Skip to content

Widely opposed nine-storey builds recommended for approval

The next phase of the Sunrise Ridge Estates development northeast of downtown Sudbury is proposed to consist of three nine-storey residential buildings with 108 units apiece
300125_tc_fieldstone_drive_application-1
An artist’s rendition of the nine-storey buildings proposed to take shape as part of the next phase of Sunrise Ridge Estates. Area residents criticized the image for its inclusion of a bus, despite the fact there is no GOVA Transit route through the development. Since this image was initially released, the developer has altered their plan so that North Field Crescent, Fieldstone Drive and Kingsview Drive no longer end with cul-de-sacs, and instead link together with a looping road which connects the ends of each of the three roads.

It’s likely to be a long and contentious planning committee meeting of city council on Monday.

During the meeting, the city’s elected officials will vote on whether to approve the next phase of the Sunrise Ridge Estates development.

Consisting of three nine-storey residential buildings totalling 108 units apiece, the proposal by SalDan Construction Group has been seemingly universally opposed by area residents.

During the previous public hearing in April 2024, area residents banded together to deliver a lengthy presentation in opposition to the proposal, expressing concerns about such things as traffic, property value degradation and sightlines.

As irate community members told SalDan Construction Group president Sam Biasucci during a neighbourhood meeting in March 2024, they want the next phase to consist of the 70 single-unit dwellings the developer had proposed initially.

The three nine-storey buildings now proposed are to be located at the ends of North Field Crescent, Fieldstone Drive and Kingsview Drive, which stem from Sunrise Ridge Drive at the top of a hill to the northeast of downtown Sudbury.

Since the project’s first draft was submitted, the proposed road network has been altered in response to public feedback.

300125_tc_fieldstone_drive_application-2
A rendition of the latest proposed plan for three nine-storey residential buildings in the Sunrise Ridge Estates development. Image: Tulloch Engineering

Rather than cul-de-sacs ending at each of the three roads (North Field, Fieldstone and Kingsview) as initially proposed, they’ll now be linked together at their ends by a new connector road which will create a continuous loop through the development. 

A sidewalk is proposed to run along the east side of this new road extension, in front of the three nine-storey buildings, with driveways linking the road with parking located primarily behind each building, plus a few parking stalls in front of each building and underground parking.

The design and orientations of the proposed buildings remain unchanged from the developer’s initial submission.

In her report for Monday’s planning committee meeting, city senior planner Bailey Chabot recommends that SalDan Construction Group’s application for rezoning be approved.

However, she also recommends a holding symbol be put in place, meaning it can’t proceed until the plan has been amended to “reflect the altered road and pedestrian network, lot layout, and any required traffic calming, to the satisfaction of the director of Planning Services.”

A traffic impact study concluded that traffic would operate within acceptable levels and that no mitigation measures would be required.

Although the nine-storey buildings are taller than surrounding two-storey buildings, a wind study concluded that conditions “on and around the proposed buildings are not expected to exceed the recommended criteria for pedestrian safety.”

The developer will be required to construct a roadway connecting to the easterly property limit, and sidewalks connecting each building to the road which links them together.

As for the development in general, Chabot’s report notes that it represents the kind of residential intensification within existing city settlement areas the municipality is striving to see built to help reach the city’s housing targets.

“The proposed development is within the settlement area, is a more efficient use of the land than single detached dwellings, relies on existing infrastructure such as roads and water and wastewater, while connecting to sidewalks,” she notes.

A sewer and water capacity analysis confirmed “there is sufficient capacity for the proposed development to proceed.” Each building will have onsite boosters to ensure adequate water pressure is available.

A sun/shadow study shows that no adjacent properties are typically shallowed for no more than an hour, and only in the morning.

“Staff acknowledge that the site is rocky with sparse vegetation but have encouraged the applicant to retain as much natural vegetation as possible to create a vegetative buffer and retain a naturalized environment as much as possible,” according to Chabot’s report, which also clarifies, “The provision of landscaped open areas far exceeds the requirement of the zoning bylaw.”

The buildings are approximately 500 metres from a GOVA Transit stop from April to December, and approximately one kilometre from The Kingsway and 1.3 kilometres from Notre Dame Avenue, which Chabot’s report cites as “core commercial and employment areas.”

Chabot’s report also flags the proposal as important in addressing Greater Sudbury’s housing shortfall, with the latest vacancy rate of 1.5 per cent far below a healthy rate of five per cent.

The city’s greatest need is with affordable housing units, and the developer has proposed 36 units in each building be classified as “affordable.”

Last year, Biasucci told area residents that affordable units would be approximately $1,000 per month and that the going rate for market units would be $3,000 to $3,500.

If approved, staff estimate the development will bring in approximately $1.4 million in tax revenue per year using 2024 rates, assuming 324 units are built at an assessed value of $275,000 apiece.

Despite what appears to be a ringing endorsement by city staff on various fronts, a collection of letters opposing the development have been submitted by area residents, including past correspondence and 210 pages of new letters.

Many of the same points are echoed throughout many of these letters, in which they reiterate prior concerns regarding increased traffic, water supply and environmental impacts. A search for “neighbourhood character” comes up 30 times in the letters, and the same form letter was submitted 28 times..

As with the previous public hearing, the Feb. 3 meeting will give people the opportunity to provide verbal feedback on the proposed development.

The meeting is scheduled to begin at 1 p.m., and can be viewed in-person at Tom Davies Square or livestreamed by clicking here.

Tyler Clarke covers city hall and political affairs for Sudbury.com.



Comments

If you would like to apply to become a Verified Commenter, please fill out this form.