The break on Montrose Blvd in Whitmire saves us from traffic purgatory

Regarding “Hell is freezing over. Houston is becoming more urban and the MKT trail proves it. | Editorial,” (May 8): What a beautiful dream. I fully support Mayor John Whitmire’s pause and review of projects like the overhaul of Shepherd Drive and Montrose Boulevard. How do you suggest anyone gets to work or home or move goods in and out of the city (yes, we already are one) when we are transitioning to this utopian vision of “urban living » ? These projects would lock us into traffic purgatory.

The “urban life” that this editorial talks about will not happen by magic. While I agree that too much money has been spent in the past on spreading concrete around this city, I strongly advise wizarding planners to allow for a transition period. It’s not the destination, it’s the journey.

To quote this editorial: “We would like to think…that the scrappy, adaptive, work-with-what-we-have attitude of our best developers and designers can invent new forms of urban planning in our great city.” “

You encourage innovation and preservation of what we have, and I agree with you. However, how does cutting down 50-year-old live oaks, pouring concrete, and replanting much smaller trees in crates work with what we have? A great designer would come up with a plan that preserves most, if not all, of the existing canopy, uses permeable materials, adds vegetation, benches, artwork and safe passageways. It would be disjointed and it would turn Montrose into a memorable boulevard.

Mary Ellen Whitworth, Houston

Regarding “Mayor Whitmire stopped a major redesign of a Houston street. It will set us back. | Editorial,” (May 2): Mayor Whitmire’s recent moves to stop and potentially reverse Houston’s mobility plans represent a troubling shift that threatens to dismantle more than a decade of progress toward a more sustainable and accessible urban environment. While his administration focuses on public safety and infrastructure, the rhetoric used to dismiss concerns – calling advocates “anti-auto activists” and opposition mere “special interests” – ignores the broader implications for all townspeople.

These decisions affect not only those who advocate progressive transportation policies, but also ordinary residents who travel city streets as drivers, pedestrians and cyclists. It is not about protecting particular interests; it’s about preserving the well-being of every Houstonian who relies on these mobility initiatives to reduce traffic, improve safety and promote healthier living.

Additionally, Whitmire’s approach could reverse progress made toward reducing Houston’s carbon footprint and improving public transportation and bike lanes. The potential rollback of these initiatives represents a step backwards in the city’s commitment to environmental sustainability and quality of urban life.

Its lack of expertise in urban planning and mobility further compounds the problem, raising questions about the effectiveness of its unilateral decisions in these areas. As someone actively engaged in the city’s transportation dynamics – and not just a mere spectator or special interest – I view these developments as a major blow to Houston’s future. It is crucial that progress in mobility is not sacrificed for short-term political gains or misinterpreted debates.

Mark Wright, Houston

Regarding “Cheating and retaliation? Houston should be concerned about Union Pacific’s safety culture. | Editorial » (May 7): My mother, born in 1916, crossed these railroad tracks to and from school. Union Pacific must be held accountable after 90 years of blocking roads and polluting the air.

Regarding “Houston-area residents clean up flooded homes as Hidalgo, Abbott and other leaders work to help” (May 6): Gov. Greg Abbott urges those affected to report damage to ensure that flood money be used to help rebuild homes, businesses, and Where was Abbott in 2021 when the General Land Office, led by then-Land Commissioner George P. Bush, ruled that the county of Would Harris receive zero dollars of the $1 billion in federal money initially allocated to Texas after Hurricane Harvey?

The Chronicle reported on June 19, 2021 that federal aid distributed by the GLO flowed disproportionately to inland counties that suffered less damage from Harvey than coastal communities, including counties in the interior that were not initially designated for assistance by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. Will politics once again intrude and direct a majority of federal flood relief dollars to red counties such as Montgomery and Liberty rather than the bluer Harris and Houston counties?