
The housing in the first bylaw was too large. The housing in the second bylaw was too small. But the housing in the third bylaw was just right. Goldilocks ate that bylaw right up, and all her neighbours helped her do it.
A Brandon, Manitoba developer of affordable housing (yes, apparently they do exist and are not poverty-stricken unicorns after all) was in the act of building an affordable small-house project in a single-family neighbourhood, when he proposed an idea for an additional ADU (Accessory Dwelling Unit, a.k.a grannie flat) on each small-house property. Those living in each house might rent out the ADU to help defray the costs of their housing.
Unfortunately, the developer came hard up against the ‘housing in the second bylaw was too small’ problem. Given the general housing crisis, he wondered politely about possibly changing the by-laws. Read more about his plight in The Brandon Sun: Developer suggests revising bylaws for affordable housing
After finishing that article, you might wish explore Goldilocks and the first bylaw — where another affordable housing developer (two in one article!) discovered that ‘the housing in the first bylaw was too large.’ Try: Not Appreciated: Minneapolis NIMBYites Attack The Affordable Four-Plex
All in all, it would seem that as city councils grow more and more concerned about encouraging affordable housing construction, they may have to counter the ‘just rightness’ of their city neighborhoods with a somewhat more diverse porridge of bylaws.