Quote:
|
Originally Posted by somethingfast
I understand your points at an emotional level. But at a practical level, it doesn't make a bit sense. Tucson is already sprawled to ends of the earth, like Phoenix. Actually, I bet Tucson's density is considerably LESS than Phoenix's. You know, I'm not necessarily in favor of massive freeways but I do believe a couple of depressed, two-to-three lane, unimpeded arterials are much needed. It takes, no kidding, forty minutes to go about ten miles in the town most of the day. Public transportation isn't gonna solve the problem in a low-density metro like Tucson. But I hear what you're saying...
|
And I hear what you're saying.
In Phoenix, we spent many years kvetching about the same unsatisfying choices which plague Tucson today. You're damned either way, it seems. But horizontal growth becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy with freeways. Tucson is at a crossroads, so to speak, and ought to think deeply about which path it decides to take. The one path, the one Phoenix and all other Sunbelt cities took, diminishes urban energy for the sake of the single family house and the one person-one car transportation method. Once you commit to freeways, you're hooked. The other path, the one Portland, Oregon took, emphasizes mass transit, growth boundaries, and a vibrant downtown. The city is a jewel. While Tucson may never rival Portland for urban energy, it's a worthy goal, and certainly a better one than emulating Phoenix. Indeed, Phoenix serves as an example to Tucson the same way Los Angeles does to Phoenix. Cheap growth being a narcotic, we ignored all the damning evidence of LA's dystopian car culture and proceeded to establish our own. My advice: visit Portland and then decide which city you'd prefer Tucson to be like. You don't have many opportunities to get these things right, and once you commit to freeways, your fate is sealed. No vibrant downtown, very few high rises, no urban character, and little civic pride.