37-unit townhouse project in old Richmond Hill could kill ‘golden goose’
Passionate residents, several councillors air concerns

YorkRegion.com
Nov. 5, 2015
Kim Zarzour

Residents filled Richmond Hill council chambers last night to protest a townhouse development proposed for the heritage core.

The project proposed by developer Laurier Homes would be built on almost three acres on the south side of Arnold Crescent, west of Yonge, and would contain four single-detached dwellings and a 37-unit three-storey townhouse development.

About 60 residents who attended a public meeting at town hall Wednesday night voiced concerns about the loss of their unique neighbourhood.

“It’s a development that is entirely inconsistent with everything that the neighbourhood is and can be,” said Michael Wilson, who moved into a home across from the proposed development last December because, he said, “we wanted that community feel. We didn’t want to raise our family in a cookie-cutter suburb.”

Wilson said the development would be precedent-setting and suggested Richmond Hill look to Main Street Markham and Unionville to see how they maintained their heritage under development pressure.

“I understand development has to happen... I ask council to respect the heritage character of the neighbourhood,” he said. “There are homes that existed less than a decade after confederation, that’s how unique and historic that neighbourhood is”.

The applicant is seeking council approval to permit a residential development comprised of four lots fronting on Arnold, with 128 parking spaces for the overall project.

The land is zoned residential; permitted uses include single-detached dwellings, recreational, institutional and public uses.

According to a staff report, under the town’s Official Plan, land within the “village district” that does not front onto Yonge may hold low or medium density residential. Small-scale office, commercial and retail uses that complement the residential character of the area are also permitted on the land.

The proposed development fit those density levels, and the heights also are permitted (up to five storeys are allowed), according to the staff report.

“This is where growth is to be directed. The dilemma is how to deal with that,” said Murray Evans, speaking on behalf of the developer.

Evans told councillors and residents that the proposed three-storey height, on a property on the periphery of more dense development, is a compromise to allow a smoother transition to residential areas.

Traffic studies predict minimal impact, he said — to which residents in the room responded with guffaws.

Traffic was a major concern expressed by residents in their delegations, stating the developer is cramming too many homes into too small an area and a section of the roadway is already used as a shortcut for drivers.

Many of the residents who spoke to council last night said they or their families had lived in the neighbourhood for decades, some for multiple generations, and said they were appalled at the pace of change in town.

They also raised concerns about the impact on stormwater flow, snow and garbage removal, safety, the environment and parking.

In a letter to the town, Robert and Lynda Johnson warned “if we and the town want to keep this street as an example of what Richmond Hill is proud to show the world, then we need a policy that considers eclectic and valuable over insane crowding and unabated avarice.”

If the development goes ahead, it will be a tragedy, said Kurbanali Manji. “These plans are outrageous. The developer is trying to concrete over so much history and character, destroying the very essence of this wonderful old village area. We in Richmond Hill have to stop becoming a dumping ground for Torontonians priced out of the market.”

This is the second well-attended meeting dealing with development on the Arnold Crescent property. Similar controversial infill proposals are being considered by the town elsewhere in the popular Mill Pond neighbourhood and small red and white signs now pepper the area, saying “We say NO to any infill development of townhouses or apartment buildings on Arnold or any part of Richmond Hill heritage core.”

“I was not at all surprised about the turnout,” said Ward 4 Councillor David West. “People in this area are quite passionate about their homes.”

West called on the developer to come up with something more imaginative and compatible, but he said the issue is not just confined to the Mill Pond area.

There are many one-of-a-kind neighbourhoods in town, he said. It’s Richmond Hill’s “golden goose”.

“It is diversity in housing location choices that makes Richmond Hill different than many other suburban communities... If we allow unfettered infill that is not compatible and sensitive to the unique characteristics of a given area, we risk eroding our ‘golden goose’ — making all these different areas much more ‘the same’.”

Ward 1 Councillor Greg Beros warned residents that their impassioned speeches would not sway the Ontario Municipal Board, should the battle proceed.

“I’ve seen communities fight like crazy, but for the most part stopped nothing,” the Oak Ridges councillor said. “We are putting houses in every single corner wherever there is land available... If these emotional arguments could hold at the OMB at a land tribunal, we wouldn’t have the build-out in Richmond Hill that we have.”

Ward 2 Councillor Tom Muench said he sympathized with the residents, but noted “50 to 60-foot lots are not the norm today”.

But other councillors agreed with the residents’ statements.

Ward 5 Councillor Karen Cilevitz said she is alarmed that the “overbearing” development would see the loss of 75 per cent of trees.

It appears to be happening more and more often that developers seek the most density that a property can yield, said Mayor Dave Barrow, “but I think also respecting the neighbourhood and compatibility must be taken into consideration.”

He suggested the developer work with staff and the neighbourhood to find a satisfactory solution.

The meeting was a legislated part of the planning process with comments referred back to staff for consideration.

Staff next performs a more thorough investigation of the planning implications and compliance with related documents including the Official Plan, followed by a report with a recommendation that will come before council for a decision.