Toronto Queens Quay & Water's Edge Revitalization | ?m | ?s | Waterfront Toronto

Thank you for our resident tree guy - are you the one who brought up the issue of the London plane cultivar used on Bloor?

AoD


I don't think I was the only one, but yes, I have had a lot to say about that very poor choice!

:)


I can't remember if I or anyone else mentioned, but it looks as though the City has now admitted that was a huge mistake and will move to plant other species there now.
 
their dense canopies and root systems don't allow anything to grow underneath.
And keep the house nice and cool.

Ever noticed when Norways are established on City Boulevards you often see the grass die?
Looking up the types of grass seed, that I used on my lawn the other day, much of it is non-native as well. Though I have grass under my Norway maple. And it normally survives the summer drought without watering, unlike the back, where there isn't the dense canopy to block out the sun.

Though in lieu of another Norway Maple in the back, perhaps you'll be pleased to know we selected a Tulip Tree. Though I keep finding self-seeding Siberian Elms trying to take over.
 
Looking good, but I'm wary seeing roadside trees planted flush with the sidewalk like that. Even with Silva cells in place, heavy salting will be hard on them.

Many of the boardwalk trees planted in the last few years seem to be thriving, but roadside trees are particularly vulnerable in winter. Queen's Quay is poised to offer some much-needed respite from the cheap streetscaping and stunted, withered trees found through much of downtown, but only if we pay proper attention to growing conditions. I really believe that a solid urban canopy down here in summertime will be integral to this becoming one of Toronto's next great boulevards, as has been promised time and time again.

This might actually belong in the Union Station building thread, but it looks like trees are about to go in in front of the Royal York as well, with some pretty fancy-looking hardware.
 
And keep the house nice and cool.

Looking up the types of grass seed, that I used on my lawn the other day, much of it is non-native as well. Though I have grass under my Norway maple. And it normally survives the summer drought without watering, unlike the back, where there isn't the dense canopy to block out the sun.

Though in lieu of another Norway Maple in the back, perhaps you'll be pleased to know we selected a Tulip Tree. Though I keep finding self-seeding Siberian Elms trying to take over.

Siberian Elm is another non-native invasive.

If you know where the source Siberian Elm is, especially if its on public property, you may want to ask to have it removed. It will probably be a 'no' unless its dying, but worth a shot.

**

Tulip tree is a near-native, and quite nice looking, haven't seen any evidence of it reproducing out of hand

More of a southern Michigan/Ohio tree, so its sometimes a bit testy w/our winters, but once established it can do very well here.


**

Most variants of 'lawn' grass are not native and are derivatives of 'Kentucky Blue Grass', but they are also fairly harmless.

If you've got one that's surviving in dense shade, under a mature Norway.....you found a very interesting varietal.
 
Last edited:
Humans and worms are non-native and invasive as well. I don't know how we got mired in that bizarre anti-Norway Maple crap. We're in a city, not untouched wilderness. I'm certainly planting more of them on my property!

Norway Maple is a great choice if you want the city to get sued. Perhaps you're one of those angling for a civic payout?
 
Siberian Elm is another non-native invasive.

If you know where the source Siberian Elm is, especially if its on public property, you may want to ask to have it removed. It will probably be a 'no' unless its dying, but worth a shot.
Oddly, I can't locate it - the seeds must travel some distance; I've not seen a mature one, so I'm not even sure what the seeds look like. ! I've cut many small ones down, but one shot up at the back very quickly. I started to cut off some small branches to give some daylight to the seedlings I want to encourage (Norway Maples ... oops), and was planning to take out the entire thing ... but my daughter has somehow become attached to it, and it's going to take some negotiations to remove.

Tulip tree is a near-native, and quite nice looking, haven't seen any evidence of it reproducing out of hand

More of a southern Michigan/Ohio tree, so its sometimes a bit testy w/our winters, but once established it can do very well here.
It's survived the last two very harsh winters, and has been there 6 years now, so I think it's made it, and growing very nicely! When we looked at the zones, we're right on the edge - in fact at the nursery they said not to plant it north of Highway 7 ... but we are near enough to the lake that we don't quite get the coldest nights. If it can survive the last two winters, it should be fine! I'm not sure how salt-tolerant they are though. Though even the red maple (not sure what variety) nearby took a major hit 4-5 years ago, and has slowly come back, after a particularly heavy use of salt by the city in the nearby laneway, and the tulip tree was unscathed.

If you've got one that's surviving in dense shade, under a mature Norway.....you found a very interesting varietal.
Surviving ... wouldn't say thriving ... but the canopy of maples all down the street ends right there, so it's getting a lot of non-direct sunshine. Not quite sure what it was ... but I keep throwing down varying types of grass seed every year, in the vain attempt that some will take root.

Norway Maple is a great choice if you want the city to get sued. Perhaps you're one of those angling for a civic payout?
Not sure why someone would sue the city ... if it falls ... judging from the ages of the one's in the neighbourhood, I'd be looking at a payout in 70-80 years. :)

I guess we are off-topic ... if one were dogmatix about it, we should move/make an urban forestry thread.
 
Last edited:
Siberian Elm is another non-native invasive.
**

Tulip tree is a near-native, and quite nice looking, haven't seen any evidence of it reproducing out of hand

More of a southern Michigan/Ohio tree, so its sometimes a bit testy w/our winters, but once established it can do very well here.

l.

Tulip trees can be found only 2 hours away...near Turkey Point. The Carolinian Forest trees (Tulip, Sycamore, Sassafras) are all found in Ontario and quite striking.

It's a shame that the City does not understand the different microclimates throughout Toronto. They have a list of about 20 trees that can be planted in the ravines but assume that the Humber, the Don and the Rouge all should have the same trees (as well as the North and South end of these ravines are quite different as well). There are also clay and sandy soils in the ravines so trees should be picked accordingly.

The city also demands a deposit if you are trying to cut down Norway Maples in your backyard to plant native trees. They should be encouraging this.

Sometimes I really questions the cities judgement on trees. I saw a crew planning some evergreens...they just finished planning cedar's at the top of the hill and were planting pines near a river in the park. I asked them if they got them reversed and they looked all confused. As I expected 2 years later both were dead.
 
Pan Am Games banner going up on the Westin. It certainly brightens up the building. I'd be happy if there were always ads slapped over it.

WP_20150507_17_47_31_Pro.jpg
 

Attachments

  • WP_20150507_17_47_31_Pro.jpg
    WP_20150507_17_47_31_Pro.jpg
    519.8 KB · Views: 859
Tulip trees can be found only 2 hours away...near Turkey Point. The Carolinian Forest trees (Tulip, Sycamore, Sassafras) are all found in Ontario and quite striking.

It's a shame that the City does not understand the different microclimates throughout Toronto. They have a list of about 20 trees that can be planted in the ravines but assume that the Humber, the Don and the Rouge all should have the same trees (as well as the North and South end of these ravines are quite different as well). There are also clay and sandy soils in the ravines so trees should be picked accordingly.

The city also demands a deposit if you are trying to cut down Norway Maples in your backyard to plant native trees. They should be encouraging this.

Sometimes I really questions the cities judgement on trees. I saw a crew planning some evergreens...they just finished planning cedar's at the top of the hill and were planting pines near a river in the park. I asked them if they got them reversed and they looked all confused. As I expected 2 years later both were dead.

There are many knowledgeable staff in the city's Forestry dept. Though admittedly this is not universally the case.

There are competing views on how do certain things; as well as third-party pressures.

To top it off, the example you cited may well have been poor site choice for the trees but I could easily envision that being successful. While cedar is often found in bog/swamp like habitat, it can actually withstand fairly dry conditions and poor soils; what cedar doesn't like is competition, which is why you often find it where other plants can't or usually don't grow.

Red Pine is often found in sandy soils atop bluffs and cliffs, though it can be found in other conditions too; white pine on other hand likes riparian habitats (river-side) and can often be found in lower land areas. See the extensive stand along the shores of Cootes Paradise in Hamilton, where the bald eagles nested last year.

***

Bloor was a case of a third party pressure as there was a desire to create an 'allay' of the same tree species, someone saw it done in Europe or the like and wanted to replicate it here.

The errors were two-fold, wrong species for that area. London Plane can do ok in Toronto, though, it may have a harder time than in a more temperate climate; but Bloor St. was just not a good fit. I expect (but don't know) that salt levels were a factor, but also the cold, and the wind tunnel effect on Bloor.

The second error (arguably) is going with any one species for such a long distance. Toronto has had the experience of streets mostly lined by mature elms, which were all but wiped out by Dutch Elm disease; more recently, Emerald Ash Borer has resulted in large swaths of Ash trees, particularly in 50s/60s era Scarborough and North York coming down and leaving a veritable moonscape behind.

However pretty it may look, going w/all one species is high-risk, because one disease or pest can wipe them all out.
 
As to appropriate locations for trees; in yards or natural areas, you have a variety of problems.

The city has a memorial tree program that routinely plants non native trees in the valleys, much to the chagrin of other parts of the Parks dept.

The street tree people are not the same unit as Ravines. They ultimately answer to the same people, but have their own targets/goals and some independence on policy.

There is also not always clear direction. For instance, Forestry has been concerned about climate change and has considered (and planted) more southerly species in anticipation of warmer summers. Ohio Buckeye, Tulip Tree and Kentucky Coffee tree to name three.

OF course, those aren't technically native in Toronto, even if so nearby; and many will not withstand the winter we just had, as they are used to a more temperate zone.

Back in the street tree division, homeowners are given a say about what tree they get; and the list necessarily includes species which aren't necessarily appropriate on any given site.

Detailed explanations aren't typically in brochures and staff aren't always inclined to argue for the best choice; as the alternative is no tree or one the homeowner might neglect.
 
IRe: the photo above, and someone’s comment about a "concrete city"...this is why I’d like to see more evergreens in TO. I don’t think they’d make good street trees, but on private property and whatnot a jack pine or white pine would be a nice change to a patch of asphalt or dirt. And their constant greenery would go a long way to improving our non-summer grey streetscape.

I agree with this 100%. Everybody loves leafy trees but the fact is they are drab barren sticks for half of the year. Why don't we see more evergreens? It's like the winter months are completely ignored.
 
I agree with this 100%. Everybody loves leafy trees but the fact is they are drab barren sticks for half of the year. Why don't we see more evergreens? It's like the winter months are completely ignored.

A neighbour has four evergreen trees of some variety, I don't know which. He inherited them from the previous owner and they are likely around 50-70 years old. They are enormous, easily the tallest trees in the neighbourhood. I'd say 5 stories high. They are a blessing and a curse. The complete shade that they cast year round means no light gets through in the spring to start the grass growing, so the backyard of the house is cast in shadow in perpetuity and nothing will grow there. They are also rather messy trees, dropping a lot of cones at certain times of the year. They also have the unfortunate tendency to be hit by lightning, as is obvious when you see the top metre of one of them is dead and visibly scorched.

Of course you don't have to have a giant one like that and I'm sure there are varieties that are less messy. Also the perpetual shade is a blessing on those very humid summer days, like yesterday!
 
I agree with this 100%. Everybody loves leafy trees but the fact is they are drab barren sticks for half of the year. Why don't we see more evergreens?
Because in an urban setting, once more than a few feet tall, they ugly for 12 months of the year.

A forest of evergreens might have some beauty, but a random one here and there, once they mature, aren't particularly pleasant trees.
 
I agree with this 100%. Everybody loves leafy trees but the fact is they are drab barren sticks for half of the year. Why don't we see more evergreens? It's like the winter months are completely ignored.


As far as street trees the principle argument is about when they are young (bushy right to the bottom) they are sightline obstructing and people can hide behind them. So they're seen as both a traffic risk and crime risk depending on location.

They also don't provide very much shade as compared to say an oak or maple, underneath....because their canopy (the spread of the top branches) is relatively narrow.

The other thing is that most conifers (cone-bearing trees) (and not all evergreen) prefer slightly different Ph levels in soil vs most deciduous trees.

While the conifers can often handle 'normal' soil; their needles when dropped alter the ph of the soil over time to show a preference for conifer tree growth.

That said, you will see a fair few conifers planted in 'natural' areas.

**

Personally, I'd like to see coniferous street trees where there is enough sidewalk width to set them back from the road and preferably in a slightly elevated (but large/lengthy) planter system.

White Spruce will put up w/that and looks quite nice.

White Birch also adds year round colour though I'm not sure how much more 'white' we need in January; but Birch don't abide more urban conditions that well.
 

Back
Top