Why some residents are concerned about the Town survey
Our concern is about question design and how results may be interpreted, not about attacking Town staff or assuming motives. The examples below are based on the survey as residents viewed it in August 2026.
Housing is ranked without a clear “no housing” choice
One question asks respondents, if housing is considered at Annandale, to rank detached homes, townhouses, low-rise apartments/condos, high-rise apartments/condos and a mixed neighbourhood.
Concern: A person opposed to housing can still be forced to produce a housing preference ranking.
First ask what the site should become
Offer “retain and improve the ball diamonds,” “retain as park/greenspace,” mixed-use alternatives, residential redevelopment, other and unsure. Ask housing-type preferences only of people who support housing.
Positive framing of redevelopment
A question asks whether exploring development at Annandale could help achieve broader goals such as housing, municipal asset growth or long-term financial sustainability.
Concern: Possible benefits are named in the question, while possible losses such as recreation capacity, established greenspace, neighbourhood impacts and replacement costs are not presented in the same frame.
Rate both potential benefits and potential costs
Ask residents to separately assess housing supply, municipal finances, recreation capacity, greenspace, traffic, environmental effects, neighbourhood compatibility and servicing impacts.
Support for both sites is combined
The survey asks how supportive respondents are of the Town continuing to explore long-term options for both sites.
Concern: Someone may support Mall Road while strongly opposing residential redevelopment of Annandale. One combined answer cannot accurately record that position.
Ask two separate support questions
Measure support for Mall Road independently from support for residential redevelopment at Annandale, then ask how residents think the two projects should relate.
Some wording assumes a new complex
A Mall Road question asks how important it is that “a new sportsfield complex be built with the ability to expand in the future.”
Concern: The phrasing can be read as presupposing construction rather than asking whether the Town should proceed.
Use a conditional frame
“If the Town proceeds with a new sportsfield complex, how important would future expansion capacity be?”
“Continue to explore” can soften the decision being measured
Questions about continuing to explore redevelopment can blend support for more study with support for the redevelopment concept itself.
Separate study from outcome
Ask one question about whether further study should continue and a separate question about whether the respondent supports the underlying land-use change.
A shorter survey with separate decisions
Our survey includes an explicit Annandale retention option, a balanced support scale for each site and a question about whether Mall Road should add capacity or replace Annandale.