Turning Vancouver into Hawaii

[Prometheus]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

Again you missed the points of the posts!

The particular species that they are planting here (the windmill palm) comes from wet, temperate mountainous regions of China. And in these forest live many tree species that are cousins to many of the tree species we have in our wet, temperate mountainous region. That is the point!

This is getting silly. It does not matter that the windmill palm technically comes from a temperate, mountainous region of China (which is still an exotic landscape in relation to the Northwest Coast). The Giant Panda also come from a temperate, mountainous region of China. But that would not make it appear any less out of place in our local ecosystem.

I repeat: this is a matter of aethestics, not taxonomy. Thus, all that matters is that the windmill palm tree (despite its alleged non-tropical origins) looks fundamentally like a typical palm tree. As such, it cannot avoid looking like the quintessential tropical plant. As it was already pointed out, even the father of the English Bay palms believes the windmill palm tree looks tropical and gives Vancouver a lush and tropical look like Hawaii and Florida.

What else can I say?

If your eye cannot spot the aesthetic incongruity of grafting the quintessential symbol of the tropics onto our mossy, northwest, Canadian landscape, then I cannot change that. But your argument that since the windmill palm originates from a mountainous region in China it therefore is technically not a tropical tree (and thus does not look out of place in Vancouver, Canada) is absurd and eloquently contradicted by the title of the article, "Turning Vancouver Into Hawaii".

Vancouver is not Hawaii. Planting palm trees along the streets of Vancouver is as aesthetically incoherent as planting Douglas Firs along the streets of Waikiki.

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

I feel a mix of windmill palms (at intersections) and Arbutus trees (between intersections) would make an amazingly unique Vancouver streetscape. We would be using one native exotic looking species that is found no where else in Canada and one non-native species to display our mild Canadian climate.

ABSOLUTELY ! ! I think you've hit on just the right combination aesthetic, Metro-One ! It's the perfect balance and symmetry between the two species and would give the city a once-in-a-lifetime feel to visitors and residents alike.

[Prometheus]

Originally Posted by Overground

Do you live in Vancouver? Drive down any street and you're bound to find a house with a palm tree.

Any street?

Are you being serious? Palm trees are an extreme rarity within context of the entire city. Even according to your own map, palm trees appear on a miniscule fraction of Vancouver streets.

[ozonemania]

Wow, all of this kerfuffle over palm trees? Surely there are more meaningful things to get hot over than this. Maybe because this discussion is done through a message board that conversations can escalate in such absurd ways.

It's as if I were reading about some impending disaster, like aliens have landed are are capturing humans only to turn them into green hamburgers to feed them to predator aliens waiting on their mothership on the dark side of the moon.

My take on it is this. Palm trees as a form of vegetation can and do thrive in Vancouver's ecosystem. Whether they should be used as landscaped vegetation is another question, and boils down to subjective matters of aesthetics and taste.

Rationalizing dislike for palms is meaningless. Attributing tags like cheesy, ugly, inappropriate, etc to palm trees is unfair, as that is your personal opinion, you you treat it as fact. Same can be argued about tagging palm trees as exotic and interesting.

Regardless, as a civil society, would not the best thing to do is to advocate your own opinion, yet also be respectful of others'?

---

My personal opinion on palm trees. I love them, but I'm not sure I'd want them on Granville Street. I really like the idea of districts -- each within the downtown core having their own character -- and I think palm trees do very well in areas of the West End/English Bay/Kits and along the waterfront/beaches. That is that district's distinctive style. Having them everywhere regardless of district means loss of character and impact, in my opinion.

My vision of ideal vegetation along Granville Street would be trees with good height (so as to not cover obscure storefronts/signs) but not too bold or thick in foliage. This would allow for filtered sunlight, and the sound of smaller leaves rustling as the wind flows through them. This probably means a deciduous variety, but I'm not really sure as I don't know alot about trees.

[Denscity]

Coal Harbour palm trees?

[Denscity]

Cedar?

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by ozonemania

---

My personal opinion on palm trees. I love them, but I'm not sure I'd want them on Granville Street. I really like the idea of districts -- each within the downtown core having their own character -- and I think palm trees do very well in areas of the West End/English Bay/Kits and along the waterfront/beaches. That is that district's distinctive style. Having them everywhere regardless of district means loss of character and impact, in my opinion.

My vision of ideal vegetation along Granville Street would be trees with good height (so as to not cover obscure storefronts/signs) but not too bold or thick in foliage. This would allow for filtered sunlight, and the sound of smaller leaves rustling as the wind flows through them. This probably means a deciduous variety, but I'm not really sure as I don't know alot about trees.

Your image of the breeze rustling through leaves is appealing and poetic, but using deciduous trees also means that for five months of the year we have leafless "skeletons" that add a feeling of dreary winter gloom. (Unless you are willing to wrap them up in Tivoli lights, which might or might not be elegant, especially if it's overdone)

Metro-One had an idea for palms and it was NOT to line the streets with them, as in L.A., but rather to have them at corners and intersection points, making a visual statement.

And please remember, we are talking about a limited area of downtown, not blanketing the entire city.

For street trees, he advocated arbutus trees, which are native to this area, are broadleaf evergreens, can be "trained" to grow in the way their young trucks are molded and bent, and would provide a year-round leafy green canopy, and have an exotic papery russet bark and trunks that bend and twist in often-fascinating ways.

Your image of palms belonging by the beach seems very valid in my opinion, and overusing them would, frankly, be "hokey," as you imply.

But we're not talking about making them the main street tree, but just, as I mentioned, accent points. Arbutus and other broadleaf evergreens (rhododendron, for example) would make nice "fill-in" trees for smaller spaces, remain green all year round, and produce flowers of an unearthly beauty in spring and summer.

And to re-iterate, this is only for the Granville Mall and corners adjacent to it, perhaps joining up, as one reader suggested, with a central median of palms down Pacific Boulevard. Nothing more than that.

I think that's a concept that can be handled without traumatizing people's aesthetic sensibilities.

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by Prometheus

Any street?

Are you being serious? Palm trees are an extreme rarity within context of the entire city. Even according to your own map, palm trees appear on a miniscule fraction of Vancouver streets.

Then why do you hate them so much?

[Overground]

Originally Posted by Prometheus

Any street?

Are you being serious? Palm trees are an extreme rarity within context of the entire city. Even according to your own map, palm trees appear on a miniscule fraction of Vancouver streets.

Ok, you don't like palm trees in Vancouver. So what. Apparently plenty of businesses and residents do. You're throwing this thread off because you're attempting to debate, for some reason, with members why we shouldn't have palm trees. You haven't shown a good reason why we shouldn't other than your personal opinion. Again, so what. I hate broccoli and short skyscrapers. I like palms, you don't. Big deal.

The fact remains, thousands of palm trees are in southwestern BC already and more are getting planted everyday. Palms aren't indigenous here, neither are many other trees and plants. People like palms. Get used it or don't, they're not going anywhere. The rest of us will enjoy them with or without you.

[AlexYVR]

Originally Posted by ozonemania

My personal opinion on palm trees. I love them, but I'm not sure I'd want them on Granville Street. I really like the idea of districts -- each within the downtown core having their own character -- and I think palm trees do very well in areas of the West End/English Bay/Kits and along the waterfront/beaches. That is that district's distinctive style. Having them everywhere regardless of district means loss of character and impact, in my opinion.

My vision of ideal vegetation along Granville Street would be trees with good height (so as to not cover obscure storefronts/signs) but not too bold or thick in foliage. This would allow for filtered sunlight, and the sound of smaller leaves rustling as the wind flows through them. This probably means a deciduous variety, but I'm not really sure as I don't know alot about trees.

I really like the palm trees in the West End, but I agree (somewhat) with Ozonemania - I like the idea of districts. The architecture in the West End is (in some cases, hilariously so) Miami-esque with the pastel colours, the 70s tower design, and the plethora of railed balconys. The palms fit really well with this atmosphere.

The palms on English Bay have several things going for them - namely, their proximity to water. To dispel a myth on this forum, palms don't actually thrive in the Vancouver climate - we're on the edge of their temperature spectrum. A palm will not naturally reproduce in this climate, because of the energy they have to expend to protect themselves. They survive in Vancouver.

Having agreed with ozonemania, I DO really like the idea of the appropriate use of unusual decorative trees at intersections, on islands, and in public plazas around the city. Maybe not palms, as I think they help differentiate the West End from the rest of the city, but I like the suggestions of cypress and arbutus (without knowing much about these trees and their longevity/hardiness/cost/sidewalk-buckling ability). I don't actually mind deciduous trees - winter is winter, no matter how much lipstick you put on it - but I think it's a great idea to have some unusual hardy cypress or evergreens of some sort placed throughout the city so they're a surprisingly attractive feature rather than placed along every sidewalk.

I'm a believer in indigenous species for the most part but occasionally there's place and scope for others.

[Prometheus]

Originally Posted by Overground

Ok, you don't like palm trees in Vancouver. So what. Apparently plenty of businesses and residents do. You're throwing this thread off because you're attempting to debate, for some reason, with members why we shouldn't have palm trees. You haven't shown a good reason why we shouldn't other than your personal opinion.

I did not intend to strike a nerve. You made the claim that one can find a palm tree growing on any street in Vancouver. I simply pointed out the gross inaccuracy of this claim. That, by the way, is not a personal opinion, but a verifiable fact.

Throwing the thread off? The subject of this thread is the use of palm trees in Vancouver. That is precisely what I have been discussing. Specifically, I have been advancing the view that the widespread civic use of a tropical icon within the context of our northwest Canadian landscape is aesthetically inappropriate.

The aesthetic disconnect of lining a northwest Canadian city with tropical trees is an excellent reason for opposing their widespread use. If you do not see the aesthetic incongruity, then so be it. But do not attempt to claim my view is somehow off-topic simply because it is contrary to your own.

[Overground]

Originally Posted by Prometheus

I did not intend to strike a nerve. You made the claim that one can find a palm tree growing on any street in Vancouver. I simply pointed out the gross inaccuracy of this claim. That, by the way, is not a personal opinion, but a verifiable fact.

Alright, 'any' wasn't the proper word to use but you got the point what I was making. There are 'plenty' of streets in Vancouver that have palms on them. The sample map I've been working on in just the small area from the beach to Broadway & Alma to McDonald you can find palms on Pt Grey, W 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th avenues.

Throwing the thread off? The subject of this thread is the use of palm trees in Vancouver. That is precisely what I have been discussing. Specifically, I have been advancing the view that the widespread use of a tropical icon within the context of our northwest Canadian landscape is aesthetically inappropriate.

You're attempting to debate something using only your personal opinion. You can't prove why they don't belong here, only because you say they don't fit in. The fact is, the people of a city past and present determine how or what makes their city aesthetically pleasing. It's totally obvious that people do find palm trees aesthetically pleasing in our region because they're buying the bloody things and planting them all over the place. Times and people change and so do cities.

The aesthetic disconnect of lining a northwest Canadian city with tropical trees is an excellent reason for opposing their widespread use. If you do not see the aesthetic incongruity, then so be it. But do not attempt to claim my view is somehow off-topic simply because it is contrary to your own.

Canadian climates aren't all the same so that isn't an excellent reason.
I never said your view is off topic, I said you're throwing the thread off because you're offering nothing but your personal view that palm trees don't belong here even though many people are planting them.

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by Denscity

Coal Harbour palm trees?

My opinion is that palm trees might look nice in the Coal Harbour waterfront area. However, there is one major distinction between Coal Harbour and English Bay, though both are waterside.

English Bay and Beach Avenue have a "resort" feeling to it, with pastel apartments with wrought iron railings, and a view of the sandy beach overlooking the broad swath of English Bay. It is upbeat, mellow, and "exotic" by Vancouver standards.

Coal Harbour looks out over the more industrial aspect of the Harbour, the North Shore Mountains beyond, and the sulphur port in North Vancouver.
The effect of palm trees MIGHT have lesser impact, but the trees in themselves always look nice.

But sure, why not a cluster or two of palms?

Cedar trees would be nice there, too.

This again is my opinion only.

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by AlexYVR

I really like the palm trees in the West End, but I agree (somewhat) with Ozonemania - I like the idea of districts. The architecture in the West End is (in some cases, hilariously so) Miami-esque with the pastel colours, the 70s tower design, and the plethora of railed balconys. The palms fit really well with this atmosphere.


Having agreed with ozonemania, I DO really like the idea of the appropriate use of unusual decorative trees at intersections, on islands, and in public plazas around the city. Maybe not palms, as I think they help differentiate the West End from the rest of the city, but I like the suggestions of cypress and arbutus (without knowing much about these trees and their longevity/hardiness/cost/sidewalk-buckling ability). I don't actually mind deciduous trees - winter is winter, no matter how much lipstick you put on it - but I think it's a great idea to have some unusual hardy cypress or evergreens of some sort placed throughout the city so they're a surprisingly attractive feature rather than placed along every sidewalk.

I'm a believer in indigenous species for the most part but occasionally there's place and scope for others.

Thank you for that informed and precise piece of feedback. I think you've succinctly put an image to what the "pro-palmers" (I being one of them) have in mind: "HIT THE NAIL ON THE HEAD," as it goes. I think it might clarify the concept for other readers in this forum as well.

[agrant]

Regarding Arbutus trees... always good to do some research.

Here's a little blurb from this page.

"It is often found on exposed rocky bluffs overlooking the ocean."

"Arbutus is found on sites that lack moisture, such as those with rocky or rapidly drained soils. Because it does not like shade, it generally occurs in clearings or on open rocky bluffs..."

This is pretty consistant with what I've observed. Not to say we shouldn't plant them, they just don't seem like the sort that would line streets. I'm not sure they would be able to cope as well as other species. In addition, they don't grow very straight, and they take forever to get to a decent size. Just something to think about.

[wrenegade]

^ Agreed. I LOVE Arbutus trees, easily one of my favourite trees, but I don't think they are a good fit in any city, mainly because of how oddly they grow. You can also notice how they naturally love to grow on exposed rock on the North Shore (lots lining the highway between Cypress and Horseshoe Bay), and how that sort of climate doesn't mesh city streets.

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by awvan

^ Agreed. I LOVE Arbutus trees, easily one of my favourite trees, but I don't think they are a good fit in any city, mainly because of how oddly they grow. You can also notice how they naturally love to grow on exposed rock on the North Shore (lots lining the highway between Cypress and Horseshoe Bay), and how that sort of climate doesn't mesh city streets.

Not to argue with you, because you raise some very valid points, but I've seen Arbutus in Coquitlam and Burnaby, and it's rainier there than in downtown Vancouver.

[Canadian Mind]

Originally Posted by agrant

This is pretty consistant with what I've observed. Not to say we shouldn't plant them, they just don't seem like the sort that would line streets. I'm not sure they would be able to cope as well as other species. In addition, they don't grow very straight, and they take forever to get to a decent size. Just something to think about.

Robson Street is designed to get plenty of light. Also, soil under sidewalks in downtown would be fairly dry, otherwise there would be alot more soil heaving/sinking. And like Tro said earlier, arbutus trees can be "trained" to grow the way you want em too, including in an arch over the road.

Also, while thy take forever to grow, they don't need to be replaced every 30 years, and sidewalks around them wont have to be replaced every couple years because of roots breaking em.

Trees in older cities in the east over 150 years old that took 50 years to reach any decent size. Oaks in NYC and area for example.

[SpongeG]

I love arbutus trees - one of the things i miss about the island - so many around there - only place i see em here is horshebay/west van area

as for palms t-wassen is covered in them - kinda cool - was out there yesterday - very resorty feeling town

[Metro-One]

There are actually Arbutus trees growing along the rocky shores of Pitt Lake. Surprised me silly when I canoed out there for the first time (It was a good surprise).

There actually are a few palms in Coal Harbour, but only near the entrance of the Westin Hotel.

There are also a couple palm trees under the blue glass office tower directly south of Waterfront Station.

Another set of palm trees can be seen from the skytrain at the car dealership along the south side of Terminal Ave.

There are more palm trees (new) planted around a new storage building on the south side of Terminal Ave only a few blocks west of the last location.

Of course there is the one outsdie of Blenze on Denman.

Also on Denman there are some outside of the highschool.

Of course many areas along English Bay/Beach Ave.

The school on Lillooet and 1st Ave has palm trees outside of it.

The roundabout where Nelson & Bidwell St. meet has a big palm in it.

On Robson there are some really nice ones on the south side of the street a few blocks east of Denmen.

The Grand Villa Casino has many lining the streets surrounding it.

The apartment on Sanders & Nelson Ave has a palm tree in the front.

There are palm trees in front of the apartments on Bonsor Ave in Burnaby.

It seems 1 out of every 3 houses in the Kits area will have one (rarely go there so dont know their exact locations.

There is a huge palm tree in someone's yard in New West on 8th Ave and Cumberland

New West also has some along Columbia street

There are also many groups of palm trees in New West along the River Front walking area.

etc...

This is just off the top of my head in a few minutes, i see them everywhere, but since people like prometheus do not see them, this means one of two things, either they blend in so well with our gardens and streets one does not notice them, or we are simply not using them for their full potential.