Council agreed Richmond Hill badly needs more purpose-built rental housing—but rejected a proposal to defer millions of dollars in development charges for 40 years. The cell-tower dispute also returned, without being reopened.
By City Desk
Richmond Hill Council’s last meeting before the summer break was short on agenda items but long on one fundamental question: how much financial risk should the City accept to get rental housing built?
Most of the agenda passed unanimously in minutes. Council then spent more than an hour debating a proposed 40-year, interest-free development-charge deferral for qualifying purpose-built rental buildings.
Passed: Almost everything on consent
Council unanimously adopted the recommendations coming from the July 8 Committee of the Whole meeting, along with the associated bylaws and remaining consent-agenda business.
That meant the only item separated for discussion was a staff response to Regional and Local Councillor Joe DiPaola’s proposal to match York Region’s rental development-charge deferral program.
Rejected: A 40-year rental development-charge deferral
DiPaola proposed that Richmond Hill defer its development charges for qualifying non-luxury rental buildings for 40 years, mirroring the program already approved by York Region.
His motion added a Richmond Hill condition requiring 5 per cent of a participating building’s units to meet an affordable-rent definition. The temporary program would have applied to qualifying applications submitted before January 1, 2028.
Oxford Properties supported the proposal. The company is planning approximately 630 purpose-built rental units on a Hillcrest Mall parking lot and told Council that the project would be difficult to move from the drawing board into construction without the additional deferral.
Oxford argued that Richmond Hill has only about 1,800 purpose-built rental units for a population of more than 200,000. Rental buildings, it said, offer greater stability than investor-owned condominiums and provide housing for newcomers, young adults, downsizers and workers who may not be able—or may not wish—to purchase a home.
DiPaola’s argument was straightforward: if the project is not built, the City will not collect its development charges anyway. A deferral, he said, could produce hundreds of homes, building-permit revenue and a larger property-tax base.
The majority of Council saw the calculation differently.
Staff reported that Richmond Hill already has a shorter development-charge deferral policy that satisfies York Region’s requirement for a municipal contribution. Extending the period to 40 years without interest would increase the City’s financial exposure and reduce the future purchasing power of the money eventually collected.
Council heard that Richmond Hill’s growth-related capital program totals approximately $833 million, with around $600 million expected to come from development charges. The City is also already dealing with an estimated $153-million development-charge shortfall resulting from provincial changes.
Mayor David West said the financial impact for a rental building of roughly 600 units could be between $12 million and $16 million over the deferral period. Without those funds when infrastructure is required, the City would have to delay projects, borrow money or shift more of the cost onto existing taxpayers.
Councillor Carol Davidson said Richmond Hill could not accept potentially “crushing debt” to secure private rental construction. Councillor Scott Thompson added that staff had not found clear evidence that a City deferral would necessarily produce rental buildings that would otherwise not be constructed.
When the recorded vote was called, DiPaola was the only member to support the rental deferral. The remaining eight members voted against it.
Delayed: An attempt to seek another report also fails
Before deciding the main motion, Regional and Local Councillor Godwin Chan proposed referring the issue back to staff for more analysis of the financial consequences and the approaches taken by other municipalities.
The referral was eventually amended to request a report in September, before Council enters its election-period slowdown.
Several councillors supported giving staff another opportunity to examine the revised proposal, particularly because the 5 per cent affordability requirement had been added shortly before the meeting and had not been circulated to Council in advance.
Others said staff had already produced a detailed report and that Council had enough information to make a decision. The referral motion failed, forcing Council to vote on the proposal that morning.
The clerk advised that the defeat meant the matter had been dealt with by the current Council. A similar policy could still be introduced during the next term.
Flashpoint: Housing incentive or infrastructure debt?
The debate was not really about whether Richmond Hill needs rental housing. Every councillor who spoke agreed that the city has too little purpose-built rental stock.
The disagreement was over who should carry the cost and risk of making those buildings financially viable.
Supporters treated the development charges as revenue the City would never receive unless the project proceeded. From that perspective, deferring the charge could unlock housing, construction activity, permit fees and future property taxes without requiring the City to write a cheque today.
Opponents treated the charges as money needed to build infrastructure for the residents who would occupy those apartments. The buildings might create tax revenue, they argued, but their residents would also require parks, libraries, roads, water systems and other municipal services.
It was, at its core, another version of Richmond Hill’s growing financial dilemma: Council wants more housing, but the City’s current system depends on collecting large upfront fees from the same housing projects it is trying to make financially possible.
No Action: Cell-tower dispute returns
Before the regular agenda began, Council heard opposing presentations about the proposed telecommunications tower at 1124 Elgin Mills Road East.
A Shared Tower Inc. representative argued that the company had completed the required consultation process and that Council must issue a formal decision of concurrence or non-concurrence. She said a step that should have taken fewer than 22 days had remained unresolved for more than 60 days.
Resident Joyce Fox urged Council to maintain its opposition, citing concerns about public notification, streetscape effects, the photographs used in the application, nearby buildings and whether another tower is necessary.
Fox also objected to proposed federal changes that could shorten tower consultations, reduce traditional public notices and allow more of the process to be conducted through an online portal.
West explained that Council had already dealt with the application. Reopening it would have required a councillor to introduce it as an emergency or time-sensitive matter, followed by a two-thirds vote allowing Council to reconsider its earlier decision.
No councillor introduced such a motion, so Council took no further action on the tower.
Up Next: Summer break—and a future rental debate
Council is now on its summer break and is expected to resume regular meetings in September.
The proposed 40-year City deferral is finished for this term, but the broader issue is not. Richmond Hill still has very little purpose-built rental housing, developers continue to say projects are financially difficult, and the City remains concerned that reducing development charges will transfer infrastructure costs to existing residents.
The question will almost certainly return for the next Council: if neither developers nor municipal taxpayers can carry the cost alone, who will?
Oddity: Council requests elevator music
While councillors silently read DiPaola’s lengthy motion on the chamber screens, West suggested that Council should have musical interludes for such occasions—perhaps some elevator music, as in a “big-time production.”
No soundtrack materialized, but the pause may have been the calmest minute of the debate.