|
|
|
- Thread starter junctionist
- Start date
Skeezix
Senior Member
The removal of the trees from the waterfront promenade was crappy for a whole host of reasons, and should never happen again, but it wasn't really tantamount to cutting down trees on La Rambla.
AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
Not yet anyways - the allee is meant to mature into the same kind of environment - the willingness to cut trees down knowing that speaks to the degree of commitment for such an outcome.
AoD
wild goose chase
Active Member
Not entirely sure about Toronto but it seems like a lot of the plane trees planted in urban environments are a hybrid, the London plane, which resulted from hybridizing the North American species Platanus occidentalis with the Old World species Platanus orientalis. That is probably the kind that is widespread on the streets of NYC and London, as well as other world cities.
Skeezix
Senior Member
It's not comparable, even if one is just comparing levels of commitment. I'd be more interested in seeing how a city like Barcelona would treat a similar request to cut down trees in a newly redeveloped area with recently planted trees. I suspect they would tell the film folks where they can stick their axe. To me, that's far more informative and compelling than allusions to La Rambla.
wild goose chase
Active Member
It seems like many trees planted in urban environments (on medians, in planters etc.) often times are seen as pretty replaceable, with the logic that someone can always order another batch and stick them in whenever the old ones are cut down, or die from lack of care. I think for that reason, many street trees seem still pretty young/new.
While there are some pretty impressive large trees lining streets, it seems generally the really old/mature trees that survive tend to be in parks (like Queen's Park, High Park etc.) or people's yards where people prize them enough to intend to keep them long-term.
Skeezix
Senior Member
This has been discussed many times before, but one of the reasons one sees so many young/new/small trees on our public rights-of-way is largely due to the difficult conditions for street trees in this city. When not being fed a steady diet of winter salt, street trees in this city have traditionally not been given sufficient space to grow, or have been planted in a manner which either deprives them of water or drowns them. It's only fairly recently, particularly at Waterfront Toronto, that public authorities in this town have gotten serious about giving street trees a fighting chance, with minimum soil volumes, silva cells, etc.
DSC
Superstar
The City has a whole section in the Streetscape Manual on street trees. See: http://wx.toronto.ca/inter/plan/streetscape.nsf/Street Trees?OpenView
mrgrieves
Active Member
Why is Montreal (and to be honest almost every other city) successful at growing trees on sidewalks and other urban non-park environments? Winters are much harsher in Montreal.
Toronto lags in maintaining attractive public spaces. I feel like the inability to grow trees well is in line with other ugly aesthetic elements like overhead power lines, transformers, streetcar cables and redundant poles which serve no purpose.
Toronto tends to be a cheap city. Is that the answer to this?
Skeezix
Senior Member
When did anyone say winters were the culprit?
(Worth noting that in the 2013/14 winter, Montreal used 194,000 tonnes of road salt, versus 210,000 tonnes in Toronto, at least according to the Montreal Gazette and the Toronto Star respectively, with roughly the same amount of streets to salt (5617 km vs. 5604 km). Toronto appears to be a little more salt happy, despite relatively milder winters, although one would need to look at actual annual stats to make a meaningful conclusion on this front).
(Worth noting that in the 2013/14 winter, Montreal used 194,000 tonnes of road salt, versus 210,000 tonnes in Toronto, at least according to the Montreal Gazette and the Toronto Star respectively, with roughly the same amount of streets to salt (5617 km vs. 5604 km). Toronto appears to be a little more salt happy, despite relatively milder winters, although one would need to look at actual annual stats to make a meaningful conclusion on this front).
DSC
Superstar
Though I agree that we could do more and better with trees here in Toronto, I lived for 30+ years in Montreal and would not agree that they are much better with street trees.
pman
Senior Member
I can't speak to Montreal, but I do wonder why Toronto and its BIA's bother with the expense of half-assed street tree planting, given the strong likelihood the trees will die after a couple years. Or be cut down / vandalized for some incomprehensible reason. I mean, the current tree situation just looks sad, though I guess that puts it in context with the rest of our public realm. Seriously, if we can't do it right why don't we just give up and save the money?
Skeezix
Senior Member
Because of the tremendous benefit of street trees if we are able to get it right. And, achingly slowly, we are getting there.
pman
Senior Member
I agree there would be a huge benefit if we could ever get it right, but are we really getting there? Bloor between Church and University seems like it's going to succeed after a rocky start with some of the trees, but that took a BIA with a lot more money than is available pretty much everywhere else in the city. Is there really enough evidence to suggest that outside of a few pockets, Toronto is capable of properly planting and maintaining street trees?
wild goose chase
Active Member
I know that trees are pretty beneficial to cities but I'm also wondering if there's an incentive/benefit to the city to invest in planting trees that will live and survive pretty long term (at least decades).
Is there almost a "planned obsolescence" mindset with street trees since new young saplings can always be trucked in to replace ones that die (unless people really do feel the value of keeping trees alive to an older age is worth it? I know there is some appeal to a large, mature canopy in cities as opposed to a few sticks in planters at least aesthetically).
Is there almost a "planned obsolescence" mindset with street trees since new young saplings can always be trucked in to replace ones that die (unless people really do feel the value of keeping trees alive to an older age is worth it? I know there is some appeal to a large, mature canopy in cities as opposed to a few sticks in planters at least aesthetically).