Dreams of urban Houston
Regarding “Hell’s freezing over. Houston is becoming more urban and the MKT trail proves it. | Editorial,” (May 8): What a lovely dream. I fully support Mayor John Whitmire’s pause on and review of projects such as the redesign of Shepherd Drive and Montrose Boulevard. How do you propose anyone get to work or home or move goods in and out of the city (yes, we already are one) while we’re transitioning to this utopian vision of “urban life”? These projects would have us stuck in traffic purgatory.
The “urban life” this editorial waxes on about will not happen magically. While I agree that too much money has been spent in the past spreading concrete around this city, I strongly advise that the wizard planners account for a transition period. It’s not the destination, it’s the journey.
Ann Derryberry, Houston
To quote this editorial, “We’d like to think … that the scrappy, adaptive, work-with-what-we’ve-got attitude of our best developers and designers can invent new forms of urbanism across our great city.”
You encourage innovation and preservation of what we’ve got, and I agree with you. However, how is cutting down 50-year-old live oak trees, pouring concrete and replanting much smaller caliper trees in boxes working with what we’ve got? A great designer would come up with a plan that saves most, if not all, of the existing tree canopy, uses permeable materials, adds vegetation, benches, art and safe crossings. That would be scrappy, and it would turn Montrose into a memorable boulevard. Mary Ellen Whitworth, Houston
Regarding “Mayor Whitmire halted a major Houston street redesign. It will set us back. | Editorial,” (May 2): Mayor Whitmire’s recent moves to halt and potentially reverse Houston’s mobility plans represent a troubling shift that threatens to dismantle over 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 — labeling advocates as “anti-car activists” and opposition as merely “special interests” — ignores the broader implications for all city dwellers.
These decisions not only affect those advocating for progressive transportation policies but also everyday residents who navigate the city’s streets as drivers, pedestrians and bicyclists. This isn’t about protecting special interests; it’s about safeguarding the wellbeing of every Houstonian who relies on these mobility initiatives to reduce traffic, enhance safety and promote a healthier lifestyle.
Moreover, Whitmire’s approach could undo the strides made toward reducing Houston’s carbon footprint and improving public transportation and bike paths. The potential rollback of these initiatives is a step backward in the city’s commitment to environmental sustainability and urban quality of life.
His lack of expertise in urban planning
and mobility further exacerbates the issue, raising questions about the efficacy of his unilateral decisions in these areas. As someone who is actively engaged in the city’s transportation dynamics — not just a bystander or special interest — I see these developments as a significant blow to Houston’s future. It’s crucial that progress in mobility not be sacrificed for short-term political gains or mischaracterized debates. Mark Wright, Houston