'Why is this allowed?': Richmond Hill residents frustrated by infill development

Bylaws, official plan designations don't protect against projects

Yorkregion.com
May 25, 2021
Yoyo Yan

"Why are these older homes not valued?"

"Why can't developers make new builds fit into the existing neighbourhood?"

"Why is the planning department approving proposed plans that are not appropriate for the area?"

Pat Pollock and her fellow residents in the Bathurst and Carrville area have many questions about the infill projects in their neighbourhoods, which have continued during the pandemic.

Most recently, at least two more applications have been approved by Richmond Hill’s committee of adjustment (COA); one March 4 regarding variances requested for 27 Mayvern Cres., and one Feb. 11 requesting variances at 68 Birch Ave. Both cases are being appealed to the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal (LPAT).

Although both applications are for larger dwellings for single families, Pollock believes they are unfit for the older established neighbourhood, where the houses are about 1,000 to 2,400 square feet in size, consisting of bungalows, side splits and two-storey homes.

"We have three of those builds in our neighbourhood now and they overpower the existing houses; they do not integrate into the area because of size/mass, design and height," Pollock wrote in an email to The Liberal.

She worries that affordability is being compromised, when houses with selling prices ranging from $775,000 to $1.3 million are being bought by investors, only to be demolished and rebuilt with much larger homes that are selling between $2.5 and $2.9 million.

"These new builds are much less affordable than the existing houses, to mid-income earners, new families, new home buyers, retirees," Pollock said.

York Region council has declared an affordable housing crisis. Richmond Hill is currently working on an affordable housing strategy, with a draft was presented to council May 4.

"In that strategy there are many tools suggested in order to provide affordable housing for our city," said Pollock. "However, they do not make the effort to retain existing more affordable housing."

But what concerns Pollock and Birch Avenue resident Arnold Schwisberg more, is the disregard for the Planning Act and the official plan at the COA hearings. Schwisberg calls this COA "legal renegades" with its "shocking actual bias against ratepayers."

Under the Planning Act, Schwisberg said, there are specific things which a COA must do, including the test for approval of an application and the need to provide reasons indicating the effect of oppositions on the outcome.

"I've written and made oral submissions to this effect at least four times to no avail, but this COA refuses to comply with the statute."

While the city is undertaking the official plan review, Ward 4 Coun. David West believes an updated zoning bylaw is desperately needed to include specific details about what's allowed and what's not.

The councillor added that all neighbourhoods do, in fact, have a unique character. "The problem is, whether they be new or old, all the different bylaws and official plan designations don't protect these kinds of things in the neighbourhood that people value."

"But if you allow all the neighbourhoods to start looking the same, because their uniqueness all get eroded," he said, "then kind of like all the colours in your crayon box all melt into grey."

Pollock, chair of Mayvern Area Residents Association (MARA), believes the infill development also hurts the stability of her community, because Mayvern area is not a priority infill area as listed in the city's official plan.