Although state funding in the near future is a pipe dream, ADOT is looking at an I-10 bypass west of Tucson to relieve congestion:
I-10 bypass west of city urged
State report recommends it start in Vail, go through Sahuarita, then Avra Valley
By Andrea Kelly
ARIZONA DAILY STAR
11.30.2008
A state report recommends an Interstate 10 bypass be squeezed between — if not encroaching on — Tucson Mountain Park, Saguaro National Park West and Ironwood Forest National Monument.
The report says traffic will get so bad on I-10 through the heart of Tucson by 2030 that such a bypass south and west of the city will be necessary to avoid massive congestion. It recommends the state plan to build a bypass that would take traffic off I-10 somewhere in the Vail area and redirect it south of the city, generally through the Sahuarita area, crossing Interstate 19 before running north up the west side of Tucson and the Avra Valley.
Although a final alignment would be determined by further study, the state's preferred corridor is the one between or on the West Side mountain park, national park and national forest lands, which could put it within view of the Arizona-Sonora Desert Museum. "I think it's a really bad idea to go forward," said Chairman Richard Elías of the Pima County Board of Supervisors. "We've been pretty clear about how we feel about it in Pima County. There's some important lands and important wildlife linkages there that we need to protect."
The bypass would reconnect with I-10 in Pinal County, likely near the Interstate 8 junction. The route could also act as a bypass for Interstate 19 traffic, which would help reduce traffic on I-10 in Tucson even more, said Greg Gentsch, state transportation department district engineer for Tucson.
The state has no money to pay for a bypass, which transportation planners say could cost between $6 billion and $8 billion. In the latest state report, prepared for the transportation department, bypass costs are stated as $40 million to $60 million per mile. The study says if a bypass is approved, the next step would be corridor studies and planning by the Pima Association of Governments and the Central Arizona Association of Governments in Pinal County.
PAG and the state have looked at a few routes similar to the suggested bypass as "study routes" since the 1980s, said Cherie Campbell, transportation planning director at the Pima Association of Governments. "For ADOT to move forward there's a lot more work, a lot more studies that would need to be done," Campbell said. That perspective is echoed in the report recommending the State Transportation Board approve the route. The association has not taken a stance on the proposal. The Pima County Board of Supervisors voted late last year to oppose any bypass routes in Pima County. Even though the state has no money for the project right now, a lot of people assume there will be federal funding for infrastructure such as roads, Elías said. "We have a lot of good projects waiting to be done in local municipalities that will be much better," he said. But planning little by little could help in the long run, Gentsch said. "Long-range planning is a smart thing to do. You've got to start somewhere," he said.
The Tucson District will continue to work on other road projects, such as widening I-10 in Tucson and north to Picacho Peak, Gentsch said, but the state also needs to plan for the future. "If you wait until all these other things are done you never get time to plan ahead," he said. The impetus to study a bypass to take truck and interstate traffic off of the busiest stretch of I-10 through Downtown Tucson first came two years ago from Si Schorr, State Transportation Board member. Schorr is now chairman of the board. His term ends in January. Schorr hasn't asserted that a bypass is the only solution to traffic problems, but asked the state to study whether the option would help congestion on the only interstate through Tucson, which is already being widened to its fullest extent. It is predicted that population growth will mean traffic on I-10 will exceed the road's capacity in Tucson before 2030. "The idea is to start planning this, and even building it, before that date," Schorr said. He asserted that the lack of any other bypass or highways means that, in a disaster, there's only one road out of town. The state conducted several public meetings as part of its study, and sought comment on dozens of potential alignment options for such a bypass.
Public outcry against building an interstate through protected riparian habitats led the state board to drop consideration of routes that would have headed through the San Pedro Valley east of Tucson. That decision, made in March, left two route options: The one recommended to go south and west of Tucson, and another that would bypass Tucson to the east and north, passing through the Aravaipa Valley. All of the proposed routes have drawn heavy opposition throughout the studies. The level of opposition to all the potential routes prompted the latest report, which compares the costs and impacts of building a bypass to building a second deck of interstate above the existing I-10 route through Tucson.
Other state reports have already asserted the need for a bypass to take traffic out of the metro area, but hadn't suggested which single route the board should consider. "Economically, I think it would be bad for Tucson because then people wouldn't stop in Tucson," said resident Beryl Baker, who's been opposed to any bypass. Though interstate and truck traffic is targeted to use the bypass, people still stop in Tucson, she said. "Why do you think you have hotels and stuff along the freeway?" she said. "People say, well it's time to sleep. They stop, they eat." Baker also says a bypass through the suggested area would disrupt the lifestyle of many people who live there, and destroy the ecosystem. "The whole Avra Valley is going to be changed by putting a bypass through there. People moved out there because they wanted to be living where they are not by a freeway," she said.
Albert Lannon, a Picture Rocks resident, agreed. "We have this wildlife corridor that was set up to accommodate the CAP (Central Arizona Project) canal. The bypass, as we make out the route, would have an impact on that wildlife corridor," Lannon said. He worries that federal land, possibly from the national park or monument, would be swapped for state-owned land so the state could use the corridor for the road west of Tucson. "Some of us think that that's been the plan from the beginning, that the whole San Pedro (route) was a diversion," Lannon said. Picture Rocks will not take the plans lying down, he said. "We're not people who live in mansions but we are people who watch out for each other, take care of ourselves, and honor and respect the land we live on," Lannon said.
Prev
Linear Mode
