Sunrise has just cracked the Rincon Mountains, as Mark Homan and Madeline Ryder push one last sign into the soggy ground. It’s a series of signs, really, written in clever rhymes and leading to this crescendo: “Don’t Super Size Broadway.”
That would be Broadway Boulevard, the roadway roaring alongside us, dampened by rain and thick with early morning commuters. We’re here because, way back in 2006, voters approved plans to make Broadway eight lanes just between Euclid and Country Club Roads, as part of a sweeping, 20-year region transportation scheme.
To widening opponents such as Homan and Ryder, this plan is rife with potholes. For one, current Broadway-widening strategies are based on 25-year-old traffic projections that some considered flawed to begin with. There’s also the likelihood that such construction could lead to the demolition of more than 100 homes, businesses and historic properties.
Then comes the process itself. To give this pivotal project the veneer of public participation, Tucson’s transportation department convened a citizens task force to help devise the new alignment. It soon became obvious, however, that the task force’s major job was gnawing free sandwiches before each meeting, and offering thoughtful suggestions which city leaders could promptly ignore.
But Tucson officialdom was only one force buffeting these poor volunteers. Another was the Regional Transportation Authority, created by the same 2006 vote, and mandated to oversee the numerous road projects. Since the Broadway planning began, the RTA has largely busied itself with issuing veiled threats to the task force, lest its citizens opt to shrink the project’s massive footprint. Not to be left out of the scuffle, Pima County Administrator Chuck Huckelberry also threatened to withhold the county’s $25 million contribution if the project didn’t stay, well, super-sized.
And true to form, last month city transportation staffers released a plan that seems destined to please no one; while squeezing the project from eight lanes down to six, it still includes the demolition of nearly 40 buildings, many of which are historic. The Citizens Task Force will meet to review that plan at 5:30 p.m. today in the Our Saviour’s Lutheran Church, 1200 N. Campbell Ave. The public is invited.
This morning, Homan smiles wryly as he inspects his roadside handiwork. He says money may ultimately achieve what mere citizen opposition so far has not, pointing out that the entire project is budgeted at $71 million, while just acquiring properties necessary for the expansion could cost more than half of that. And all before a shovelful of asphalt hits earth. Meanwhile, city planners are still swinging merrily down their six fat lanes. “I think they’re living in a parallel universe,” he says.
This article appears in Mar 19-25, 2015.
Thank your for a well written article that captures our frustration as we try to bring some common sense and new progressive thinking to Tucson’s transportation plans. With the millenials driving less and the boomers aging out of driving, and our projected population increase not happening, widening these main roads in an urban business district only destroy family homes and businesses, decreasing the city, county and state sales tax collections, not to mention property taxes. Who is pushing this project? The consultants who are collecting millions in fees? It can’t be any thinking Tucsonan who loves our city with its rich history and culture.
Someone said tonight that state law allows cities or towns to change RTA projects if they pay the difference. Is that true? This sounds different from RTA’s “projects must match the ballot language” mantra.
Another case where a handful of extremists against the will of Tucson’s vote. The vote of Tucsonans should stand ( 8 lanes ) regardless of ‘traffic projections’. TUCSON SHOULD RESPECT THE VOTE!!
RTA was “passed” by expanding the voter base to folks in outlying NON-Tucson areas — folks who only want to sip through our neighborhoods on their way to briefly visit the west Tucson strip malls and car dealers…
And was passed in a probably fraudulent “election” where some doubts still linger about the actual result of the vote…
And even if not fraudulently flipped was a perfect example of the big money of the 1% buying votes through a massive media propaganda push…money as “speech”…
And as the article mentions was based on population and traffic “prognostications” that ARE NOT BEING BORN OUT BY REALITY…
We need SMARTER, more sustainable transportation options NOT more of the suburban car culture!
You GO Broadway Coalition! And save some energy to join those of us fighting to impose some degree of sanity on the Grant Road corridor too before it’s too late!
PS: Probably the most egregious example of expensive hypocrisy were the endless series of “public meetings” to help “plan” the result…
In the case of the Grant Road corridor, hundreds of thousands of precious dollars were spent for (ironically, a Berkeley, CA based consulting outfit) to gude attendees in spinning our wheels about bike lanes (not happening), meandering paths (not happening), green spaces (not happening), sustainable xeroscaping (not happening), routing (ignored) and, most egregious of all, even though the consensus among the Grant Road residents who attended was that 6 LANES WERE NOT NEEDED (no traffic), we were consistently patted on the head and fed the standard bullsh*t about the “voters have spoken” (a never read footnote buried in the legislation that was probably fraudulently “passed” (Google “Box 13 Lyndon Johnson”)…
So as a late, lamented actually HONEST City Councilman told us, “They’re going to lay down 6 lanes of asphalt and tell you, ‘Sorry, but we’re out of money for all the rest of that stuff!'”
Meanwhile, Tucson panders to the war business to “grow the economy” while the Real Economy continues to fester and good people who can see that real sustainability is NOT the point of the exercise — leave…
Fascinating…I know nothing of traffic studies. I can’t give specific examples of anything but my anecdotal evidence is strong. I own a home at Broadway and Craycroft (now assisted living) and a few others through out town. I work at Golflinks and Houghton area. I moved to Continental Ranch (better schools and more family friendly neighborhood last year). It takes just as long for me to get to Golflinks and Houghton from Continental Ranch (30 minutes) as it did from Broadway and Craycroft although I did have to buy a smaller car :). I think we’ll never see decent streets or good traffic flow in Tucson because we’re all NIMBYs (myself included).
It seems the City of Tucson could do a narrower version and save some money buying buildings and use the money to help businesses stay and provide PARKING instead. The Sunshine Mile deserves a sensitive treatment, not a tear everything down treatment. More creative solutions could enhance the area save money, buildings, and businesses. I’m really disappointed in that the community does not seem to have been heard and that the City of Tucson once again does not appear to be business friendly. This area could be a model for the rest of the nation, but alas, doesn’t appear to be the case.
You want to save historic properties, which I favor also, how about scrapping the damn median? There’s absolutely no reason why all our major arterials have to look the same. Broadway has lots of charm, that of an inner city historic district, unlike Grant Road, which the city has purposely let go on maintenance for the sake of hedging support for its transformation into homogenous autobahn. Honestly, Broadway is fine just the way it is, otherwise I forsee a wide sterile slab of asphalt with few and far between cars after rush hour.
To Citizen Tucsonan: Let’s stop the name calling. If you really want people to read and consider your opinion, just give a good clear argument.
Dear Robin Steinberg,
Citizen Tucsonan gave a good clear argument. Broadway should be 8 lanes and not 6 lanes. We need to respect the law and our constitution. Broadway Rd isn’t owned by those (handful) opponents.
It’s time for Tucson to move forward and not back. These ideologues did a good job keeping Tucson poor and destitute over the last few decades, they must be stop. Tucson is a city and not some small town. Accept change. 8 lanes on Broadway Rd.
So, in addition to being “extremists”, people who disagree with you are”ideologues.” I can take a pretty good guess as to where you get your “discussion” style, but I won’t go there. Have you ever considered that these comment sections can be an opportunity for people to actually discuss topics of importance and perhaps listen to each other and name calling does not facilitate that?
Anyway, the 8 lane option is already off the table. What is being discussed is how to do the 6 lane alignment. The important thing to remember is that traffic counts are down to 1984 levels. Original projections have not materialized. One of the reasons for this is that other roadwork has been done that has taken pressure off this particular corridor ( a win for the transportation planners). Traffic is never backed up on this section of Broadway. Sure, things slow down from further east, but it is not due to traffic volume. It has to do with the number of lights. This is inevitable when one is driving through a more densely populated urban area. In widening a road going through this area, we would probably slow down traffic. This is because a wider roadbed would require longer lights. I hope no reader would suggest that we go forward with a plan that wastes taxpayer money.
Robin, 8 lane option isn’t off the table. I’m sorry but rigging the ballot box is illegal. In cases like these, it will always follow a lawsuit. A lawsuit is waiting at the city’s mailbox, Mark Homan, Madeline Ryder and crew.
Nice try Robin. If you wished to live in a neighborhood with less traffic and noise, please move outside the perimeter of downtown Tucson and the University of Arizona. You are living in the wrong place. Always expect heavy and growing traffic in that part of Tucson. Tucson needs those extra lanes for Tucson’s future light rail route.
In case you haven’t noticed, there are more and more construction of high rise buildings within downtown and the U of A. which translates to more people living within that area therefore more vehicular traffic.
Tucson needs to have a real city center not just islands of suburbs. I live in that neighborhood and personally there should be 10 lanes on Broadway but I respect what Tucson voted for – 8 lanes. I could also create my own traffic projections as an excuse for a 10 lane Broadway but I’ll leave it to the traffic engineers.
these are the same arguments that were said when Broadway was expanded to its current alingment. from a dirt road to a two lane road to its current alingment.the same things about buildings getting torn down, the cost, that it is not needed. If the road is not expanded the cost will be much more when it does happen.
I appreciate that all of the recent comments have not included any name-calling. Thank you.
I do want to address some comments from recent postings:
1) I don’t understand the reference to “ballot-rigging.” There hasn’t been some kind of vote, so I don’t get it.
2) The traffic counts I refer to are official counts done by PAG. I don’t have the link, but this is public info and you can get it from their website.
3) The assumption has been made that I live in the neighborhood and just don’t want this project in my backyard. Not the case. I live between Craycroft and Wilmot. I am just interested in transportation issues and building a thriving urban center both downtown and in the surrounding areas. I believe you do that by creating access to it, not by running a road through it.
Finally, I would just suggest that people drive this piece (between Euclid and Country Club) during rush hour, morning and evening. There are no bottlenecks, not even close. Any bottleneck occurs in downtown itself, and widening the gateway to it is not going to eliminate it.
Thanks for taking the time to read this.
So it is better that our tax dollars be spent on unnecessary boondoggle projects instead of on meeting real transportation needs (like fixing potholes, synchronizing street lights, better transit)? Just because a project made sense thirty years ago (and in this case, that is a generous assumption) does not mean it still makes sense now; in fact, all data (PAG’s own traffic studies, projections, “lessons learned” from other cities, demographic trends, et cetera) indicate that transportation funds would be better spent on a handful of turn lanes, synchronizing traffic signals, and reducing the speed limit (which, counterintuitively, increases end-to-end throughput speed while creating a safer place for all the other people who use the road: pedestrians, bicyclists, business customers entering/exiting, and so on). RTA would be better meeting its fiduciary duty to the taxpayers by re-examining the need for this project AT ALL, revising the project size downward accordingly. and putting the remaining funds into pothole repair and other deferred maintenance. Times and conditions “on the ground” change, plans should too.
A city that’s static is a dead city. Look at Detroit and ….. Tucson. Stop living in the past. Let it go. The idyllic life that you are seeking never existed in Tucson. The Foothills folks must stop forcing their fantasy to the rest of Tucson who are suffering.
Sacrifice the few ‘historic’ buildings in Tucson for an 8 lane Broadway, a crosstown freeway and urban lifestyle. We neither have the time nor money to fight against this rich folks fantasy.