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.
Crape myrtles wouldn't belong either in that case.
I'm okay with that. They're nice trees but kind of annoying since you see them EVERYWHERE, all over the south. I'm not sure how or why they became more popular than native flowering trees.
I'm okay with that. They're nice trees but kind of annoying since you see them EVERYWHERE, all over the south. I'm not sure how or why they became more popular than native flowering trees.
We'll just have to disagree with the queen palms, but everything else is on point.
Overall, many have responded to this thread with some really key ideas, so I'll just address them. I'll reference the posts wherein each topic/subtopic appeared:
Landscaping
While Houston certainly has a wide palette of species capable of cultivation, given its climate zone, I agree that more can be done by the city on this front. However, I strictly consider this in terms of going "above and beyond." That is, Houston does quite fine in terms of covering ground on a basic level (the notion that the city lacks landscaping is quite silly), but vigorous work in this department should still be encouraged, just to make things grand, and take it to the next level.
The "subtropical/tropical" look definitely needs to be emphasized in the landscaping; in terms of the US, this is the domain of the Coastal/Deep South. Houston is warmer in winter than the well-known garden cities of Savannah and Charleston, similar in temperatures to New Orleans, so it definitely is more than capable of demonstrating the look to great levels.
Achieving this look (all over the metro) calls for emphasis on broad leaf evergreens for large shade tree options; Southern US natives include the live oak, southern magnolia, loblolly bay, red bay, etc, while good exotic species include the broadleaf evergreens that come out of Asia (i.e. camphor laurel, bambooleaf oak, etc). Of course, genetic hybrids like the Galveston eucalyptus and drake elm are good too. As for deciduous trees, those that hail from tropical/subtropical regions around the world (i.e. crape myrtles, jacarandas, flame trees, etc) are fine, but those that range deep into the Northern US/Canada are no good, even if the native range extends into the South (unless a subtropical eco-type can be found or created); so, southern natives like bald cypress and southern hackberry are good, but others like green ash and sycamores should be gone, or at least minimized. Palms of all kinds that can survive the climate represent great complements to the aesthetic, as do many shrubs, flowering plants, and lianas.
Reduction of compartmentalization is another feature that can really make landscaping excel (as well as one not mentioned). Too many people in the area have mistaken notions of where certain plants/trees "belong," which precludes landscaping diversity that could easily be present all over the metro. For instance, the idea that palms belong solely on the coast/south of Ellington, when they can easily grow in further inland areas (provided that winter temps are warm enough). Additionally, many people don't seem to realize that the pines (and associated vegetation) growing in Northern Houston range down to the coast for much of their range across the South. It's only in Texas and Louisiana that they aren't present on the immediate shore areas, and that is due strictly to edaphic (soil) reasons, a circumstance that can be taken care of with typical landscaping soil amendments. Basically, there is nothing wrong with planting palms in The Woodlands, and there is nothing wrong with planting pines and live oaks on Galveston; keeping this mentality in mind will cause Houston landscaping to excel.
Another aspect is usage in areas/manners not common. More plantings along freeways like the trenched area of 59 (where the vines line the entire roadway walls), as well as greater expansion of designated landscaping areas (i.e. in parks, lots, etc). In fact, designated green-belts of mass silviculture of subtropical trees (as well as palms and bamboo) would be epic. Also, greater usage of pioneering for green practices: This 'tree' has the environmental benefits of a forest - CNN.com
Usage of Natural Features
I definitely agree with this, and feel that this is the most significant factor as to why Houston is viewed the way it is. The way the city/metro developed after that 1900 Hurricane on Galveston strikes me as one that actively tries to shun the water. It turns out that said hurricane wouldn't even had been near as devastating as it was had the US listened to warnings from Cuba: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1900_G...ogical_history
With that in mind, there is no use in being so fearful of the coastal location. I agree that Galveston Island itself isn't an ideal sport for a large city (hard to evacuate from), but a place on the mainland bay shore (i.e. where places like La Porte, Baytown, Sea Brook, Clear Lake, etc are located) would have been just fine. Even though Houston itself is inland from the bay, the metro can still connect with the bay/gulf, through a "trifecta:" a more eastward-focused Houston as the start, Galveston as the end at the Gulf, with one of those bayside communities (Sea Brook, Kemah, etc) grown up into a larger resort city.
Inland in Houston, the water features are present in the form of bayous, essentially, slow-moving rivers (plural). They've largely been neglected historically, but the new system of parks/trails to utilize them represent a start of what's to come. These waterways start out small, but from downtown on east, they grow into much larger features, enough that islands appear within the waterway; the Buffalo Bayou is comparable to size and width as the Spree through Berlin (a well known river city), as shown in a Google Maps comparison. Urban development of Houston's east (i.e. Magnolia Park, Harrisburg, etc) would help to integrate the wider bayou int the fabric: http://planhouston.org/sites/default...aster_Plan.pdf http://i.imgur.com/NXcQJAg.png http://i.imgur.com/F0WFjWj.png
A very crucial point indeed. There is a reason that places like London, Berlin, etc are never criticized for supposed "lack of nature or scenery," despite not having giant mountain backdrops right next to the sea.
Tourism
This is a minor one, but it relates to the point about city tourism. Many here have to get over this notion of "business city" vs "tourist city," as there largely is no such division. All cities are what they are, places where people live, work and play; those that attract high numbers of tourists (not counting theme-centric cities like Orlando and Las Vegas) do so because the districts/neighborhoods/features of those cities just so happen to appeal to visitors. That is, places like SoHo, French Quarter, etc didn't just get built to pull tourists, those were simply areas of live, work, and play that happened to appeal to tourists. It just so happens that walkable, urban design facilitates tourist appeal better than car-oriented sprawl, all other factors equal (for a myriad of reasons that I don't feel like delving into) Overall, many in this thread have echoed this sentiment, so we are in agreement.
There are a variety of reasons Houston gets bashed.
1. The East coast runs the media. The East coast hates Texas. The only city the East coast fawns over a little is Austin. Let's be honest, they are fawned over for one reason: 6th street.
2. Houston is an emerging city. Houston still needs time to grow while other cities are done growing.
3. NYC, Chicago and other cities advertise their beautiful areas very well. As a Chicago native myself I'd have to say Michigan Avenue is the most recognized street. Furthermore, the Michigan Avenues of the world have had over a century to develop. 100 years ago, Houston was barely starting to grow due to a devastating hurricane in the town that was supposed to be Houston. And that town, of course is Galveston.
4. Houston is much less segregated by income and class than other cities. Since there is no zoning, I have noticed people are much less afraid to go to "rough" neighborhoods than in other cities.
I could go on all day.
This post is 6 years old, but still accurate. East coast is biased.
I shared these next 2 photos in the other thread, but I thought it would be fitting to put them here too since this is a topic about how ugly Houston is said to be. I don't think Houston is the best city but It's not as bad as a lot of people think. But its funny how those old myths about Houston are hard to shake, no matter what it does.
This photo shows Medical Center and Uptown/Galleria in the far background (to the left). Mann that Galleria skyline is extensive. It makes Houston seem like a mini Manhattan in certain angles.
This was taken from the same area but includes downtown in the far background (to the right)
I am in Houston and I wasn't talking about this past winter. It was several years ago and the queens were less than two years old. Maybe that had something to do with it. I used special palm vitamins and watered according to queen palm recommendations which is wide and deep as I recall. I even added sand to the soil as well as had the PH and lime adjusted to help the trees thrive. They grew wonderfully, dark green and the fronds didn't bow over too much like an unhealthy tree would. I guess something was out of place, but it would have been great had they survived.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Texyn
Queen palms certainly grow better in frost free South Florida than elsewhere in the South. They do have specific soil/nutrient needs though, so they can indeed ail if conditions aren't met.
You're either:
1. Outside of Houston (queens can survive temperatures down to 17F-20F, which nowhere in Houston proper reached this past winter)
I am in Houston and I wasn't talking about this past winter. It was several years ago and the queens were less than two years old. Maybe that had something to do with it. I used special palm vitamins and watered according to queen palm recommendations which is wide and deep as I recall. I even added sand to the soil as well as had the PH and lime adjusted to help the trees thrive. They grew wonderfully, dark green and the fronds didn't bow over too much like an unhealthy tree would. I guess something was out of place, but it would have been great had they survived.
So you were probably somewhere in Houston's expansive city limits (most likely the northern and/or western portions). Queen palms can survive brief spells down to 17F; all that I've seen in Sugar Land have survived the various cold spells, a place that gets colder temps in these spells than much of Houston, due to being much further inland.
I just hate the lack of trees
You would think that with Houston's heat, everybody in the Houston could agree to pass a tax to plant trees all through the city.
Laughable. Please show me these areas of Houston that are supposedly lacking in trees.
With the sole exception of San Francisco, ALL American cities are ugly, and they all look exactly the same. If you want a beautiful city, live in Edinburgh, Durham, Bath, York, Oxford , Cambridge, London, Paris, Rome, Florence, Venice...
Pittsburgh is a very pretty American city. After the steel industry collapsed there, the air and water cleared up, revealing a real gem. Pittsburgh is nestled in green hills bordered by three rivers.
Laughable. Please show me these areas of Houston that are supposedly lacking in trees.
I'm merely commenting on this lacking trees in the vast Houston region one sees? SOME areas can be quite grassland prairie not lush in forest or tropical lush.
Southern Houston metro has many grasslands. Some trees but more like the Midwest prairie without farms then a sub-tropical area.
Coastal gulf regions are mostly grasslands with sprawling elevated homes where they are inhabited. Some palms but looking far more arid like a semi-desert meets the sea.
I mean really, this street-view in January looks like ANY AREA OF THE MUCH NORTHERN PRAIRIE IN EARLY WINTER before snows..... BLAND AND BROWN. Yet soooooo clse to the Gulf coast. Far from a more lush eastern gulf coast.
Depends what areas one sees and comment on. JUST DEPENDS ON HOUSTON AREA ONE REFERS TO. Sure there are areas with more forested areas and evergreen areas.
Just overall tropical looks are not common but for homes people chose to plant more and maintain it. Houston can support a more tropical look but not in natural settings. Sweeping palms are not the norm or common even coastal. It's a more ARID LOOKING region.
I'm sure more northern Houston regions are more forested but ..... you asked where its not.
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.
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.
