It’s a great idea. Let’s get the Santa Cruz River running in the downtown area. Rebuild and maintain the riparian environment, to the extent it can be rebuilt and maintained, anyway. Turn it into a natural attraction for locals and tourists. Bring people to its banks to get a sense of the river and the area as it once was.
Let’s bring a little running water to town.
I’ve bit my lip on this topic for years because, well, I came here from Portland and . . . say no more. Few words fall flatter on the Tucson ear than, “In Portland, we . . .” I feared the rolling eyes, the dismissive grunt. “This is the desert, idiot. Two words. No. Water.” But now that the subject has been broached in an article in today’s Star, with the blessing of some locals, I’m ready to go public.
Look, we’ll soon have functioning light rail here using Portland streetcars and modeled, at least in part, on Portland’s light rail system. I’m a big supporter. It looks like it’s paying economic and urban dividends even before the first paying passenger hops on board.
I just returned from a visit to Portland, where I rode the MAX from the airport, then back to the airport again, and I took lots of trips on MAX and the lighter-light-rail streetcars while I was there. Years ago, I watched the city being dug up to make way for the tracks. The downtown went through the same agony we’ve gone through here — torn-up streets (add mud), construction delays and businesses on life support. It was ugly, and it got nasty. Now downtown Portland is hopping (it was dying before), and many of the rail stops around the city have become commercial hubs because businesses know people are going to be walking by when they get on and off the trains. It’s really something. It’s transformed the city.
And I saw Portland revitalize its waterfront around the same time. Sure, the huge Willamette River was always there running through the center of the city, but the waterfront was a place boats dumped scrap metal in ugly piles to be, I don’t know, reprocessed or something. Now it’s dotted with hotels and condos and restaurants and walkways and large expanses of grassy parks filled with people and music festivals. I’ve sat at outside tables on the banks of the Willamette at dusk with a beer and a sandwich, looking over the area and thinking, “If I were traveling anywhere in the world right now, I’d be a happy man sipping and eating and strolling at a spot like this.”
Tucson’s Santa Cruz won’t be Portland’s Willamette, of course. But it could bear a resemblance to a creek running through Ashland — yeah, Oregon again, a six hour drive south of Portland. One beautiful stretch of the creek has shops and restaurants crowded together on its banks with patios over the creek bed, looking down onto the water and the vegetation. Very busy. Yet very quiet and very soothing at the same time.
The Star article says it’ll take two golf courses worth of water to get the Santa Cruz flowing again in the downtown area. How many golf courses do we have in Tucson, with a diminishing, aging population of golfers? Now, how many bodies of running water do we have that everyone can enjoy?
I wonder how many new homes we would have to not build in the greater Tucson area to keep that stretch of the Santa Cruz filled. A few less new homes in the area. That could actually be a net positive, Santa Cruz or no.
But listen, I’m just a retired high school English teacher from Portland, Oregon. What do I know? Would it add to my credibility if I said I have a Masters of Urban Studies degree? I do. But in the interest of full disclosure I have to add, I earned it at Portland State University.
This article appears in Jun 12-18, 2014.
Wow! Masters of Urban Studies.
Water already flows north out of the Roger Rd treatment plant creating a beautiful riparian area. It would be as “simple” as pumping that same water several miles south to the 22nd Street area. The economic benefit would far outweigh the initial investment. Another option would be to tap the end of the CAP pipeline in the Altar Valley.
David, which Portland? The real one on Casco Bay, or the West Coast imposter? LOL
San Antonio, TX, has re-routed some water to form the Riverwalk, which has become a major tourist attraction. I believe they may have featured a shot or two of it during last night’s Spurs game.
@ sloride the Roger Rd. Plant is shutting down, the flow going on down to Ina Rd. The cost of building a pipe to carry a decent flow say 30 million gallons per day would be significant. Then there’s the whole county owns the treatment facilities while the city owns the wastewater effluent. However there is a closer model, Tempe town lake. The problem being how to allow the river to run free after a rain but retain water or even flow the other three hundred and some days a year.
Hmmm, I think rewilding Tucson in such a dramatic way would have to be done at a very gradual pace to avoid further disturbing the environment. For example, there are Mexican free-tailed bats living under the Campbell Avenue bridge. Yes, that part of town deals with the Rillito and not the Santa Cruz, but – correct me if I’m wrong – couldn’t the Rillito be a tributary of the Santa Cruz in some areas? If it started flowing again, what would happen to those bats? Would they be able to find other habitats? Would we give them the time to do so?
I believe that restoring Tucson’s original riparian habitats is a worthy aim– if undertaken slowly. There’s also the question of where the water would come from. Look, the single event that destroyed the most riparian habitat in Tucson was the building of the Hoover dam. If you have any doubts about that, just go to the Desert Museum and they’ll tell you all about it. Without the supply that was cut off by the dam, could we ever fully return Tucson to its former ecological balance? And if we could, what would the cost be in terms of water usage taken from another area? I’m not talking about the economic cost here, I’m talking about the very real fear of robbing Peter to pay Paul ecologically.
I’m going to go out on limb here and say that the whole Sonoran Desert would probably have been better off if that dam had never been built. To some ecologists, seeing it come down one day – at a slow pace – would be a dream, especially if we were eventually able to harness alternative sources of energy to make up for the electricity that the dam provides. In the meantime, the concept of refilling and rewilding the Santa Cruz and its surrounding habitat, while a lovely ideal to consider, is one that, IMO, should be approached very carefully and with deep consideration for the possible impacts of a well-meaning but possibly highly consequential action. We humans screwed up the desert once in the name of money and government make-work. Let’s make sure we don’t do it again, even if we’re trying to heal things.
Put a million people in this valley and suck the water table down …what do you expect? I didn’t even mention the golf courses. (Yes I know they use treated sewage water but that has only been happening recently).
Sounds like another Creative Class idea.
Portland — Oregon, of course (who out here knows about, let alone cares about, the one in Maine?) — had the benefit of leadership by the Committee of 100, an organization of high-powered professional and business men and women who took a patrician responsibility for guiding the city’s wise development through administrations, crises, and macro events in the larger world.
The energized citizenry got to championing rather than dissing major projects that benefited everyone, like the development of the east bank of the Willamette where the common people live. The Committee’s altruistic leadership and the citizenry’s earnest involvement, plus the support of Nike, Intel, etc., all together made modern Portland the great city it is today, a progressive, sustainable economic powerhouse with a small-town feel.
Now name one of the above factors that Tucson possesses in abundance, to make following Portland’s model a likely success? Beautiful hopes. But wishful thinking. Note the negative comments even before a single move has been made. Those Tucson has in abundance.
So what happens when it rains? I mean if there is already water in it for cosmetic reasons, wouldn’t the rain water just overflow it?
What we need to do is bring a visual measurement aid to illustrate the unseen underground water table. Like a graph as a goal to restore the table and to bring a greater public awareness and challenge to restore the water table for real. Promote further water conservation. The idea of falsely restoring the river is appealing but to do so paints a false picture, hides and potentially damages the efforts to do for real. On a side note maybe optimistic but can we all make comments more productive and understanding in these comment areas. This country is great from people who work and build together.
Normally you write about education. Less homes mean less kids to educate. What is happening in Tucson is more retired people moving in and more young U of A graduates going to Phoenix for jobs. Without a vibrant economy in Tucson you won’t see young people coming or staying and you will have less kids in school.
ANYTHING to return ecological sanity to Tucson would be a plus! We have so many opportunities for innovative development that we are ignoring in lieu of housing magnates, making money but not improving the general environment. Please, please, please continue this dialogue with action and less rhetoric!
From the Star article:
“Tucson Water’s concerns include costs, the potential for effluent to cause groundwater contamination due to the presence of a nearby landfill, and regulatory obstacles, said Wally Wilson, Tucson Water’s chief hydrologist. Such issues “make these ideas extremely difficult if not infeasible,” Wilson said.
It would cost $2 million a year to have an 18-inch-wide, 6-inch deep stream through downtown, he said. That would require about 2,500 acre-feet a year, enough to water two golf courses over a year, he said.”
Safier’s take:
“The Star article says it’ll take two golf courses worth of water to get the Santa Cruz flowing again in the downtown area. How many golf courses do we have in Tucson, with a diminishing, aging population of golfers? Now, how many bodies of running water do we have that everyone can enjoy?”
How can we compare Tucson with San Antonio and Portland (OR) – both cities with large “rivers” nearby? An 18-inch-wide, 6-inch deep stream through downtown hardly merits attention – and that’s what Safier believes would be an improvement over 2 golf courses.
Fore
This topic has been thrown around in an incessant circle for 30 yrs (go back in the TW archives. It’s been reported on almost that long).
The topic heated up in the mid 90s when the city of Tempe created Tempe Lake…close to ASU; created a whole new shopping district much like our University, 4th Ave and downtown. It thrived; I’m not sure if it’s still held, but Red Bull sponsored the “Flutag” there for years; professional beach volleyball; non-motorized boating, picnics, fireworks; they have even held “Spring Break” there.
On the other hand, the people of Tucson wanted to not only flood the Santa Cruz, but put our now infamous ballpark and the UA Extended University across the river and bring “life” back to downtown. Our supposed “enlightened” city counsel voted against all of them.
My point is…I’m 49 and I’ll be dead before anything is decided.
Of all the hair-brained schemes out there, this is not one. We have an ugly ditch that could be beautiful greenway right through the heart of the City. 2 golf courses of water, 2 million a year… that sounds totally reasonable.
We are currently dumping large amounts of effluent in the river (further downstream) as well as vast quantities of CAP water in pits in Avra Valley for recharge. The Santa Cruz sounds like a great place to recharge some CAP water.
Ahhh yes, water in the Santa Cruz — especially when it is not flooded to the bridge tops by rainy season flash floods — you know, the type of flood that almost wiped out Marana several years back.
If this became a reality, think of the disastrous effect on the media — no more “Ice Breaking on the Santa Cruz” stories the first day it hits 100. No submarine races, sand trout or yacht parades on wheels.
Of course, we could privatize the river bed, put in concrete and pool decking then put water and wave machines in it and charge for access on foot, or tolls on the bridges to get across it. Sort of a long swimming pool.
I would rather turn the thing into a png set of soccer pitches with artificial grass.
The City uses treated sewage water in many of its Parks. They also have dug wells that monitor the seepage of that water into the ground. They dont want the sewage water getting into the water table. hence the water put into the Golf courses. It waters the grass but doesnt go deep. If you get the treated sewage water on you when it dries it leaves a sticky type film. Nothing bad but you dont want to have a river of it for people to play in like the “Santa Cruz River Park” idea.
City crews go out and check those wells caps on a regular basis.
OMG a streetcar to the airport. City council would never listen to that noise. These streetcars are more for just the ride around the blocks and not intended to get you from Point A to Point B.
While I agree using water on golf courses is foolish, using water for repairing and maintaining a riparian habitat is just as foolish. If we as a community are interested in ensuring our long term viability and the overall health of the local ecosystem, then we need to focus on consuming less and living in harmonious state with our environment. At one point in time the Santa Cruz was a river year around. The annual flow was reduced to a trickle and eventually wiped out as the population tapping its head water and recharge sources grew beyond the carrying capacity of the land. The riparian zones were most definitely wiped out by human activity. but they were not destroyed because of some acute event. they were not wiped out after a chemical spill, or paved over for the sake of development. They are gone because there are too damn many of using, and we using too much water.
We do not need to take water from golf courses and dump it into a once running river to revitalize Tucson. What we need is a paradigm shift in our thinking about water and what it means to live in the desert.
Do you want your kids running through two feet of treated sewage water in the Santa Cruz. That would be fun.
Didn’t that river run as recently as one hundred years ago?
It is simple just start at the point where the water comes out of the treatment plant. Create a river park there. Nobody but bums are going to hang around the river in Dead Downtown Tucson.
Hate to say it, but Tommy Amparano and C.H. Mara both have a valid point. A turbulent monsoon season in a climate with no truly absorbent soil is already a difficult thing to deal with as it is. Clearly, this complication needs to be taken into consideration.
I don’t think the whole thing should be paved over and turned into another golf course for an already-diminishing snowbird population, however, nor should we keep dumping in it. And I agree with the people who say that we need to get our priorities straight about water conservation as well – if we do rewild the Santa Cruz River, how can we possibly take care of it if we keep wasting water?