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

[Streety McCarface]

Heated sidewalks? Which turn on only during a snow or ice fall.

From link.

That must cost a fortune in heating elements and electricity. The specific heat of ice is very high.

 

[ADRM]

That must cost a fortune in heating elements and electricity. The specific heat of ice is very high.

I think the general idea is two fold: first, that they stay hot enough such that they never really have to melt ice from scratch, and second, that they are something close to cost-neutral when weighed against the salaries of the people paid to do it manually.

 

[Jayomatic]

One patch of trees I noticed recently doing really well is the section right next to Maple Leaf Square along York St. I think what's helping is that they are protected by a stone border which might keep some of the salt and snow from entering the beds.

 

[smuncky]

One patch of trees I noticed recently doing really well is the section right next to Maple Leaf Square along York St. I think what's helping is that they are protected by a stone border which might keep some of the salt and snow from entering the beds.

Yes! Just walked by these trees this past weekend and commented that it so rare to find trees like this on downtown streets. The only other spot I can think of where new trees have thrived is down by Sugar Beach and the promenade there.

 

[innsertnamehere]

I believe the planter boxes along Harbour Street are getting the same treatment - so hopefully Harbour gets some nice mature trees in a few years.

 

[steveintoronto]

Yes! Just walked by these trees this past weekend and commented that it so rare to find trees like this on downtown streets. The only other spot I can think of where new trees have thrived is down by Sugar Beach and the promenade there.

After the initial disasters on Spadina, trees there are now actually able to change the personality of an otherwise barren view. As to how long the present plantings live remains to be seen.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Yes! Just walked by these trees this past weekend and commented that it so rare to find trees like this on downtown streets. The only other spot I can think of where new trees have thrived is down by Sugar Beach and the promenade there.

After the initial disasters on Spadina, trees there are now actually able to change the personality of an otherwise barren view. As to how long the present plantings live remains to be seen.

Why can't we get trees right in this city

 

[steveintoronto]

Why can't we get trees right in this city

It's a known issue in many cities. Even Guelph (a city that claims to be Greener than Thou) had to face up to the '13 year life span' of *most* trees on main thoroughfares.
The hard life of a tree on the streets of downtown Guelph

It's a bit more complex than just the airborne pollutants. Stress from audible factors has also been determined to be a factor!

In Toronto's case, it isn't just the environment and care factors. It's also the *choice* of tree type. As to why it went so wrong on QQ is perplexing. All well and good to put the blame on the "contractor". Surely someone on City staff should have overseen qualifications and choices before issuing the contract?

 

[Northern Light]

One patch of trees I noticed recently doing really well is the section right next to Maple Leaf Square along York St. I think what's helping is that they are protected by a stone border which might keep some of the salt and snow from entering the beds.

I've used this location as an example of planting done right, many times, including in this thread.

Right species, right planter style (open trench soil system, multiple trees and complimentary plants, good cubic volume of high-quality soil, and planter height substantially reduces salt exposure.

Why can't we get trees right in this city

We can, and we have, as noted in multiple examples.

The problem is consistently applying what we know works.

The reasons we don't, vary, the London Plane debacle is a result of a landscape architecture fetish which Parks felt they couldn't resist, as it was supported heavily by BIAs, WT, and other heavyweights.

I'm hoping that lesson is learned and a spine developed.

Likewise there has been a caving on proper project-management practices (enforcing specs); as well as concessions to help the City manage cash-flow and workflow (by permitting plantings in fall of species that should only be planted in spring).

I outlined the solutions earlier in the thread so I won't repeat them all.

We know what has to be done, its a matter of choosing to do it consistently, and not abiding BS from landscape architects, City bean counters, BIAs, or contractors.

Its about a culture of excellence.

There are people within PF and R who very much have that, but there are others who do not. It needs to be pervasive.

 

[Northern Light]

Hmm, I'm going to add something here.

For those of you who take a keen interest in the public realm.

If you're following a project in your neighbourhood or around where you work, a streetscape project/sidewalk reconstruction etc., and you're either not sure about the design or deeply concerned (in respect of trees), post the details and any links you have here at UT, tag me, I will look through them and give you an informed opinion.

If I think there's a problem I will tell you, publicly, what that is, what solutions or alternate choices might be better, so you can go lobby Parks, the developer, transportation and/or councillor and have the facts at your disposal.

Away from UT I can't lobby for everything, everywhere, but nothing says I can't help those of you who care, do so more effectively.

 

[steveintoronto]

Hmm, I'm going to add something here.

For those of you who take a keen interest in the public realm.

If you're following a project in your neighbourhood or around where you work, a streetscape project/sidewalk reconstruction etc., and you're either not sure about the design or deeply concerned (in respect of trees), post the details and any links you have here at UT, tag me, I will look through them and give you an informed opinion.

If I think there's a problem I will tell you, publicly, what that is, what solutions or alternate choices might be better, so you can go lobby Parks, the developer, transportation and/or councillor and have the facts at your disposal.

Away from UT I can't lobby for everything, everywhere, but nothing says I can't help those of you who care do so, more effectively.

One thing I see chronically is the City (and other cities) cutting grass way too short, in effect, killing it (albeit the roots somehow survive in many cases).

I can find no suitable answer on why they do this from any Parks staff I've spoken to other than "we're just doing what we've always done". It's bizarre...beyond bizarre. No reputable or informed groundskeeper would ever cut grass that short. You grow grass for a reason, so it's lush and usable, not dead threads on dry soil.

We're now facing a mild drought (it's showing to the north and east of Toronto, especially away from the Lake), some locales have water rationing in place. And the City still cuts grass to make it brown. Go figure.

 

[Northern Light]

Now, i going to do something else. I'm going to put a list of with photos, of best performing street trees in Toronto, in my experience.

Silver Maple - most commonly the Freeman Maple hybrid. (the difference is the latter turns red in the fall)
Acer saccharinum

Red Oak
Quercus Rubra

Swamp White Oak (near native)
Quercus bicolor

Honey Locust
Gleditsia triacanthos

Accolade Elm
Ulmus morton

Bur Oak
Quercus macrocarpa

Those are the best, most consistent performers in my books to which I have no material objection.

The City of Toronto's street tree list can be found here:

https://www.toronto.ca/data/parks/pdf/trees/street-tree-brochure.pdf

I don't completely agree with what's there, but will save that discussion for another day.


Problematic species in terms of their performance:

London Plane
Red Maple
Tulip Tree

* all of these do well in the right spots, but they are fussier and require better growing conditions than can be offered on most streets.

Problematic Trees ecologically:

Ginko - nothing in our local area uses its not birds, not insects, nothing. Its a non-contributing species.
Norway Maple - While very salt tolerate it is highly invasive and can easily escape into natural areas where it may obliterate local biodiversity.


* if you have questions about specific species, please ask away, I will do my best. I'm not a botanist by trade, LOL, just well informed.

 

[Tulse]

I see a lot of what I presume to be honey locust in the city, and they do very little for the public realm -- they tend to be weedy, and the leaves don't provide much in the way of shade compared to a lot of other species in us in the city.

 

[Northern Light]

I see a lot of what I presume to be honey locust in the city, and they do very little for the public realm -- they tend to be weedy, and the leaves don't provide much in the way of shade compared to a lot of other species in us in the city.

I don't know about 'weedy', but yes, they provide dappled shade. Their leaves might be called fern-like to some and therefore let quite a bit of light through. Larger, healthier specimens can get quite large though, and I think quite nice, though that's personal taste I suppose. They do have a cooling effect though not as drastic as species with denser canopy.

They do often get a crap reputation because they have been a favourite to plant in the old-style concrete boxes and in parking lots, where, not surprisingly, they don't do all that well most of the time. But that's less a function of the species that the conditions in which it is being grown.

https://goo.gl/maps/SpVb62z5zyS2

 

[Tulse]

It's personal taste, I guess -- for an urban environment I much prefer trees that give deep shade.