We have been working hard on next steps to Save the Montrose Live Oaks.  We need your continued focus on this to make the TIRZ listen and adjust their plans to preserve more trees.  Talk to your neighbors!  Send the petition link to everyone you know!  Public outrage and pressure is our biggest strength. 

MARK YOUR CALENDARS:  There are two upcoming meetings that we hope you will plan to attend.  

• Thursday, November 30, 6:30pm - Please plan to join our first Save Montrose Live Oaks meeting!  Meet the group to learn more, ask questions, and provide your input.  Stay tuned for location.  Meeting info will be sent out to this list and posted on www.SaveMontroseLiveOaks.com
• Monday, December 11,  6:30pm  - Public TIRZ Board Meeting at St. Stephens Episcopal 1827 W Alabama St, Havens Center, Houston, TX 77098.  Please attend in person if you possibly can, or register for Zoom at https://us02web.zoom.us/meeting/register/tZElcOCqpzgpGNRO1s1yRqBQTqadWZIb9yr1 

COMING SOON: Independent arborist report  -  A board certified arborist has been evaluating the 57 trees that the TIRZ plans to bring down in early 2024 as well as the viability of the 14 Live Oaks in the medians that they claim will survive, in spite of 5 feet being taken off each side of the medians. This report will be made public early next week.  

TIRZ COMMUNICATIONS  -  The following questions and suggestions were sent to the TIRZ on 11/9.  Their attorney has indicated that we can expect written responses next week.  We will post their answers once we get them. 

Questions/suggestions sent to Montrose TIRZ:

1. Project phases and planning timeline

a)     We understand that Segment One construction will begin in the first quarter of 2024.  Is there any more specific start date planned at this time?

b)     Can you clarify the timing for Segment Two?  We understand that you are awaiting an HCAD report for final budget information. Are there other decisions or inputs to that budget that you are awaiting?

c)     Is it accurate to say that Segment Two is at 0% engineering plan at this point?  When do you anticipate having the first community input meetings for Segment Two? 

2. Sidewalk design

a)     We understand the plan is to narrow the sidewalk to 6’ south of Westheimer to allow many of the large live oaks in that stretch of Montrose to be preserved. Is this correct?  Where will the change in sidewalk width begin (Westheimer, Hawthorne or Harold?)

Would the TIRZ be willing to consider greater continuity in the design, by having a 6 ft. wide sidewalk starting farther north, e.g. W Clay or W Grey? 

b)     As the sidewalk narrows, how will existing trees be incorporated into the design?  Will the sidewalk go around them?  Or will they fit within the intended buffer zone?  

c)     The City recently required crushed granite on parts of the new sidewalk in front of Glenwood Cemetery, a project that also had SWA serving as the landscape architects. Can the TIRZ incorporate crushed granite on the Montrose sidewalks in order to preserve trees? Is permeable concrete like the concrete used by Rice University an option?  

3. Renderings

a)     When will the revised streetscape drawings be available as promised at the 10/16 board meeting?

b)     Can the new planted trees be rendered to scale instead of showing what they might look like 15-30 years from now? 

c)     How will the bike path/vehicle crossings look?  Where will stop signs be placed for cars and bikes? 

3. Cycling plans

a) Divergence from published plans:

                i.     The 2020 Montrose Walk/Bike plan that the TIRZ developed does not show Montrose Blvd as being appropriate for a shared bike path except north of Clay and south of Richmond.  Isn’t the plan to accommodate bikes on Stratford, Waugh, and Commonwealth instead? What has changed in your thinking about that?   Would the TIRZ be willing to reconsider using Montrose as a main artery for bikes?  

              ii.     In reviewing the agendas, minutes and tracking spreadsheets from the committee in charge of the Houston Bike Plan, the Bicycle Advisory Committee, (https://houstonbikeplan.org/bac/ for the last 2 meetings, this group shows nothing planned for Montrose Boulevard. We support the Houston Bike Plan that shows biking on Waugh/Commonwealth to the West and Stanford to the east. What is the rationale for diverging from this? 

             iii.     The TIRZ’s Livable Center final report (https://montrosehtx.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/Montrose-LC-Final-Plan.pdf refers on page 19 to the WalkBike Montrose plan and the Houston Bike Plan, neither of which call for bike accommodations on Montrose Boulevard.  No 10-foot path is shown and nothing in Livable Centers appears to require or recommend the plan adopted by Montrose TIRZ.  Did the Livable Centers final report recommend a ten-foot path or any off-street bike path, shared or otherwise? Did it support removing the mature trees lining the street?

b)     Will the envisioned shared path for cyclists be on one side or both sides of Montrose Boulevard? 

c)     At the point where the TIRZ plans to narrow the sidewalk, how will this work for cyclists?  Will cyclists be required to weave around trees?  This of course is easier to do for pedestrians but not as easy for a rapidly moving cyclist.  Please help us understand the intent.

4. Cyclist and pedestrian safety

a)     Shared paths appear to stir considerable debate in the cycling world.  Wasn’t safety the reason the Houston Bike Plan and Walk Bike Houston do not recommend a shared path? 

These guidelines by Ohio DOT, for instance, discuss ten feet as the narrowest a shared path can be, and state that whether the path will be frequently used by children or by seniors or by folks with disabilities should be considered before creating a shared path. https://www.transportation.ohio.gov/working/engineering/roadway/manuals-standards/multimodal/05/05

Since prominent proponents of the 10-foot path are families walking to Wharton and wheelchair users who came to the Oct. 16 meeting to affirm their desire for improved sidewalks, isn’t the inclusion of cyclists likely to make the shared paths unsafe for these users?

b)     Where will vehicle stop signs for cross streets be located? Behind the shared use path? 

c)     A major safety concern with the current design for cyclists is the number of business and residential driveways that intersect with the proposed shared path sidewalk.  

EAST SIDE

Dallas to Clay – 6

Clay to Gray – 9

Gray to Fairview – 10

Fairview to Westheimer - 9

Westheimer to US 59 - 19

WEST SIDE

Dallas to Clay – 7

Clay to Gray – 6

Gray to Fairview – 12

Fairview to Westheimer – 10

Westheimer to US 59 - 22

TOTAL PHASE ONE – 13

TOTAL PHASE TWO – 97 (47 East, 50 West)

*Does not include any added entrances/exits at Ismaili Center, if added

TOTAL STREET CROSSINGS IN PHASE ONE – 3

TOTAL STREET CROSSINGS IN PHASE TWO – 50

Cyclists could potentially face traffic intersecting with the shared path 107 times on the west side between Allen Parkway and US 59.  Having so many vehicles intersecting with the shared use path is a hazard.  Vehicles must cross, and block the cyclists’ path, to reach the curb to decide to enter or cross Montrose Blvd.  Do we realistically expect cyclists will stop or slow down to assess a clear right-of-way to proceed at each vehicle crossing?  

5. Century-old legacy trees in Segment One

a)     The Post Oaks on the west side of Montrose between Allen Parkway and Dallas are estimated to be 140+ year old (per report by Matt Latham, board certified master arborist). If explained to the Urban Forestry Department that in fact there are trees older than 100 years which will face removal if a sidewalk is built on the west side of Montrose between Dallas and Allen Parkway, might that help the TIRZ obtain an exemption to the requirement that a sidewalk be installed on that block?  Was an exemption ever asked for? Can it be pursued now?

b)     Was the historic value of these Post Oaks considered in your decision to install a sidewalk on that block?  At the entrance of the historic German Magnolia cemetery, where notable Houstonians are buried, these giant 140+ year old oaks currently shade the graves of notable Houston family gravesites, including members of the Webber, Borden, Schultz, Pasche and Williford families.  

6. Replacement trees

a)     Would the TIRZ be willing to upgrade the replacement trees to larger calipers?  Walter Hambrick, the mayor’s Deputy Chief of Staff, had recommended to us that we view the replacement live oaks that were used on the Bagby St walk/bike project, which was another SWA project. We agree that these 5-6” live oaks provide a much better option to replace mature trees and request that the TIRZ use this caliper size for Montrose as well. 

b)     Given that Live Oaks and American Sycamores have been deemed Super trees by Rice researchers and the City of Houston for their superior air pollution-fighting traits, helping to prevent asthma in children, and given their shadiness and flood-fighting root systems, would the TIRZ be willing to reconsider the lanana cypress choice?  The Lanana cypress, we understand, is a new hybrid without a decades-long track record.

c)     We understand that Mr. Webb announced at the Neartown Super Neighborhood meeting that there would be six trees in Segment One that will be moved or transplanted.  Please let us know which trees these are and where they will go. 

7. Median trees

a)     Certified arborist Matt Latham’s preliminary report determined that the narrowing of lanes will cut into the root plate of most of the trees, and require severe removal of limbs in order to create clearance above the newly located lanes. If it is determined 6 ft sidewalks will be adequate, would the TIRZ be willing to reconsider the plan to narrow medians?

b)     The TIRZ has said every median tree will have a plan to protect it as part of this project.  Is this referring to the city-mandated tree protection measures that accompany infrastructure projects, basically to keep trees from harm during construction? Or do you intend to invest in any way to give these trees extra care beyond the city mandate, such as to help them recover from construction in the years immediately following?

In summation, our interest is in preserving mature healthy live oaks, while respecting the requirement for improved sub-grade drainage and meeting the need for better sidewalks on Montrose Blvd.  We hope it is clear that a number of our ideas were inspired by solutions already successfully realized in past Houston projects of SWA, the landscape design firm you’re already working with.  We are confident that a meeting will help us better understand the ways in which we may be able to collectively preserve more trees.