County of Brant Council received more information in regards to preliminary zoning changes to permit four residential units, as-of-right, during the regular Council meeting on Tuesday, April 8, 2025.
Earlier this year on February 11, Council directed staff to undertake a detailed analysis to identify local provisions that would permit up to four (4) units as-of-right, per lot, within the fully-serviced primary settlement areas of Paris and St. George.
According to the staff report, this initiative is “one of the first steps in the County’s Housing Needs Assessment process, aimed at facilitating the development of more affordable and diverse housing options while supporting focused growth and infrastructure.”
Back in February, Brandon Kortleve, the County’s Manager of Policy Planning, explained that by approving the zoning by-law amendment, it would allow the County to qualify for the Canada Housing Infrastructure Fund (CHIF) – Direct Delivery Stream funding.
“The Canada Housing Infrastructure Fund (CHIF) aims to accelerate the construction and upgrading of housing-enabling infrastructure, including drinking water, wastewater, stormwater, and solid waste infrastructure to support increasing housing supply and densification,” noted the April 8 report. “To qualify, municipalities with a population greater than 30,000 must commit to zoning for four (4) units as-of-right, per lot, in all low-density residential areas with municipal servicing. If received, the funding would support infrastructure upgrades in Paris and St. George, ultimately supporting increased housing options in the County.”
So what does “four units as-of-right” mean?
Essentially, it means that a property can have up to four units on one lot. This could include a fourplex, which is one building split into four equal parts, or one main home and three additional rental units (ARUs) that are smaller.
Additionally, detached, semidetached, duplex, triplex, stacked townhouse, rowhouse, and street-fronting rowhouse dwellings could also all be used to achieve four units.
“Four units are achieved as a result of the construction of a new primary dwelling, additions to an existing primary dwelling, or interior/basement conversions [but] they must meet the standard regulation of the associated zone, ” said Negin Mousavi Berenjaghi, a Development Planning Student with the County. “Four units can also be achieved through detached ARUs, either by converting an existing accessory structure or constructing a new detached dwelling.”
Even though as-of-right permission means a property owner can build without going through a public meeting or getting Council approval, the planning student said that regardless of the configuration, a building permit would be required for any new proposed residential dwelling.
She added that currently, the County’s existing zoning regulations permit up to three residential units per lot as-of-right (one primary and two ARUs), in fully serviced areas.
“Despite permissions for three unit properties, all ARUs developed to date have only accommodated two units, with the majority being developed as attached or basement units,” said Mousavi Berenjaghi.
As it stands right now, a small percentage of lots would actually be eligible for third and fourth units, those which are mostly larger lots or older developed areas.
“Certain lot characteristics, such as lot coverage, parking, driveway, pedestrian access, setbacks, servicing and the existing building type can further limit the uptake of the four units initiative,” she added.
If the County updates what’s currently allowed, this would make it so there are multiple configurations that could be utilized.
“These configurations would allow up to three attached ARUs, or up to two attached ARUs and one detached ARU, or up to one attached ARU and two detached ARUs,” said Mousavi Berenjaghi. “These configurations would support different types of ARUs including additions to the existing dwelling, above garage additions, accessory structure conversions, interior or basement conversions and new detached dwellings.”
She later went over the following amendments they could make to the by-law.
Permitted use for Zoning
- Add fourplexes as a permitted use for all Urban Residential zones.
- Remove the “Existing Only” condition for duplexes within R1 and R2 zones.
Definitions
- Remove the definition for a converted dwelling to avoid unnecessary classification of ARUs.
- Add a list of uses that would allow for ARUs in the ARU definition.
Building Configuration
- Add a regulation regarding building configuration and the number of permitted ARUs in fully serviced areas.
Maximum Building Height for Accessory Structures
- Increase the maximum structure height for detached ARUs from 4.5 metres to 6 metres. Minimum Interior Side Yard and Rear Yard Setback for Accessory Structures
- Require a minimum of 3-metre interior side yard and rear yard setback where a second-storey window, balcony, or exterior stairs of a detached ARU face a lot line.
Rooftop Amenity Space
- Prohibit rooftop amenity space above the second storey of a detached ARU unless it meets the maximum height for accessory structures or buildings.
Following Mousavi Berenjaghi presentation, Mayor David Bailey then opened the floor to the public to ask any questions before councillors had the opportunity to comment.
Later, Councillor John Bell expressed his concerns. He noted that if there were such few lots that could make four units work, he was unsure why they would make a change to the by-law in the first place.
Councillor Lukas Oakley said while things could change after the federal election, the report was brought forward because of potential funding.
“Who knows what the priorities of that government will be, but the [current] federal government was indicating that there would be some sort of funding that would be tied to us having four units as a right,” he said. “Even if, practically speaking, there’s very few units that come out of it, we would still then be opening up the opportunity to get federal funding. I think the general temperature of what I’ve seen all four major parties put out, I think that would be fair to say, is probably a priority of the next [government].”
Later, Councillor David Miller asked if the driving factor for these changes was the Canada Housing Infrastructure Fund (CHIF), Jeremy Vink, the County’s Director of Development Planning, said that was partially the reason.
“It’s partially because we’re trying to apply for infrastructure funding and we get some substantial monies to help assist us with some infrastructure works, and we have to have this in place in order to achieve that. Other elements, and you’re going to hear from us later on in April about our housing needs, there is a need for us to achieve some different housing types and different opportunities in the community, and we’re trying to find ways to achieve that. The more we can achieve that in existing service areas, the better it is for all of us in terms of financial and tax resources, but also better use of existing urban areas. So there’s a lot of benefits, more than just the financial, but we’re trying to service some needs and give opportunities for people to provide some different housing types.”
Miller followed up with the question of, if they were increasing housing density, should they be looking into increasing transit also?
“I guess there’s a chicken and egg theory here. You need density to make transit work, and if you want density, you should provide transit, and if you want to support some housing needs, you should have transit,” replied Vink. “So, the two do kind of go hand in hand at some point; do we need transit necessarily for four units as-of-right? No, because we’re still requiring the parking. So you’re still accommodating the needs of the community on the property, but you’re missing out on a housing need or target that might be for people who can’t afford cars, that would benefit from transit.”
In the end, Council voted to receive the report as information, and once the rest of the public consultation is complete, another will come back to council to adopt at a later date.
Kimberly De Jong’s reporting is funded by the Canadian government through its Local Journalism Initiative.The funding allows her to report rural and agricultural stories from Blandford-Blenheim and Brant County. Reach her at kimberly.dejong@brantbeacon.ca.
