1)The City of Markham’s…

1) The City of Markham’s Sustainability Metrics Program was developed in partnership with other municipalities (e.g., Vaughan, Richmond Hill and Brampton) to promote consistency across the Greater Toronto Area municipalities.

While consistency is desirable, it is not necessary that metrics or standards are identical as each municipality may have different capacities, contexts and requirements. For example, the standards developed for Markham provide metrics for both existing urban and greenfield areas which address a range of standards that wouldn’t be needed in the City of Toronto which is fully built out.

2) Staff would be generally unsupportive of streamlining, standardize and prohibiting the mandatory use of enhanced development standards. City Staff have not encountered cases where the enhanced standards proposed or implemented through the City’s Sustainability Metrics Program has been a regulatory burden or caused a delay in the approval process for applicants.

3) Municipalities use local green standards to mitigate the local impacts of climate change (e.g., managing stormwater, flooding, etc.) and to meet local environmental targets. Removing this ability would limit a municipality’s autonomy and decision-making. It would create a challenge for municipalities to ensure new development aligns with local values, environmental protection and sustainable design.

4) The Province's proposed prohibition of enhanced development standards at the lot level has potential unintended consequences and should be reconsidered. The ability of municipalities to implement enhanced development standards through land use tools such as zoning, site plan control, agreements and conditions of approval should be retained with provincial guidance that promotes consistency of standards across municipalities.

5) The City uses local green standards to mitigate the local impacts of climate change (i.e., managing stormwater, flooding, green roofs etc.) and to meet local environmental targets.
This proposal may eliminate local democratic control over land use, making it harder for municipalities to ensure new development aligns with local values, environmental protection, and sustainable design.

6) This proposal prioritizes the speed of construction, however, may inadvertently undercut the tools that municipalities rely on to implement locally tailored, climate-conscious development and transportation infrastructure.

7) The City requests clarification on the definition of “enhanced development standards” and matters included as part of the definition. The proposal details include a broad list of examples that could be considered enhanced development standards including native tree planting, soil volume and bike racks, while noting that the definition is not limited to such items. For example, does the inclusion of “vegetative elements” on the list of examples of enhanced development standards include requirements from municipalities to protect and replace tree canopy on development sites?

8) Health, safety, and accessibility are stated as Provincial Interests in the Planning Act R.S.O 1990, Section 2 (h)(h.1),(o), which are matters to be carried out for local municipalities. Enhanced development standards are tools to implement and support provincial legislation and the City’s Official Plan, which are directly tied to maintaining health and safety.
The Province should continue to allow municipalities to implement and enforce lot-level standards for climate-resilient design (such as tree canopy protection, minimum soil volume and permeable paving) through the development review process, as they are tied directly to public health and safety.

9) Enhanced development standards including but not limited to soil volume, native tree planting and increasing tree canopy relate to ensuring healthy trees grow to the fullest potential and reach maturity. Healthy trees directly relate to the improvement of public health by creating comfortable, safe, and accessible spaces that provide relief from extreme weather. In addition, the inclusion of vegetative elements as enhanced development standards support mitigating environmental impacts of heat island effect, slow down storm runoff, improve air and water quality, increase biodiversity and many other environmental, social and economic benefits. Prohibiting lot-level soil volume, on-lot tree planting and tree protection would impact the long-term viability of trees, reduce canopy and increase future maintenance/removal costs, affecting canopy targets, urban heat island mitigation, and biodiversity goals.

The Province should, in consultation with municipalities, consider developing provincial technical standards or minimum baselines for soil volumes and tree health (in consultation with municipalities) to improve consistency and provide predictability to developers. Equal or stronger standards should reside at the local level.