As an Associate Professor of…

As an Associate Professor of Landscape Architecture and Urbanism and Director of the University of Toronto Centre for Landscape Research, my work over nearly two decades has focused on the role of landscape design and planning in helping cities adapt to climate change. Much of this research and design practice has been centered on the relationship between green standards, on-site stormwater retention, and the integration of ecological systems as essential urban infrastructure.

From this perspective, I must emphasize that the current framing of “enhanced development standards at the lot level” as optional or negotiable is profoundly misguided. Climate change is already altering precipitation patterns across Ontario, with more frequent and intense cloudburst events overwhelming municipal stormwater systems designed for historical conditions. These systems, largely reliant on grey infrastructure, are incapable of accommodating the volume, frequency, and unpredictability of current and future extreme weather events. As a result, urban flooding, property damage, and public health risks have increased significantly.

In this context, green infrastructure is not a luxury — it is a form of critical safety infrastructure. Standards for water retention, infiltration, storage, cleansing, and conveyance must be embedded in every scale of development, from individual lots to regional watershed systems. Green roofs, permeable pavements, rain gardens, bioswales, and constructed wetlands are integral components of a distributed hydrological network that supplements and relieves pressure on aging municipal systems.
Enhanced lot-level development standards that require these interventions are therefore fundamental to the health and safety of residents and communities. They reduce flood risk, mitigate the urban heat island effect, improve air and water quality, and build redundancy into municipal infrastructure networks. To not require them is to externalize costs onto municipalities, emergency management systems, and vulnerable residents who will bear the brunt of future flood and heat impacts.
In my experience, the application of such standards across Ontario municipalities remains inconsistent and often inadequate. Toronto’s Green Standard frameworks that integrate on-site stormwater management and ecological performance metrics into development approvals should be the norm. These measures should not be voluntary nor discretionary, undermining regional resilience and perpetuating uneven environmental risk.

Regarding costs, numerous studies and pilot projects have demonstrated that the short-term incremental costs of implementing green infrastructure at the lot scale are outweighed by long-term savings in reduced flood damage, deferred infrastructure upgrades, and enhanced public health outcomes. Framing these standards as “burdens” misses their essential role in safeguarding community well-being and reducing municipal liability.

To conclude, municipalities must be empowered — indeed obligated — to apply and enforce enhanced green development standards outside of buildings. These measures directly maintain the health and safety of sites and their surroundings. Green infrastructure must be recognized as essential climate adaptation infrastructure, not as aesthetic or optional amenities. Ontario’s planning and development frameworks should reflect this reality with consistency, urgency, and enforceable standards.