Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Can you see three trees?

not-ship.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 155 posts

Re: Can you see three trees?

#11

Post by luuundonjk »

mickeyp wrote: post #9
luuundonjk wrote: post #7

I was walking in central London and something felt wrong. I couldn't quite tell what though, but I had this constant feeling of unease. It took me a few days to understand - there are no trees in central London (the City). Sure, you have a small/big park here and there, but no random trees on side walks. It's literally a (beautiful) concrete/glass wasteland. Note: I only walked a few of the main streets, I'm sure I'm…

What? London is one of the greenest cities in the world.

I'm talking about trees on sidewalks and streets, not about parks.

Re: Can you see three trees?

#12

Post by jamiecurle »

luuundonjk wrote: post #7

I was walking in central London and something felt wrong. I couldn't quite tell what though, but I had this constant feeling of unease. It took me a few days to understand - there are no trees in central London (the City). Sure, you have a small/big park here and there, but no random trees on side walks. It's literally a (beautiful) concrete/glass wasteland. Note: I only walked a few of the main streets, I'm sure I'm…

I'm not sure what parts of London you were in, but there's many trees in London on sidewalks. There's even a specific species for it - the London plane (Platanus × hispanica)

If you're in the very new, constantly rebuilt, concrete jungle that is the very small part of the city, then OK, greenery is going to be hard to spot. Particularly as they tend to nearly always choose the wrong species to plant and aftercare is an afterthought. But your assessment is factually incorrect.

See for yourself. Go to Google maps, drop a good few street view randomly around the city and you'll see that more often than not you'll see trees.

Also, I have a networks in arboriculture who work in the city and they're never short on work.

I'm not doubting your experience of unease or a concrete/glass wasteland (that's yours and not mine to question) but the facts don't support the statement of no random trees on pavements (side walks).

I live in the North, but I'm often in London.

Re: Can you see three trees?

#13

Post by isoprophlex »

rendaw wrote: post #4

Some photos would be really awesome. What does a view in an area that passes the test look like compared to one that doesn't? 3 trees doesn't sound like a lot, I don't have a good mental concept of this.

indeed, i can see more than three trees, but the tree cover is probably... 1%?

Re: Can you see three trees?

#14

Post by ImaCake »

That first map seems to map quite closely to koppen climate zones across the continent. Its hard to say whether the climate is decisive here because climate is a big influencer of urban design. However, its interesting that in Australia its the two Mediterranean climate cities (Perth and Adelaide) which frequently get labelled as worse for tree cover compared to the sub tropical east coast cities.

Re: Can you see three trees?

#15

Post by luuundonjk »

jamiecurle wrote: post #12
luuundonjk wrote: post #7

I was walking in central London and something felt wrong. I couldn't quite tell what though, but I had this constant feeling of unease. It took me a few days to understand - there are no trees in central London (the City). Sure, you have a small/big park here and there, but no random trees on side walks. It's literally a (beautiful) concrete/glass wasteland. Note: I only walked a few of the main streets, I'm sure I'm…

I'm not sure what parts of London you were in, but there's many trees in London on sidewalks. There's even a specific species for it - the London plane (Platanus × hispanica) If you're in the very new, constantly rebuilt, concrete jungle that is the very small part of the city, then OK, greenery is going to be hard to spot. Particularly as they tend to nearly always choose the wrong species to plant and aftercare is…

open Google maps at Monument station, find a tree in the area. all the streets in that region of London (let's say 1 sq km) are quite narrow, I would guess there just is not enough space for street trees.

Re: Can you see three trees?

#16

Post by thebrid »

jamiecurle wrote: post #12
luuundonjk wrote: post #7

I was walking in central London and something felt wrong. I couldn't quite tell what though, but I had this constant feeling of unease. It took me a few days to understand - there are no trees in central London (the City). Sure, you have a small/big park here and there, but no random trees on side walks. It's literally a (beautiful) concrete/glass wasteland. Note: I only walked a few of the main streets, I'm sure I'm…

I'm not sure what parts of London you were in, but there's many trees in London on sidewalks. There's even a specific species for it - the London plane (Platanus × hispanica) If you're in the very new, constantly rebuilt, concrete jungle that is the very small part of the city, then OK, greenery is going to be hard to spot. Particularly as they tend to nearly always choose the wrong species to plant and aftercare is…

I'd echo the gp's thoughts. There are parts of the City and the West End that are basically devoid of trees.

My biggest bugbear in London is the number of developments that have a "token tree" with one lonely tree in one corner, often doing quite poorly, presumably included to check some item on a planning consent checklist.

Of course, London has many green spaces and on the whole has plenty of trees, it's just they're quite unevenly distributed.

Re: Can you see three trees?

#17

Post by jamiecurle »

rendaw wrote: post #4

Some photos would be really awesome. What does a view in an area that passes the test look like compared to one that doesn't? 3 trees doesn't sound like a lot, I don't have a good mental concept of this.

Here you go. Hot off the press for you. My house which passes the test.

https://jamiecurle.com/posts/trees-3-30-300

Northumberland, UK.

Re: Can you see three trees?

#18

Post by stevekemp »

helloplanets wrote: post #2

Esbo / Espoo is an odd one out, of those four. The three others look like the olden European cities you'd expect, but you'll have a hard time getting around in Espoo without a car. There are plenty of beautiful neighborhoods in Espoo, but it's basically a large spread of separate suburbs rather than a city in the way the rest are. The actual "Espoo Center" is not very green and flowery either, and it's not really tho…

Helsinki has a lot of parks, and also housing companies tend to have trees in their gardens, along with trees alongside many of the bigger roads. But even so it's a reasonably dense city.

Espoo is much more spread out, and the areas between them are all full of trees and greenery. So I very much agree with you, I've visited Espoo a few times but without a car I wouldn't want to live there.

Re: Can you see three trees?

#19

Post by jamiecurle »

thebrid wrote: post #16
jamiecurle wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure what parts of London you were in, but there's many trees in London on sidewalks. There's even a specific species for it - the London plane (Platanus × hispanica) If you're in the very new, constantly rebuilt, concrete jungle that is the very small part of the city, then OK, greenery is going to be hard to spot. Particularly as they tend to nearly always choose the wrong species to plant and aftercare is…

I'd echo the gp's thoughts. There are parts of the City and the West End that are basically devoid of trees. My biggest bugbear in London is the number of developments that have a "token tree" with one lonely tree in one corner, often doing quite poorly, presumably included to check some item on a planning consent checklist. Of course, London has many green spaces and on the whole has plenty of trees, it's just they'…

Maybe I'm just in different places. Normally I'm walking from Kings Cross down Grey street and around Covent Garden type areas.

I'm nearly always on foot. Perhaps it's just because I'm also an arborist and I'm hard wired to see trees and avoid places that don't have them?

The token tree thing is a problem. Daisy Barrington was part of webinar on the topic as part of the Arboricultural Associations webinar series [0]. Rarely do the species planted get based on local ecology and or have a solid aftercare plan. They're normally chosen for immediate aesthetic look (Paper / Himalayan birch being the most common) rather than how they'd exist over time.

In short birch being a pioneer species is short lived (80 years), grows fast towards light and dislikes being pruned. Where as oaks, norway maple, London planes ( some of which are "climax species") etc live for longer, grow slower and respond to pruning better, support local ecology better and some don't mind the pollution of an urban environment so much.

[0]: https://youtu.be/Kql22dZlq6o?t=2407

Re: Can you see three trees?

#20

Post by pm215 »

luuundonjk wrote: post #11
mickeyp wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What? London is one of the greenest cities in the world.

I'm talking about trees on sidewalks and streets, not about parks.

The city government tracks data on public realm trees, and has a nice map based visualization of it: https://www.london.gov.uk/programmes-and-strategies/environm... and if you zoom in you'll see that many of these are streetside trees.

Personally I have always felt that most Japanese cities are very devoid of urban greenery compared to UK towns and cities.

Post reply on HN