pay levy to the builders to just postpone their construction plan.

    The committee need to think things through instead of offer bold terms.

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.