Markham’s decision to roll back a citywide four-unit housing policy could have ripple effects across neighbouring municipalities — including Richmond Hill — especially as local politicians head toward the next municipal election cycle.
by City Desk
Mayor Frank Scarpitti recently used strong-mayor powers to veto a council decision related to allowing up to four residential units on typical residential lots, commonly referred to as “fourplexes as-of-right.” The move effectively reverses part of Markham’s earlier direction to allow more “missing middle” housing in established neighbourhoods.
The decision may resonate beyond Markham. Municipalities across York Region are facing similar pressures to allow gentle density such as duplexes, triplexes, and fourplexes in order to increase housing supply while avoiding high-rise development in low-rise neighbourhoods.
Cities like Richmond Hill are grappling with the same debates over neighbourhood character, infrastructure capacity, and housing affordability. With municipal elections approaching in Fall 2026, housing policies like fourplex zoning could quickly become campaign issues.
Federal funding question
The policy shift is also drawing attention because Markham previously committed to allowing four units as-of-right across residential areas as part of its agreement with the federal government under the Housing Accelerator Fund.
Through that agreement, the City of Markham secured roughly $58.8 million in federal funding intended to speed up housing construction and planning reforms. One of the core commitments in the city’s action plan involved enabling up to four residential units on typical residential lots.
The federal program is designed to encourage municipalities to remove zoning barriers and increase housing supply. In other jurisdictions, the federal government has warned that funding could be at risk if municipalities fail to deliver on promised reforms.
While Markham has not lost funding, critics argue that backing away from the four-unit policy could raise questions about whether the city is still meeting the commitments tied to the funding agreement.
A test case for local politics
The controversy highlights the growing tension between federal housing initiatives, provincial housing targets, and local political realities.
Policies like fourplex zoning are often framed as a way to introduce “missing middle” housing — modest density that fits within existing neighbourhoods — but they have also proven politically sensitive in many suburban communities.
If Markham’s reversal stands, it could encourage similar pushback elsewhere. For municipalities like Richmond Hill, which face comparable housing pressures and voter concerns, the situation may offer an early glimpse of how housing policy could shape debates leading into the next municipal election.