On March 20, at the General Committee Meeting in Barrie City Hall, the council deliberated extensively on amendments to the city's zoning bylaws, spotlighting the national push towards increased urban density amidst housing shortages. At the heart of the discussion was a federal initiative: cities must allow up to four residential units per lot to access funds from the $4 billion Housing Accelerator Fund, aimed at mitigating housing crises. This goes against the backdrop of Barrie's 2021 zoning bylaw, which capped residential units on a property at three.

As Barrie aligns its policies with federal and provincial goals, the council faces mounting pressures from residents eager to preserve their neighborhood's essence, particularly its green canopies. In response, Ward 1 Councillor Clare Riepma proposed an amendment aimed at a more conservative approach to the development of Detached Accessory Dwelling Units (DADUs), focusing on reducing their maximum height to 4.5 meters and enlarging setback requirements significantly to protect neighborhood character and privacy.

Mayor Alex Nuttall emphasized the importance of adapting the bylaw to allow for additional residential units on residentially zoned lands. The ensuing discussion unveiled a range of perspectives among council members and city officials. Some voiced support for smaller setbacks to maximize property utilization and meet density objectives. In contrast, others, like Riepma, raised concerns about potential negative impacts on neighborhood ambiance, privacy, and the removal of mature trees—issues previously encountered when the city permitted three units per lot.

Clr Robert Thomson introduced the notion of equitably distributing secondary dwellings across the city's wards, hinting at a strategy to prevent the concentration of these units in specific neighborhoods. 

Michelle Banfield, VP of Development Services, offered a professional planning standpoint, indicating staff's initial recommendation for smaller setbacks to encourage higher property unit counts. However, the final discussion leaned towards Riepma's amendment to maintain larger setbacks within the city's built boundary, potentially varying standards for annexed or developing areas.