Five street trees in planter boxes at Yonge and Finch, August 2007
Last summer I wrote a post about a sad patch of street trees near the southwest corner of the Yonge and Finch intersection. I’m up in this area about three or four times a month to visit my mom who lives in a nearby condo and I continue to watch the health of these trees. In the spring of 2007, they were planted in raised planter boxes, which is one of the worst things you can do to a tree: it restricts the growth of roots and allows only a small surface area for the roots to absorb water. City of Toronto bylaws clearly state that all City-owned trees need to be planted in trenches (literally linking up root systems of nearby trees which allows water to spread more easily through this network below sidewalks), but this group seems to have defied those requirements. (I won’t rehash any more arguments from last year’s post, so maybe a take a minute to re-read it.)
Last year was Toronto’s driest summer in 50 years, while this summer is being hailed as the wettest in recorded local history. For trees, last year was hell and this year is turning out to be heaven. But how are the trees doing that I highlighted last year? Check out the photo below.
Same street trees at Yonge and Finch, July 2008
Sadly, the trees are in much worse condition. This is partially due to the fact that the success of a tree relies on the rainfall (and stored energy) from the previous summer. Tree 1 had leaves in 2007, none today; Trees 2 and 4 had a few leaves near the bottom of their canopy, but none today; Tree 3 had no leaves in 2007, and has already been cut down and removed from the planter box; Tree 5 had some leaves and is still holding on to a few today.
This small example of dying street trees reinforces the well-known fact that City Council is willing to plant trees — a wonderful photo-op and newsletter feature for councillors, no doubt — but does not have the foresight to allocate a proper budget to maintain them. Urban forestry staff has continuously stated their frustration in not being able to properly look after trees. I find this situation infuriating and mind-boggling: almost all councillors, on both sides of the political spectrum, understand the value of trees to the local environment, yet they continuously under-budget maintenance of street trees and ignore the long-term affects of their penny-pinching ways.
This wet summer is only masking the problems the City is facing when it comes to its tree canopy. There has been a large drop in the tree canopy in the last decade from 30% coverage to 20%, according to the City’s inventory. And years of not planting trees over the previous decades has left us vulnerable to a large swath of trees dying in a short period of time (through disease or old age).
Over the last seven or eight years, the signs of Toronto’s parks have contained a slogan: “A City Within A Park”. I’m not sure City Council understands the irony of promoting one of their worst oversights.
photos by Matthew Blackett
21 comments
Matthew I would go much further with my outrage.
I personally invested in landscaping a park which our head of Parks & Wreck and the councillor both took pride in and walked the area with me while I showed them the wreckage at the hands of staff.
Despite their expressed outrage they each did NOTHING. Further, part of my agreement with the city provided me with the hoses, sprinkler and hydrant key to water the area on my own time. Yet staff continuously took or cut the hoses, demanded the key be returned, etc.
Result… a very sad place exists and I am pissed at the vacuous nonsense and incompetence that exists at silly hall.
Yet they and Miller continue misrepresenting to anyone who will listen, their desire to make this city a garden. BULL.
Even Forestry, which like every department whines about no money, is posing.
Their staff ignores trees until you show interest in pruning, removing or planting on or near city property. Then they are all over you with rules, regs, and false concern. The same rules and regs they ignore for themselves.
Ask these same individuals what they intend to do about caring for their own city, park or ravine trees and you get an indignant scowl, your permit gets lost in the office and their trees get ignored and die.
I believe it is shameful and won’t stop until they see ALL their names posted on the dead trees they are responsible for.
Gee, sounds like a great idea.
Let’s get everyone who feels as we do to go out in their respective areas and put a headstone on every dead tree, street bound or not. Perhaps reading
‘Died from neglect by Councillor (name)”
Imagine the photo ops and perhaps even the change of heart at council.
Yes… we can only dream.
Oakville 2006 Canopy Coverage: 29%
Oakville wins again!
What a waste of resources. And that they put so many barriers in the way of citizen volunteers is disgusting.
Dear i,
This is not a competition. Our tree canopy effects you as well, and vice versa. Its much different to run a town of 165,613 compared to the 2.5 million in Toronto.
But it does speak to the point of how the old cities of Toronto were good examples of functioning local governments. They were able to manage themselves better as smaller entities rather than as one big one. There are different needs in downtown North York than there are in Parkdale but that does not get reflected well in the current way the city is run. This sad story of trees is one of the examples of how the megacity government concept does not work well for anyone.
They have amateurs at the city’s forestry. Look at what happened at the High Park playground. In the forest is one thing, but around kids they should be checking the trees more thoroughly.
But try to do fix trees around your property (ie. pruning, health of the trees), they “know best”.
But the weeds in the sidewalks and roads are doing great!
Thanks for the tree post though the subject matter is woeful. I miss Tree Tuesdays. When I was in Toronto last month I noticed some outdated planting techniques, but there are some hopeful signs like the tree protection zone I saw in The Annex (you can see the photo in my July 28 post).
Despite the competitive nature of i’s comment, it raises an interesting point about differences in tree canopy by neighborhood. Can you provide more information about this issue?
We could always try the Danish Solution:
Any trees that front your property (in this case, Shoppers Drug Mart) are your responsibility. If your trees die, you get fined.
Presumably tree canopy includes trees in developed areas, trees in parkland and open space (e.g. the ravines), and trees in whatever undeveloped land is left in the city.
Would all trees be considered equal? That is, if we were able to pull up 200 mature trees from the middle of a ravine and turn them into street trees along a cul-de-sac in Scarborough, the canopy would not change (correct?) but would there be a net positive impact? While obviously this is not going to happen, it is a relevant question  if we are aiming to increase the tree canopy, and we are going to be planting (say) 2000 trees, where is the priority? Street trees on main streets? Street trees in the burbs (newer subdivisions where there are fewer trees) vs in the old city (where there is a stronger “base”)? Street trees in industrial parks? etc. Or, maybe it turns out it is simpler to plant them in currently open areas in City parks, ravines etc.
Actually the most successful planter trees I’ve seen are on the north side of Danforth between Greenwood and Linnsmore – a few of them have been there for about 20 years, they cracked the old planters and the City actually put largers ones around them.
Oakville’s Forestry Dept actually studied a way to help the streetside trees along main arteries, and has undertaken some projects to allow the tree roots to link up by burrowing out “tentacles” around the tree out of the heavy clay and then filling them with lighter soil and mulch, so that the trees don’t get root-bound in their original planting hole. The heavy clay in Oakville is deadly for street trees, at least they’re making an attempt. I watched a number of old boulevard trees get cut down in my neighbourhood 20 years ago, and the City didn’t replace any of them. Now that the street has lost even more of the large old trees, it’s looking quite barren, where there used to be a thick canopy.
This is most upsetting. If Toronto staff can’t see the forest for the trees, at least learn from other places like New York… The street trees here are, for the most part, fantastic and it is the very first thing I notice the absence of whenever I return home from Toronto. I can’t even bear to look at photos of Toronto’s commercial arteries, with their bare concrete completely absent of leafy goodness. It does not exactly meet the image of woodsy Canada that most tourists expect.
I take care of the street tree outside my place in northern Manhattan and it’s been doing great since 1935. 4’6 x 4’6 opening, no grille, flush with the sidewalk – this is not rocket science. And yes, there is salt and winter here too, but the dogs are probably the bigger overall threat.
Whether street trees, green roofs, bike paths or power plants, Toronto talks the talk but can’t walk the walk. Embarrassing!
I’ve noticed that trees which are planted a few metres further away from the street seem to do better than the standard-issue Toronto street twigs that struggle along in the boxes at the edge of the sidewalk.
I’ve always wondered why we don’t have more pine trees on our streets. They would look far better in winter, when our streetscapes devolve into a grey wasteland. There would be less streetcleaning required in the fall. Finally, they would provide a unique look that could help differentiate us from other NA cities. Are their issues, such maintenance or cost, that I am discounting?
I get so frustrated reading these comments. Individuals are so prone to judge the whole system by their single experiences. There is so much more to the larger picture. Take your blinders off and stop looking through those negative lenses. Yes there are things that can be improved in Toronto’s urban forest, but there is SO MUCH that is beautiful and working well.
For what it’s worth, when the town of Oakville plants a tree at the front of a house (on that median strip b/w the sidewalk and road) the developer has to include the cost in the home and the owner cannot get a refund even if they cut it down. This allows the town to plant trees in many places at no initial cost. Is there a similar plan with businesses in Toronto?
This issue is very consistent with how Toronto works in general. It is all about optics. Announcements are worth more than actual results. The political capital lies in planting the trees not keeping them alive. The fact that the trees are doomed to die provides more opportunity to showcase the city’s green initiatives (sic).
@Glen
Absolutely Glen. And it all flows from the guy at the top.
Since he wants to be held accountable I suggest we grant his wish and fast.
It should be noted that is is an issue that has been going on since at least the 50’s.
Hey Matt, great post. The trees @ Yonge and Eglinton are in similar planters and are doing better than the ones you’ve highlighted, but still aren’t great.
c, your post is puzzling. Just because Toronto has amazing sidestreet tree canopies (due to the stability and physical layout of downtown residential lots) is not an excuse to have treeless arteries. Why should Toronto not implement what is universally judged to be good practice for successful streetscapes? I think you may be the one who needs to remove the blinders.
There’s too much of a “That’s not my job.” mentality among city staff. And then there’s the endless refrain of “We don’t have enough money.” How much money does it take to pour some water on a tree in a drought? When I was a kid (in another city), the fire department went up and down the streets watering the trees in a particularly bad drought year.
Hmm… I’ve been enjoying spacing.ca and spacingmontreal.ca a lot, and I am surprised to see the difference in attitude between the cities. For a city that from an visitor’s perspective is really, really nice, you guys sure like to complain! Sheesh. A few dead trees in planters is a shame, but in fact Toronto is beautiful and very green, although yes, more so in the residential areas than the main streets. But compared to most other cities I’ve visited? Get a grip.