Municipalities including…

Municipalities including Toronto changed their by-laws to encourage Additional Dwelling Units and have seen far fewer units built than anticipated, as it just isn't financial viable. So for the province to weaken the measures by which a lot can be developed and encroach on adjacent lots does communities a disservice, especially as this is as of right. The performance metrics below help provide comparability between different built forms in a manner that allows communities context on what can be built and its potential impact on neighbors. Yet the province wants to either do away with them or meaningfully alter them for no rational goal or appreciation of the implications.

1. Angular plane
2. Maximum lot coverage
3. Floor Space Index (FSI)
4. Minimum lot size
5. Building distance separation

The above selected performance standards are also among the most commonly regulated by municipal planning departments across the province, which will simply add to the chaos.

The technical changes in the proposal manifests itself in reduced soft-scape that challenges water absorption, increases flooding, puts other natural cheap global warming mitigation such as trees at risk and increases the impact and cost of more volatile weather.

As for the impact on communities, it is going to increase land values, create greater uncertainty as to what density looks like which will increase tensions within communities as transitions from one property become much closer, and less respectful - impacting sunlight (more shadows), more water run off, parking challenges, strains on infrastructure and ultimately desirability. This encourages ownership for rental rather than ownership for owner occupancy, which has a material impact on communities.

As for the democratic process this takes away community choice and adds to the financialization of real estate, which is what drove prices up in the first place. So you are not making things more affordable, as the cost of these additional residential units don't benefit from any economies of scale nor can they as each property owner will need something customized to their property. The vast majority of these ARU's will be for rent and that is temporary housing in nature with a desire by the owner for cash-flow that is a much different motivation than owning a home to live and bring up a family.

Currently the enforcement of the building code is challenged so bringing these types of massive changes will bring about unintended consequences. There will need to be meaningful addition to current building code enforcement resources otherwise the public realm will be a meaningful loser.

If you do want to address housing affordability, minimize environmental impact through appropriate densification and add to communities through workforce housing without any grants or subsidies I have attached a policy paper from the Co-operative Homeownership Sector that can help workers starting at incomes of $35K to own a unit in a Co-op through an innovative financing mechanism. Please take a look. This piece was written for Toronto, but applies to any Ontario community.