I really don’t see the appeal in The Woodlands (Houston: sales, employment)

[As Above So Below...]

To be fair if the Woodlands had Sugar Land or Katy’s demographics, it would be amazing!

[SouthernBoy205]

Originally Posted by As Above So Below...

To be fair if the Woodlands had Sugar Land or Katy’s demographics, it would be amazing!

Bingo.

I’d even turn it up some notches and say Pearland’s or Spring’s demographics.

[Frustratedintelligence]

Originally Posted by WRM20

But TW has trees, and there are no plans to get rid of them. Katy has about 3 trees(OK, maybe 5), it's a tree desert. It's not nearly as attractive as the Woodlands. If I had to pick, I would take TW. And I say that with my parents having lived there for 40 years.

Doesn't have to be though. There's plenty of space for trees to be installed, so I'm not sure why it doesn't get done.

[DabOnEm]

Originally Posted by Frustratedintelligence

Doesn't have to be though. There's plenty of space for trees to be installed, so I'm not sure why it doesn't get done.

There are new trees planted all over Katy that have matured well. You have canopies in Katy down roads like Fry, Greenhouse, Mason, etc. now. Parts of I-10 you can barely see the businesses from the frontage because the trees they planted when they build the freeway back in 04 are now mature. Katy doesn't have dense natural pine tree coverage everywhere like the northern burbs but one thing the area does do is plant a bunch of trees where there were none before.

[Frustratedintelligence]

Originally Posted by DabOnEm

There are new trees planted all over Katy that have matured well. You have canopies in Katy down roads like Fry, Greenhouse, Mason, etc. now. Parts of I-10 you can barely see the businesses from the frontage because the trees they planted when they build the freeway back in 04 are now mature. Katy doesn't have dense natural pine tree coverage everywhere like the northern burbs but one thing the area does do is plant a bunch of trees where there were none before.

I've heard people claim before that Houston and its suburbs plants a bunch of trees and I just don't agree with that. It plants some but compared to other eastern cities it doesn't seem like nearly enough. Four or five oak trees spaced twenty feet apart doesn't really do the trick. Many Houston neighborhoods that have been established for decades still don't have nearly as many trees as they should.

I think even Dallas seems to do a better job at reforestation than Houston does, ironically

[WRM20]

Originally Posted by Frustratedintelligence

I've heard people claim before that Houston and its suburbs plants a bunch of trees and I just don't agree with that. It plants some but compared to other eastern cities it doesn't seem like nearly enough. Four or five oak trees spaced twenty feet apart doesn't really do the trick. Many Houston neighborhoods that have been established for decades still don't have nearly as many trees as they should.

I think even Dallas seems to do a better job at reforestation than Houston does, ironically

You don't plant oak trees 20 feet apart.

I seriously doubt Dallas does a better job than Houston on tree planting.

Houston did not have many trees in the past. Almost every tree in the area was planted as part of a development. There was no reforestation here, because there were no trees.

If you look at Google Earth for Houston and compare 1943 to now, you can see just how many trees have been planted.

[As Above So Below...]

Originally Posted by SouthernBoy205

Bingo.

I’d even turn it up some notches and say Pearland’s or Spring’s demographics.

Pearland is good to. Spring's lack of an Asian population would not entice the wife.

[Frustratedintelligence]

Originally Posted by WRM20

You don't plant oak trees 20 feet apart.

That was a tongue in cheek comment I was making, the gist of my statement being that more trees can fit into the same area than what you will typically see around Houston

I seriously doubt Dallas does a better job than Houston on tree planting.

Houston did not have many trees in the past. Almost every tree in the area was planted as part of a development. There was no reforestation here, because there were no trees.

If you look at Google Earth for Houston and compare 1943 to now, you can see just how many trees have been planted.

Yes we know Houston is partially prairie, but this is hardly Denver that we're talking about. The entire city was not built on nothing but grassland. Trees were and are still torn down to make way for development. I'm not saying it would ever look anything like Atlanta, but it should have more trees than it does.
https://www.globalforestwatch.org/da...9&showMap=true

[Raider Scott]

Originally Posted by As Above So Below...

To be fair if the Woodlands had Sugar Land or Katy’s demographics, it would be amazing!

So...some thing the Woodlands is too white?


Is there a place to gather stats on the demographics of Houston burbs like Woodlands, Kingwood, etc? I would be interested in seeing these.

[ParaguaneroSwag]

Originally Posted by Raider Scott

So...some thing the Woodlands is too white?


Is there a place to gather stats on the demographics of Houston burbs like Woodlands, Kingwood, etc? I would be interested in seeing these.

Yes. While others particularly like the Woodlands because of the demographics