SPECIAL FEATURES:
Email
Toronto's new green roof law a first for North America
Bylaw requires some new developments to devote almost 60% of roof space to vegetation.
Tue, Jun 23 2009 at 9:34 AM
Related Topics:
Photo: 416style/Flickr
In a first for a North American city, Toronto recently passed a new law mandating "green" rooftops for all new developments. Any new construction with floor space of more than 2,000 square meters must devote between 20 and 60 percent of its roof to vegetation. The rule applies to residential, commercial, industrial and institutional structures.
As expected, developers are less than thrilled with the new mandatory rules — least of all that they come during an economic downturn. Some estimate that green roofs could add more than $177,000 to the cost of a project; not including the ongoing maintenance, replacement and repair costs. "I don't think anybody is warm and fuzzy about having a green roof bylaw impressed on them as a prescriptive method," one developer told Reuters.
Still, the benefits to the city in terms of energy savings and rainwater runoff management are seen as cost-effective in the long term. According to the organization Green Roofs for Healthy Cities, more than 3.1 million square feet of green roofs were installed in 2008, a growth rate of 35 percent over the previous year. Though Toronto may have the lead in proactive legislation, the city of Chicago retains the crown for having the most green roofs in North America at more than 600. Still, it should be interesting to see if our neighbors to the North can inspire some U.S. cities to follow their example.
You might also like:
Sign in with one of these accounts to add your comment.
EDITORS' PICKS
Advertisement
TODAY'S MOST POPULAR ON
- 10 uses for Parmesan cheese rinds
- 13 natural remedies for the ant invasion
- 7 surprising things Pope Francis has done in his first 100 days
- 10 false facts most people think are true
- Yurts: Everything you ever wanted to know but were afraid to ask
- Watch: Sir David Attenborough deals with a band of cannibals the British way
- 9 habits that may do more harm than good
- Archaeologists unearth 5,000-year-old 'third-gender' caveman
- Student science experiment finds plants won't grow near Wi-Fi router
- The dog poem that made Johnny Carson cry
NEWSLETTER
Advertisement
Yes it sucks that this can turn into a money grab for many levels, and extra cost for other levels. Big deal! At least it's pushing the topic, and related topics, into the forefront and not letting big business determine our future. Obviously many humans are ignorant and/or lazy, so active pursuit of things like this makes sense. If you want no government involvement in your lives, then why don't you just ask for anarchy?
Congratulation Toronto the city will be more greener and will help to prevent heat especially in the areas with many bulidings BUT WHAT ABOUT WHITE ROOFS ? IT IS THE CHEAPEST AND EFFICIENT SOLUTION TO REDUCE THE HEAT ..I THINK IT'S EVEN BETTER THAN SPENDING SO MUCH MONEY ON THE GREEN GARDENS AND THEIR MAINTENANCE ....
Yes white roofs help reduce local heat, green roofs not only reduce local heat, but they help maintain the water level. When there is a major downpour the city has to process that extra water and that costs money. Also when sewers overflow they go right into the lake. Green roofs will help solve this problem.
Maybe an idea like this could help reduce the terrible smog in larger cities like Toronto.
Good idea or bad, I wonder about maintenance. Every lawn or garden I've ever seen needs care, watering, weeding, fertilizing or mowing or something. Even a quasi-wild field needs something, and these are bound to be only inches deep and not huge. Is this part of the deal? If it dies, you have to replant? What about no watering periods during droughts? Anyone know details from Toronto or Chicago or elsewhere?
These gardens are for rooftops on new developments. I imagine in a condo the maintenance fees would go into your monthly condo fee.
I have lived in Toronto for 30 years and have never known it to have a drought. It's beside a giant freshwater lake.
Whatever the contribution is to water management, CO2 absorption, heat dissipation blah blah blah, green rooftops will be one way to make a city considerably less ugly. I always think the aesthetics of any manmade space is improved by the addition of plants. There's also the potential to make the space a place to go for people to relax and enjoy, even have a cafe there, maybe.
Very well said.
The only reason this had to be mandated is because developers weren't doing it by themselves already. Any architect/developer/engineer who's any good can clearly see that concrete doesn't absorb rain and therefore in a concrete city, there'll be run-off... so they should've already been putting things in place, such as green rooftops to sort this out. But they weren't. Now they have to.
I think that green roofing is a good idea (green-- including solar, possible small wind, etc projects) however, the goverenment mandating and getting into our lives even further is unnecessary and quite the opposite of what is needed.
If they want it, offer tax credits for doing it or offer some stipend to have it done. But ordering every new building to have it done will create cheap sloppy work resulting in damages and uncared for roofs and simply even more unhappy citizens.
I hope that they would count solar (heat or power) or some other type of green project as part of the % and not just a roof with plants on it. it is always scares me when gov seems to force people into one product and not into a range of solutions so privet sector can find the best answer for the different people/buildings. An example, privet homes have solar hot water but office buildings have plants and a roof top park.
If it's not right now flexible enough to allow green technologies other than plants, it will be made so in short order. That sort of thing makes lawmakers look really good.
Well.. in my city one of the mayors made it mandatory that every major development, as in shopping malls or sky scrappers, have to have a small park area. so similar to the roof idea but next to the building.
Wow! This is amazing!! Thanks for sharing this!
Maybe I am the only one in the whole world right now that thinks this but I don't care I don't think the goverment should be putting all these by-laws into effect at all I think that it is the responsbily of the buyer a new development to buy what they feel is environmentaly impacting if thats what they feel is better. I don't like the goverment pushing things like this on us
How about making it optional with a substantial tax credit incentive for those who choose to participate? Will there be a rash of roofs collapsing on unsuspecting citizens in the future? Green roof weight + snow weight = trouble? Will there be government inspectors regulating if a roof is capable of sustaining the additional weight prior to compliance? I'm just askin' ...............
Loads are taking into account at the START of the design of a building, including green roof weight & snow. Following proper engineering rules and guidelines ensures all of our structures and buildings don't collapse. Inspectors are only responsible for ensuring the proper installation of the green roof as well as the rest of the entire building. Inspectors are present throughout the entire construction process already. I'm just sayin' ..............
Looking down from a high building you realize how much roof space is unutilized. It can be profitably used for parking of cars, solar heaters, pv, roof gardens greenhouses and whatever.
Pages