‘They’re playing math games’: Richmond Hill residents question plan for Yonge and Bernard

“We know the original density would’ve worked. But can we go higher?"

Yorkregion.com
December 20, 2019
Sheila Wang

A city-held open forum for the future of a key development area in Richmond Hill seems to leave more questions than answers.

More than 200 residents and city councillors attended an open house session on Dec. 10 to learn about what the future held for the Yonge Street and Bernard Avenue community.

It was the first step the city has taken to rehash the secondary plan for the Yonge and Bernard key development area (KDA) since a majority of council repealed the original one in April with a view to greater density and height.

Concerned residents filled the plaza suite of the Richmond Hill Centre for Performing Arts at the two-hour open forum, leaving standing room only.

“It looks like they want to triple the size of the KDA, and that was the biggest surprise,” resident John Li told the Liberal, troubled by a new intensification concept introduced by staff during the 30-minute presentation.

Sybelle von Kursell, the city’s manager for planning policy, briefed the engaged audience on the status of the secondary plan with an update on policy changes.

The KDA falls within the recently identified Major Transit Station Areas (MTSAs) which are defined by Ontario as areas within 500 to 800 metres of an existing or planned transit station, according to von Kursell.

The density target in the 63-hectare MTSA around Yonge and Bernard would be a minimum of 200 residents and jobs per hectare, the planning manager said, which seemed to be lower than what was set out in the original secondary plan for the KDA.

The KDA plan was targeted at a density of 500 to 560 residents and jobs per hectare at full build out, and it was council’s intention to further increase the density which has sparked public outrage.

“They’re playing math games,” said Li, who was among several residents quick to call out the official on the confusion of the two concepts.

The city was inflating the actual size of the KDA in the disguise of MTSA in order to normalize its density, Li said.

“There’s probably a little bit confusion there. … We have not increased the size of the KDA. We’re not going to do that at all,” said Patrick Lee, Richmond Hill's director of policy planning, noting the city was “ahead of the game” as the Yonge and Bernard KDA was already well within the MTSA.

Lee assured that the city was not going to change the low-density area outside the KDA within the MTSA circle at Yonge and Bernard, either.

The transportation consultant is currently looking at opportunities to accommodate higher density in the same area, since transit and road network is the “biggest determinant” in the plan.

“We know the original density would’ve worked. But can we go higher? We don’t know, but council asked us to look into that,” Lee said.

Schools? Hospitals?

“It’s very embarrassing for the city’s planning staff because residents asked very strong questions, and they couldn’t answer,” Li said.

It’s difficult for staff to answer these questions about hospitals and public schools when municipalities have no control, Lee responded.

“The municipalities do not have the ability to limit growth because there’s not enough for hospital capacity. The onus is on the province to match the hospital to the growth that comes about,” he said.

Taking the new Mackenzie Vaughan Hospital as an example, Lee said, the province approved it in response to population growth in Vaughan, Richmond Hill and surrounding areas.

With the anticipated population growth, residents at the open house were wondering where the new public schools were planned in the area.

The answer is none.

The schools in the area have already been overloaded, Li said, stating two new public schools would be needed in the KDA.

Staff has consulted the school boards in the planning process for the area, but they have not identified the need for a new school site yet, Lee said.

What you can do

Council is scheduled for vote on the final adoption of the secondary plan at a council meeting in March before the hearing at the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal (LPAT) slated for June 22.

A transportation consultant is expected to bring the draft recommendations to council in January while landowner and resident appellant meetings are taking place.

Residents are also welcome to provide their feedback to the open house to the city staff and council by filling out a comment sheet which presents proposed options in terms of parkland, transportation and urban design and built forms.

Visit richmondhill.ca to summit comments and register for updates at bernardKDA@richmondhill.ca