Question 1. Are there…

Question 1. Are there specific zoning by-law barriers standards or requirements that frustrate the development of ARUs (e.g., maximum building height, minimum lot size, side and rear lot setbacks, lot coverage, maximum number of bedrooms permitted per lot, and angular plane requirements, etc.)?

Answer: Generally, no. Zoning provisions, standards, etc. are adopted by municipalities for good reason. They are intended to facilitate good planning and achieve the necessary balance of what is best for the public good. They are responsive to community-specific social and environmental conditions and challenges and are based on sound research and experience. ARUs are broadly permitted where and when there is existing demand and actual need for new housing. Loosening rules or (more problematically) removing municipal discretion relating to zoning provisions is contrary to good planning. It would enable the abuse of ARUs and inappropriate implementation, such as allowing ARUs on at-capacity waterbodies, allowing overdevelopment by eliminating lot coverage, etc. These would create considerable impacts at the community level and would roll back years of positive progress in terms of necessary environmental controls for sensitive waterbodies and other ecosystems - which are the backbone of rural economies in many municipalities.

ARUs are one tool in the overall housing toolkit, but with any tool it is appropriate for use in some but not all settings. Lastly, expanding ARUs does not appear to reflect market demand. Continued focus on residential and settlement area infill with missing middle-type housing (most importantly, attainable housing) is what is most needed.