Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
From an aesthetic viewpoint, which vegetation types in residential areas do you like better? I suppose it might be hard to separate your personal regional or climactic preferences from your aesthetic preferences, but give it your best shot.
Links are to Google street view scenes, 3 for each vegetation type. Tried to find reasonably similar neighborhoods with large-ish but not too large lots (capable of having sufficient vegetation, but not so large and heavily vegetated that you can't see the houses).
I like the NW ones the best. I lived in Spokane: loved it, beauty in every direction, the tall trees I find mesmerizing. Summered as a kid near Mill Creek: loved it. It's almost like the land is trying to hang on to the wild.
I grew up in an area that looks like Tustin, and have lived in a place that looks like Vegas. They have their merits.
I really like the ones in KS, PA, NC, and SC as well.
Where I live now, I'm not sure what you would call it. It is barren plains with trees that wouldn't be there without man.
Yeah I thought stuff on the plains was, well, boring and probably wouldn't get any votes so I skipped them.
Another gray area was the Midwest/NE forests, which, technically, could have been divided into 2: The all-deciduous forest from the mid-Great Lakes to the the southeast, and the mixed conifer-deciduous forests northward (including some of upstate NY and parts of New England). But there aren't really many big cities in those areas (I guess Minneapolis is kinda-sorta and maybe Detroit and Boston, but also just kinda-sorta, they're close to the borders of the two areas), so anyway I just decided to lump them together.
Just so you know, what you list as "Southern Mixed Forest" is within the territory of the US classified as "subtropical." The vegetation of Miami/South Florida is "tropical," while Central Florida is the transition zone between subtropical and tropical.
Subtropical/tropical vegetation has by far the most attractive/lively foliage, so "Southern Mixed Forest" and "(Sub)tropical" on your poll both are satisfactory for me. Med and Desert climates can also grow subtropical vegetation, but the climates are too dry for the lushness I prefer.
Biased, but definitely going with the Eastern/Midwest deciduous.
I can appreciate the uniqueness and appeal of all vegetation, but, just like the East cannot compete with the West in dramatic land formations, the West, in my experience, doesn't hold a candle to the lush greenery of the East.
Very specifically, I think the broader Mid-atlantic region, running from, say, southern NY through PA, NJ, DE, MD, WV, VA and NC, has the absolute perfect balance of dense foliage, bucolic fields/grasses, and landscaping designs that are incredibly pleasant and appealing.
This has never been a popular opinion, but I don't like nature in my cities. Even in dense urban centers like Seattle, the fact that you can see the mountains and forests all the time ruins it for me.
I like deserts for the sole fact they lack vegetation and the vegetation they do have is very unique. The fact that you can see for miles on end in a desert, and you can't in a forest, means so much more to me. Love the big open skies. I also like plains for this reason also, but they don't have the striking "wow" factor like deserts do.
As far as actual forests, ponderosa pines like you see in Flagstaff and in the NW have always been my favorite. That one street view in Spokane is very beautiful.
I like Mediterranean and the southern mixed forest best.
I appreciate the others, but for me the desert is too barren/dry, and the Pacific Northwest and the deciduous forest (Pennsylvania, Michigan) tend have trees too close together or tightly packed. I have family in Mill Creek and I feel a little claustrophobic when I visit there; Spokane is better (I have family there too). I like to see out from among the trees.
I do like deciduous forests of the Midwest and Northeast, particularly of the maple/birch or maple/beech mix. My current location is primarily maple/birch and the dominant species of deciduous tree is sugar maple They are gorgeous in the fall and are attractive trees all year round.
I also like mixed deciduous/evergreen forests. This forest type is very common in my area with Norway Spruce, Eastern White Pine, and sugar maple/white birch & river birch.
Another type of forest that I find especially nice is northern evergreen forests with hemlock, spruce, and pine.
I don't particularly find the desert vegetation or Mediterranean type attractive. The vegetation is too sparse and the surrounding landscape looks barren with no interesting points such as ponds, creeks, etc. I'm not into the palm tree thing either since I like trees that turn nice colors in the fall unless they are a pine/fir, etc.
Just so you know, what you list as "Southern Mixed Forest" is within the territory of the US classified as "subtropical." The vegetation of Miami/South Florida is "tropical," while Central Florida is the transition zone between subtropical and tropical.
That's not actually true. South Florida isn't even in the tropics, since it is north of the Tropic of Cancer. This map here shows US vegetation types, and south Florida is classified as "Subtropical broadleaf evergreen forest."
And anyway, this is vegetation types, not climate or hardiness zones.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.