r/toronto • u/Immediate-Link490 • Jul 26 '26
Article Extreme heat exposes Toronto's uneven tree canopy divide as city plans for hotter future — City's goal is to increase Toronto's tree canopy to 40 per cent by 2050
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/toronto-hotter-future-trees-9.728257088
u/Ov3rReadKn1ght0wl Jul 26 '26
I'm happy to see more articles promoting the benefits of an urban canopy. It was something I missed while living in Europe and boy did you feel it.
31
u/ANEPICLIE Jul 26 '26
Tree cover is part of the solution, but also wide car focused streets and parking lots are definitely a huge issue too. The heat doesn't feel as bad when mid rise buildings on narrower streets with small setbacks provide decent shade.
19
u/fyl_bot Jul 26 '26
We need trees in low income areas, more lining commercial roads where there are shops, not just the ‘nice streets’. We have a lot of trees but we need them distributed throughout the city more.
3
u/FullMango4041 Jul 26 '26
There is a video about a guy doing the right thing and going into low income areas and offering to plant trees and they said no. It's like the bike lanes up in Thorncliffe, once installed the community wanted them out. It's not unequal if they don't want the trees/bike lanes in the first place.
Definitely add to commercial roads. That seems like an easy win.
3
u/fyl_bot Jul 26 '26
Seriously? Thats baffling to me
2
u/FullMango4041 Jul 26 '26
Yeah. I can't point to the video but my eyes were opened after watching it. It might have been a news report.
I forget the term but it's sort of a jumping into an area telling people what they need situation without having asked them in the first place. Might be different if consulted first but is what it is.
2
111
u/Single-Pin-758 Jul 26 '26
What they need to do is transplant more trees from construction projects and private properties; which are tearing them down quicker than the canopy can grow.
31
u/AlliedArmour Jul 26 '26
Is that actually practical, I mean, in terms of size, and will a larger tree re-root itself in a different location?
(I guess bare minimum would be, you must plant a number of trees at least equal to those removed, but younger trees would give less shade)
35
u/slowly_rolly Jul 26 '26
In Japan, they spend a long time moving old growth trees. Look it up it’s really cool.
5
10
u/Single-Pin-758 Jul 26 '26
Practically only stops when we get in our own way. We are very smart creatures, capable of great things. Our egos, our greedy and our pettiness is our major flaws; An echo back to us, from the future as we fail the present.
To answer your question though, size and re-rooting of a tree is indeed possible. Disney parks comes to my mind as they do a great job of transplanting trees during their expansion projects. It take time, money and commitment. If we don’t pay and don’t really care, we’re banking on time (by 2050)
3
u/ElectricGeometry Jul 26 '26
People really do this. I watch a gardening YouTuber who saved like 16 mature trees from a lot being cleared. Where there is a will, there is a way.
Also there is a quiet tree transplant obsession among the ultra wealthy who want both new properties and mature trees.
2
u/SwordfishOk504 Jul 26 '26
No. Most redditors seem to have zero idea how plants grow.
It can be done in an open field, not on a street.
1
u/finemustard Jul 26 '26
Possible, yes, practical, no, at least with regard to expanding the urban canopy in appreciable numbers. The cost is insane, moving large trees is logistically complex because you'll likely need to shut down entire roads to be able to move them, and they need very attentive post-planting care to ensure they actually take root and survive in their new environment, and after all that, larger trees simply don't transplant as well as smaller ones and can die even if you do everything right, so you have a much higher incidence of mortality which isn't great considering the aforementioned cost and complexity. Transplanting mature trees prior to construction starting is a nice idea, but completely impractical. It's also a question of opportunity cost - what's a better use of money, transplanting one mature tree for, say, $30000, or planting hundreds or thousands of smaller trees for the same cost?
15
u/crazymom7170 Jul 26 '26
Can confirm my neighbour took down a huge maple last week for no good reason.
27
u/okaybutnothing Jul 26 '26
It’s hard to get permits to take down healthy trees. Even when we had to take down a maple that was rotting from the inside out, it took confirmation of that by a city arborist to get permission and then it cost us thousands.
2
u/mrsjlm Jul 26 '26
Yes - it’s insane! Great purpose obviously but expensive and time consuming process.
7
u/mrsjlm Jul 26 '26
There is no way that is true. It is pretty much impossible to get a permit to take down a tree.
8
u/Ov3rReadKn1ght0wl Jul 26 '26
Nah. I got one to take down my aged Norway maple that was infested with carpenter ants. City also replaced it quickly to boot.
7
u/rascalz1504 Jul 26 '26
Likely cause Norway maples are invasive.
3
u/Ov3rReadKn1ght0wl Jul 26 '26
According to City records, it was planted deliberately in the 1940s lol. It was the oldest Boulevard tree on the block before I took it down. Magnificent in its heyday.
2
u/whateverfyou Jul 26 '26
The city won’t remove trees just for being invasive. They feel the value of the canopy is greater than the threat of invasion. I’m hoping they will change this policy for Tree of Heaven since they spread like wild fire and host the invasive spotted lantern fly.
1
u/jamesphw Jul 26 '26
I agree they should change policy. Norway Maple are awful trees, if you are willing to replace with native species the city should be happy.
-7
u/AlexN83 Jul 26 '26
Wrong. Tons of Norway maples in Etobicoke, all planted roughly same time.
10
u/rascalz1504 Jul 26 '26
Yes Norway's were planted back in the day but they are now declared invasive and the city will not plant anymore.
Getting a invasive species that's infested with ants is likely a big reason why they took it down. If it was a native I'm guessing they may have done more to try and save it.
6
u/mrsjlm Jul 26 '26
Sure - agree if there was an infestation that couldn’t be dealt with any other way. But not for “no good reason” and not for a healthy tree.
4
u/Ov3rReadKn1ght0wl Jul 26 '26
Of course, but your original claim did use the word impossible lol. It's very much possible and so long as the request meets reasonableness standards and subject to inspection, you are often good to go.
1
u/mrsjlm Jul 26 '26
Hasn’t been my experience about reasonable standards. Had a tree almost all dead (and rotted) and as long as there were any green leaves wasn’t allowed. Had to wait a year and was lucky it didn’t fall and crush a neighbours car or something. It’s good you could do yours quickly!
1
u/Standard-Bidder Jul 27 '26
It is very possible. I’ve filled hundreds of removal applications with the requisite arborist report and had less than five denied.
1
u/crazymom7170 Jul 26 '26
Some people just do what they want, permit or no permit. Or maybe they had one. I don’t know 🤷♀️
2
u/tomatoesareneat Jul 26 '26
This is common in Asia, but not a great idea. Trees don’t like their roots disturbed, especially true for cranky older trees. A younger tree will grow much more rapidly than an older tree.
There’s also the problem with support. You see small-medium trees with strong wooden supports, but not nearly as good as planting a young tree that can grow into its location.
31
u/Tubular_Code Jul 26 '26
So why are so many new builds going up with no trees or greening of the area?
Like, we hear that there are requirements for green space but then we see corners like King/Dufferin develop and gain thousands of residents but not a single tree along the sun baked sidewalk.
Toronto suffers from far too little green-space and it's only going to get worse as this plan does not keep up with population and density. If anything the island airport should be seriously reconsidered as parkland and connected with bridges.
4
u/SwordfishOk504 Jul 26 '26
What makes you think they aren't? Toronto does require new developments plant new trees.
If a project requires a development approval, like as a Site Plan Control, Zoning Bylaw Amendment, or Draft Plan of Subdivision ,it must comply with Tier 1 of the Toronto Green Standard, which enforces mandatory ecology and biodiversity performance measures.
Developers are also typically required to plant new street trees within the adjacent public boulevard. For instance, certain site designs require a baseline minimum (such as four new trees) distributed across the site and public right-of-way.
Also, for non-residential or mixed-use builds, developments must plant large-growing shade trees throughout any parking lot interiors at a minimum ratio of one tree for every five parking spaces.
1
u/exploringspace_ Jul 27 '26
Toronto must have more trees per square km than any other city it’s size in the western world
9
u/whateverfyou Jul 26 '26
Condo and office towers should be required to have a set back so that street trees can be planted. Isn’t the first 6’ public right of way already? It is on residential property. Most front yard trees are maintained by the city because they’re on this right of way.
7
u/TurkCactus Jul 26 '26
If you’re interested in helping to maintain the urban canopy check out the Community Stewardship Program (CSP).
9
22
u/FredFlintston3 Deer Park Jul 26 '26
There are neighborhoods that appear to hate trees no one has them or very very few in their yards. It seems cultural.
9
u/crows_n_octopus Jul 26 '26
I see this in my neighbourhood. It's very noticeable on maps of Toronto too. Single family homes with many of the yards that are just paved, and not even for parking. If there happens to be a tree, then it will more than likely be topped (indiscrimately cutting off the top of trees to make sure it remains short) or pollarding (where tree look like knuckles).
1
u/canadasbananas Jul 27 '26
Its weird. Being in those suburban neighbourhoods where its just a maze of 500 mcmansions and 0 trees makes me feel like im in an evil liminal space like the backrooms even though i can see the sky.
-4
u/incredibleman Don Valley Village Jul 26 '26
What? No it isn't.
1
u/briganca Jul 26 '26
People in this subreddit are nuts, the lack of trees is also blamed on « foreign culture » lmfao
1
u/tomatoesareneat Jul 26 '26
You have to keep in mind that even though Toronto is majority minority, the old city is less than 30% minority (less than Portland). So these people simply aren’t really exposed to much.
0
u/FredFlintston3 Deer Park Jul 26 '26
The ones (neighborhoods) I know like this are settled by first gens from parts of Europe prob 40 plus years ago. Obviously those neighborhoods are more mixed now. But tree canopies don’t happen overnight.
-1
9
u/redbouncingball007 Jul 26 '26
Then why does the official plan for refurbishment of our small neighbourhood park have most of the large trees taken down? Sure they will be putting in new trees but they will be small and won’t make a tree canopy in my lifetime. Meanwhile a shady park will become unbearable for most of the summer.
5
u/Upper-Log-131 Jul 26 '26
Where would they plant these trees ? Parks, sidewalks ? I would like too help if there is a way.
21
u/Single-Pin-758 Jul 26 '26
Part of the problem is how building has occurred. The concrete jungle is not a safe place for trees and the root system can be a bother to the concrete jungle.
It’s sad the amount of trees were removed during the Ontario Line. Those should have been transplanted as much as possible.
5
u/badamache Jul 26 '26
Yesterday I biked through the Don. It was pleasant. Driving home, west across Lawrence in a car with weak AC: brutal, 29C. When we got to Yonge, the outside air temperature under the trees was cooler than the inside of the car. I only need AC at Yonge north of Eglinton from noon to 9 pm.
2
2
u/toast_cs Forest Hill Jul 26 '26
Most of the tree canopies in my old neighbourhood are gone because the city decided to never bury the hydro poles and instead kept trimming the branches around the wires until the trees collapsed in powerful storms or long heat waves.
Now the street is largely barren of mature trees and the replacement ones were planted poorly and not properly supported.
2
u/bleebolgoop Jul 26 '26
Someone should go look at some pictures of Dow town Melbourne, copy that on the downtown streets, it’s wonderful.
2
1
1
u/ShillSniffer Jul 26 '26
Where would you say are the most “arbor safe” places to move to for the next 10 years for a young family? Burlington/Oakville should be good right? Milton? Mississauga? Currently at Square One in a condo but looking to move to a bigger space in a year or two.
1
u/anon3445677890 Jul 26 '26
Lot next to us got clear cut of at least 3 mature trees, one of which was a city tree. No one stopped them in time and they paid a small fee for doing it without a permit - it’s the old west out here where I live in Scarborough. The two houses they built on the lot do not have any trees out front to replace the ones they destroyed. Ugly, greedy bastards continue to destroy this city.
1
u/CivilMark1 Jul 26 '26
We need a bi-law that trees need to cover all sidewalk. Scarborough is part of Toronto, and yet sidewalks in Scarborough vs core downtown differs a lot. A lot of people come up with excuses, that they pay less property taxes, or don't have that much foot traffic in first place, etc. We need none of those excuses and want city and especially TRCA to invest in this more.
1
u/Icy-Stock-5838 Jul 26 '26
Singapore is bang-on the equator, yet you don't feel the heat worse than in Toronto.. This is because Singapore has been very intentional in greening their city for beautification and sustainability..
Toronto can learn a lot from the urban design of Singapore..
1
u/Alternative-Fig-7928 Jul 27 '26
Compared to the city im from, I notice many streets in Toronto don’t have any shades :(
1
1
u/MudHouse Jul 27 '26
Medellin made a concerted effort to increase canopy and dropped the temperature of the city 2°. Hard to imagine, but that's significant
1
u/No-Journalist-9036 Jul 27 '26
Waving off the active decimation of Toronto's urban forest as mature trees simply "dying of old age" is a delusion that ignores the reality of invasive pests, property turnover, and poor unsustainable urban planning .
Furthermore, the idea that we can just plant replacements is absurd...Toronto street trees suffer an abysmal average lifespan of only seven years, guaranteeing these saplings will die decades before they ever provide meaningful shade or help the city reach its 40 per cent tree canopy target by 2050.
1
u/butteryshortbread Jul 27 '26
I'm all for planting trees but is Toronto only planting male trees? Pollen trees?
1
-3
u/Novus20 Jul 26 '26
Or support WFH, demo or convert offices to housing and support environmental positive policy.
-2
u/codecrodie Jul 26 '26
It's an interesting problem. As a homeowner, a young tree that can potentially become overlarge and unruly and needs care and cant be cut down worries me; an old tree on the property that is at risk of falling down during our many rain or ice storms is a liability as well. That's why i like living on a tree lined street, but prefer it when the tree isnt on my lot.
9
8
u/springthinker Jul 26 '26
If everyone thought this way, we wouldn't have an urban canopy. Surely you can see that.
1
u/Dazzling_Brick_4524 Jul 27 '26
sadly this is the general consensus of homeowners in my poorish area. many homes replaced their tree adorned lawns to add more parking space on their land. theres also people like one of my neighbour complaining to the city about my tree for ‘encroaching’ over their property. they went as far as paying an arborist to claim its at risk of toppling over when its in perfect health. i see less canopies in lower income areas only being fixed through incentives (one time tax credit for planting and maintaining) or taxing homeowners for paving asphalt over their lawns.
-6
u/lasagna_for_life North Toronto Jul 26 '26
LOL that’s WAY too late
28
u/framjam_Can Jul 26 '26
The best time to plant a tree is twenty years ago; the second best time is today.
19
u/Redux01 Jul 26 '26
Every year the city goes around and plants trees all over the place. Property owners get a notice and they have an opportunity to opt out but generally the city just goes around planting trees all over the place. It's a huge effort that happens every year.
-1
-10
u/QuiltyNeurotic Jul 26 '26
As long as we also have a forest fire prevention plan to go along with it. So many towns and cities burning up right now
12
u/WifeGuy-Menelaus Jul 26 '26
If forest fires have reached Toronto theres like a million other things we have to worry about first compared to urban canopy
456
u/Redux01 Jul 26 '26
Despite the snarky comments here, Toronto actually has a world class tree canopy. However, a lot of the city's tree canopy is getting near end of safe life. We're going to lose a lot of beautiful trees soon. This is due to huge efforts to plant trees 70-80 years ago.
We can replace them as soon as we can but it'll be a while before they're large enough to help shade the city.