I would like to comment as…

I would like to comment as an Urban Design and Architectural Designer practitioner practicing within the province of Ontario. While I completely support the idea of ARUs and believe that certain development standards need to be revisited to appropriately accommodate ARUs for them to be considered a feasible addition to a property, I do believe that certain aspects of city planning need to be protected for to ensure safe, healthy and comfortable living standards for residents.

My comment is specifically with regards to the proposed 4 metre building separation distance between a primary home and the associated ARU on the same lot.

Side yard setbacks of 1.2 metres are typical of residential lots thereby creating a 2.4 metre building separation distance between the side elevations of two homes. This makes it appear that a 4 metre distances between the rear of a main dwelling and the front face of the associated ARU is a sufficient distance.

However, my concern lies with access to natural daylight, access to sky views and mitigation of privacy concerns. Windows within sideyards can be located such that it avoids being directly across a neighbour's window, thereby mitigating any privacy concerns. However, for rear and front elevations, windows tend to be larger, and the flexibility to locate windows/glazing so that they aren't directly opposite one another is next to impossible. In other words, the flexibility of window placement available to architects and homeowners on a sideyard wall doesn't exist on a rear wall.

This implies that windows on the front face of an ARU will be directly facing the windows of the rear wall of the main dwelling, and that too at a proposed distance of 4 metres. This is no conducive to mitigating privacy concerns.

In my opinion, 6 to 7 metres should be considered the minimum appropriate building separation distance between a main dwelling and its associated ARU. If a site cannot accommodate this facing distance, a different ARU configuration (such as one that is directly attached to the rear of the main dwelling) should be sought.

Furthermore, a reduced separation distance to 4 metres also implies that most of the backyard could be occupied by an ARU leaving no landscaped amenities. We should ideally be protecting for these types of spaces as they directly impact the mental well-being of inhabitants.

We should be careful to protect for development standards that do not compromise on healthy and comfortable living standards.