More palm trees in Houston? (Dallas, Galveston: mall, move, suite)

[Gunion Powder]

Originally Posted by War Beagle

What natural areas are left tend not to have many palms. For instance, Brazos Bend State Park is a natural area, and it has vegetation that is more traditionally Southern in nature. I prefer that look to what I consider attempts to make Houston artificially look like a tropical paradise.

Obviously, it all comes down to aesthetic taste. Some palms might be native here, but they are not the predominant vegetation. Too many palms strikes me as trying to fake it and make this area something its not.

That's just silly. I do think a cap should be placed on planting invasive species, but the native types should certainly be more common. The fact that they aren't predominant is all the more reason to make them more visible.

You mention aesthetic taste, well Miami is a city that most people would say is more aesthetically pleasing than Houston, and I believe all the palms there have a lot to do with that.

[NickelsTX]

Originally Posted by Gunion Powder

I believe all the palms there have a lot to do with that.

The beaches, pretty water and architecture have a alot to do with it.

Palms look very tacky in the city IMO.

[testmo]

Eh your mind would change regarding any other city - irvine ca, santa barbara. Palms definitely out of place but frigging puzzles are made out of their photos on city streets

[Yn0hTnA]

Originally Posted by LocalPlanner

The tall, spindly types of palms should be confined primarily to Galveston and the immediate coast area. Canary palms (I think that's what they're called) can be OK in Houston itself in certain situations, like the way they're used along Post Oak Boulevard. But broadleaf trees - and not just live oaks - almost always look better than palms. Highland Village should definitely get rid of its palms, they begrime the area.

Palms are fine anywhere in Houston; they blend well with the rest of the vegetation to create an interesting subtropical US mix (the combo of pines/cypress, broadleaf evergreens, both native and non-native, and palms, plus any subtropicals/tropicals).

Originally Posted by War Beagle

What natural areas are left tend not to have many palms. For instance, Brazos Bend State Park is a natural area, and it has vegetation that is more traditionally Southern in nature. I prefer that look to what I consider attempts to make Houston artificially look like a tropical paradise.

Obviously, it all comes down to aesthetic taste. Some palms might be native here, but they are not the predominant vegetation. Too many palms strikes me as trying to fake it and make this area something its not.

The palm species I refer to are indeed native to the Southern US, and thus are typical Southern US vegetation. As much as three, even four, species of palm are native to the Houston metro area; the Sabal minor (dwarf palmetto) is well known, and the Sabal Brazoria, a unique hybrid species of palm found nowhere else in the world but the forests along the Brazos River. The Sabal Brazoria is a hybrid between the Sabal minor, and the Sabal Palmetto (the Cabbage Palmetto, which grows naturally in Florida, up to the Carolinas); this means that the Sabal Palmetto, at one point, was present in the Houston area, in order for the hybrid to have formed, at least some point in time. While no signs of the palm are seen as of now, the private nature of the Brazos forest areas means that there are many areas that remain unexplored, and thus could have stands of Cabbage Palmettos. There is a Texas Sabal Palmetto, which grows naturally in the Rio Grande, where the range is known to have extended further north in the past, as per explorer accounts; it is known that a lot of these palms were cut down, due to their wood being immune to ship-worm:
http://www.mapress.com/phytotaxa/con...t00027p025.pdf
Brazoria County Palms

The palms may have not been dominant across the overall natural environment, but that doesn't hold to a good argument as to why Houston won't look good with palms. The coastal area of California, including San Diego and Los Angeles, had no native palms; the only native palm for California was the Washingtonia Filifera, which grew only in the desert oases of the state, away from the coast. That didn't stop San Diego and Los Angeles from looking good while being loaded with palms of various kinds, did it? The same goes for Houston (even more so, considering that Houston actually has multiple palm species native to the area); Houston is warm enough climactically for many palms, even non-native, to do well.

Of course Houston shouldn't look like a tropical paradise; the city isn't at tropical latitudes. It is, however, at subtropical latitudes, and can, indeed, look more like a subtropical paradise (which it already is in my book).

Originally Posted by NickelsTX

The beaches, pretty water and architecture have a alot to do with it.

Palms look very tacky in the city IMO.

They look great even in areas like Sugarland; they fit in the city just fine. Be reasonable with yourself:
First Colony Mall at Sugar Land:

https://www.sugarland.com/photos/vie...1&order=Newest


http://www.verdanttreefarm.com/image...cake-dates.jpg

Canary Island Dates at Imperial Sugar Factory:

https://www.sugarland.com/photos/vie...r=Popular&tag=

[PedroMartinez]

I plan to put 4 date palms (haven't narrowed down the specific type yet) behind my pool. I'm going for the resort look.

[LocalPlanner]

As I mentioned, the Canary Island palms can look nice in certain situations. The taller palms are unequivocally out of place, tacky, and shameful, especially as street trees (for which shade is a prime function). That First Colony Mall photo shows how horrible they are - how could you claim that as evidence for pro-tall-palms? This isn't even up for update. First Colony needs to remove those post-haste and replace them with broadleaf native Texas trees, such as Shumard oaks, or even a deciduous non-broadleaf such as Texas Cypress. What a horrible choice they made.

[Gunion Powder]

Originally Posted by LocalPlanner

As I mentioned, the Canary Island palms can look nice in certain situations. The taller palms are unequivocally out of place, tacky, and shameful, especially as street trees (for which shade is a prime function). That First Colony Mall photo shows how horrible they are - how could you claim that as evidence for pro-tall-palms? This isn't even up for update. First Colony needs to remove those post-haste and replace them with broadleaf native Texas trees, such as Shumard oaks, or even a deciduous non-broadleaf such as Texas Cypress. What a horrible choice they made.

What if those trees were replaced with native Texas palmettos? Would that be tacky or tasteful, in your opinion? They can get pretty tall, mind you.

I agree about the bald cypress, though. There should be way more of them.

[JoeHito]

They can look nice but there's a reason they're not native to the inland areas. I think it's better to select vegetation that's native to the area personally. Palms use more water and don't provide as much shelter from the sun. We need all the water we can get in some years so planting water hungry trees is not the best idea.

They are probably more relevant if you live near the coast but not inland.

[mikeyyc]

Originally Posted by testmo

Mongolia trees also have to be kept pruned more so than oaks to not look a mess

I hear they'll over-run everything and are hell on your Great Walls...

[naadarien]

Originally Posted by LocalPlanner

As I mentioned, the Canary Island palms can look nice in certain situations. The taller palms are unequivocally out of place, tacky, and shameful, especially as street trees (for which shade is a prime function). That First Colony Mall photo shows how horrible they are - how could you claim that as evidence for pro-tall-palms? This isn't even up for update. First Colony needs to remove those post-haste and replace them with broadleaf native Texas trees, such as Shumard oaks, or even a deciduous non-broadleaf such as Texas Cypress. What a horrible choice they made.

I must be missing something because those trees at First Colony are well cared for and look exactly as they should (though they do look recently groomed in these pics). They aren't meant to be shade trees though. Not sure why anyone would think they would be.

I have no problem with palms if they are taken care of. I am from the land of streets lined with palms. They can certainly look pretty. Spent many hours looking at and watching them sway in the ocean breezes as a kid. I wouldn't really consider Houston to be "inland." Dallas, sure. Houston is definitely transitional, which means you are likely to see a mix of vegetation (inland and coastal).

Coastal Marshes