Keep our parks

Dear editor:
The mayor and council probably all agree Fort Frances is a great place to be and live. But my question is where are we going?
I realize that we, and mayor/council, have many challenges every day and every month, as many things need to be fixed and issues to address; plus the dreaded budget every year.
Our local mill and town, together with our provincial government, have done a great job in putting the new bio-mass boiler project underway. Plus our dedicated group of library people are working toward a grand new library here.
But now I see that we are visiting the old park issue (Nelson Street park), or as it is listed on the map as Williams Avenue park. Whatever it is called, this “green open space” once again is up for debate and discussion.
If we look back to 2004, there was a movement against this proposal with a multitude of signatures. I am sure mayor and council can retrieve it from the records department (on or about July 15, 2004).
Plus back in 1990, By-Law #72/90 (Amendment No. 34 to the Official Plan of the Fort Frances Planning Area) indicates that these efforts were successful. The bylaw was adopted on Nov. 26, 1990.
Furthermore, the Ministry of Municipal Affairs approved this amendment to the official plan on July 16, 1992. This bylaw amended the existing zoning bylaw (#8/77) and clearly designated this area as open space with a “site specific provision—Town of Fort Frances, Nelson Street Park and Playground.”
I hope that you, our elected officials, can see the betterment of our community by not trying to sell this small park for a mere four-five lots that will generate a short-term windfall.
Whereas if you need a short-term windfall, then sell the “empty space” on Front and Nelson at the corner of Mosher Avenue, which may help you with your budget shortfall (but I am not here to tell you how to run the budget, just look for other tools at your disposal).
In spite of these efforts in 1990 and 2004 (which clearly demonstrated the will and desire of the surrounding neighborhood—and were soundly supported by new bylaws) the issue is back on the table.
It has not been made clear to area residents why the Nelson Street park is back on the chopping block. Is there a monetary shortfall? Is the same developer or prospective homeowner continuing to approach council about revisiting a sale?
Area residents have a right to know, and townspeople have a right to know, what principle is guiding the actions of their council.
Removing green space for the simple result of selling five lots is extremely shortsighted; you will still have a shortage. You never ever get green space back!
Would it not be better to use tools, such as short-term debentures and “local improvements,” to help develop areas such as Sixth Street East, which is also on the map, between Shevlin and Williams.
I understand there already is a roadbed and several components of the infrastructure there (sewer, water, storm sewer, and curbs at the corner).
My simple math for this area shows an average of eight lots per block, with an average of $2,000 taxes w/improvements per lot and four blocks (north and south sides).
This equals 32 lots @ $2000/year = $ 64,000 taxes/year. This is $54,000 more in tax revenue then four-five lots on Nelson would ever produce. Even without doing a total financial analysis, I am sure of a break even or payback point of seven-10 years is possible.
I have not even considered the potential for expansion of Minnie Avenue to the north, nor the economics of the having building space here and other areas to the west, northwest, and the north end (where the town has large tracts of land that could be sold).
And I am sure there are many other privately-help parcels which landowners would like some assistance or guidance to help them develop. Some of the others that I am aware of are Erin Crescent (20-30 lots), Eighth Street East (five-10 lots), Colonization Road West (60-70, w/10 riverfront), plus the 32 or so on Sixth Street East).
The total is more than 100.
Wherever new developments are started and energies are spent, are there not bylaws with “green space requirements.” And do these bylaws not apply to existing green spaces?
I have reviewed council minutes and parks located within the one-km radius of Nelson Street, and it shows several which already are developed and sponsored by service clubs, and one of them appears to be where the new library is to be built.
However, the other parks are smaller and require crossing of major roads, truck routes, and wood yards, and some not even large enough to fly a kite. And I would like to add that very few of them have had any traffic this winter at all.
Perhaps a relocation of the equipment from the Butler Avenue park would be beneficial. Then you could have four-five riverfront lots for sale?
What will the future of Huffman School be? Maybe the town should apply for that land?
What is the future of the Sixth Street School and all of its land? Is the town interested?
Creativity, transparency, and openness will go a long way towards engendering a feeling of good faith between townspeople and council.
As I am coming to the close of this letter, I ask mayor and council, and other members of this community, to use some other tools at your disposal to help plan for the future of this town—and future generations—for growth and development as shown in your official plan.
This is where open spaces are permitted to allow “recreational uses which are normally associated with everyday activities with residential areas.” (Official plan 2.1.1 iv).
And “Neighborhood parks should be between 1.5 and 2.0 ha in size and should have suitable dimensions to provide for junior soccer pitches and junior baseball diamonds. (Official plan 2.1.6 ii).
If we look around, you can see many new business and people do come to Fort Frances. Our mill has had request for lot availability to help attract and maintain employees to help them with their changes and growth.
All of which will help increase our tax base and spur some economic activity. As my simple math has shown, 32 lots (or four blocks) has yielded a good income no matter who sells it.
Sincerely yours
Eric H. Rude