Tucson Development Thread

[soleri]

Originally Posted by Don B.

^ I disagree about your general concept of freeways. They don't always feed suburban development. Suburban sprawl can occur all by itself without freeways. Phoenix was basically nothing but sprawl in 1975 before the coming of the Loops, part of I-10, US 60 and SR 51. In fact, Phoenix became the largest city in the U.S. with virtually no freeways by 1985, when Maricopa County taxpayers, likely fed up with the ever-worsening congestion, passed the first half-cent sales tax.

To make my point even more clear, in 1980, Phoenix and Kansas City were about the same size in terms of their metro populations. Phoenix was at 1.5 million and Kansas City was at 1.3 million. Phoenix had virtually no freeways and Kansas City had 316 miles of freeways completed, including one complete beltway (I-435) and parts of two more (I-470 and I-635). Yet, both cities have suffered from immense sprawl since World War II. The only reason why KC has more skyscrapers is because it is a considerably older city than Phoenix, and KC was once much larger than Phoenix.

The freeway in Tucson I mentioned before, running east along River Road from I-10, then looping south along Pantano Wash to I-10 again on the southeast side, then heading west by the airport on the south side of town before turning north on the near west side is not a simple "crosstown freeway" as you put it, and I apologize for not being more clear about my thought process here. I envision a true, albeit small beltway, and one sorely needed in that congested burg. Building this small beltway will not "turn Tucson into Phoenix." Tucson will never be as large as Phoenix and we can both agree that is a good thing. However, Tucson today is the largest city in the United States without a beltway. Heck, cities less than half the size of Tucson back east like Wichita, Sioux Falls and Omaha have beltways.

I think building such a small beltway in Tucson, along with light rail to all four points of the compass from downtown, would serve Tucson's economic interests much better than the "head-in-the-sand" approach that city is following now. Again, pay now or pay later...the day is coming when such things will be sorely needed.

I'll sum up my thoughts on Tucson like this: Today, Kansas City has almost 2 million people. Tucson has about half as many people, yet it is far easier to get around Kansas City than Tucson.

--don

It's true Phoenix was a sprawl town prior to the intense freeway construction program that's ongoing. But freeways are indispensible for feeding sprawl, and the mega-sprawl Phoenix is now experiencing would be unthinkable without prior freeway construction. If Phoenix had not voted for freeway construction in the mid 80s, what would have happened? Obviously traffic on major arterials would be snarled, and commutes would be long and exasperating. In other words, people might actually have been motivated to live closer to work, use mass transit, live centrally, and accept density. The reasons Phoenix is the least urban large city in America include its history and peculiar flat topography. But freeways are a crucial ingredient in radically decentralizing Phoenix.

You (Don) and I agree on just about everything that's important in this forum. If I disagree with you strongly on this issue, it's not because I think you're being blind. Your viewpoint is quite commonsensical. My viewpoint is radical and Luddite. But I would still prefer to see the mayhem and chaos of sprawl unmitigated by freeways. I think that disaster needs to be seen for what it is, not swept under the carpet so it appears to work. Sprawl is the antithesis of what we love here - cities, density, tall buildings - and we feed sprawl everytime we try to make it work just a little bit better.

[soleri]

Originally Posted by somethingfast

^^ You both make good arguments. I live in Tucson and I sympathize with both angles. My feeling is that Tucson is hopelessly lost. We have a totally clueless city council and little leadership anywhere for that matter.

I do think SOME sort of cross-town freeway or a mini-loop around the Rillito River is totally necessary. Beyond that, I agree that we should encourage infill and density, which can be done of course through tax incentives, etc.

DT Tucson is absolutely pathetic. The kicker is that it has lots of potential. It's actually much "nice" in setting that DT Phoenix, by a country mile. But the city does NOTHING to encourage private investment, which is the source of investment on the horizon given political climate.

I love Tucson and I hate it. Nobody wants nor expects it to be another Phoenix. It will always be in Phoenix's shadow and that's fine. The trouble is, Tucson is in a constant state of paralysis bc is it overwhelmed by its fears of Phoenix, and most of them them are totally unfounded.

Downtown Tucson has a lot more potential than downtown Phoenix. The setting, as you note, is lovely, and the surrounding neighborhoods are priceless. Keep the faith. Tucson's day is coming.

[Don B.]

^ Agreed. In fact, to some degree, the same relationship exists between Phoenix and Los Angeles. As Tucson fears becoming more like Phoenix, Phoenix feared for many decades becoming like Los Angeles, which is why freeways were resisted by Phoenicians for so long, and like Tucsonians fear today.

*smack* Come back to reality. The people are coming. Tucson is supposed to become the same size as Kansas City is today within a few decades, with a metro population of around 1.7 to 2.0 million people by 2030. If something drastic is not done, driving in New York City in 30 years will be pleasurable compared to Tucson's horrific congestion.

As Phoenix proved for many decades, the people are going to move here regardless of whether your infrastructure can bear it or not. Best to prepare for the coming onslaught.

--don

[somethingfast]

^ 100% correct. It's time to do SOMETHING about transporation other than to keep building 2 and 3-lane roads with stoplights every half mile. It's beyond insane. I really honestly feel that Tucson might have the worse surface street traffic in American based on its population. It's really that bad.

Yes, build freeways or build light rail but, for God's sake, build something other than freakin' roads.

[HooverDam]

I agree w/ Don, sprawl is going to happen with or with out a beltway. Some people need to realize that just because they like living near their jobs, that doesnt mean its everyones preference. I have a friend who gladly drives 45 minutes to work everyday because he likes living out in the boonies and being able to see stars at night.

Not everyones view of an ideal city is this:

[oliveurban]

Many of you have already seen this (http://www.tucsonlightrail.com). Something similar would have been a good starting point:


Larger version: http://www.savetucson.org/initiativebigmaps.jpg

[kaneui]

With new financial partner Town West, Jim Counts is headed to the City Council with a revised $40M mixed-use redevelopment project to bring his Nimbus Brewery to the downtown warehouse arts district, which would also feature 130 condos up to 12 stories high:


rendering - Nimbus Brewery project



Nimbus returns as contender in Downtown revitalization

By Rob O'Dell
ARIZONA DAILY STAR
04.21.2006

Nimbus Brewery's bid to move Downtown has a new partner and a new lease on life with the city. City Council members on the Rio Nuevo subcommittee said they had been prepared to end discussion with the owner of Nimbus because of a lack of progress on his proposal to move the business to 2.8 acres at North Stone Avenue and West Franklin Street, at the east end of the warehouse arts district. But council members said they were impressed with the brewery's new partner, Town West Design Development Inc., which has taken over as the main developer of the now roughly $40 million project.

Under the proposal announced Thursday, Town West would help Nimbus owner Jim Counts build his $5 million brewery and Counts would pay Town West back similar to the way a home mortgage is structured, Counts said. Councilwoman Nina Trasoff said she was impressed with the new plan laid out by Town West's vice president, Raul Reyes. Reyes touted the new $20 million Sam Hughes Place project that Town West recently completed at East Sixth Street and North Campbell Avenue, along with another $25 million building project at East Fifth Street and North Wilmot Road as proof that "we know we can handle a project like this." "They come in today with what they haven't had for six months," Trasoff said after the meeting. "We've spent too much time looking at pretty pictures and nice plans. This is a giant step forward for the validity of the project."

Even with the positive remarks, the committee forwarded the project to the whole City Council without a recommendation. In fact, Councilman Steve Leal advocated for taking the 2.8-acre property out to bid because Nimbus owner Counts had missed a deadline in January to submit a viable project to move his popular microbrewery from west of Davis-Monthan Air Force Base to Downtown. That was after the City Council granted Counts a 90-day exclusive negotiating period in mid-October.

"There are still a lot of questions whether this is a feasible project," said City Councilman Jose Ibarra, though he added, "The project does excite me." The committee instructed Town West to meet with city staffers to allow them to determine the financial feasibility of the plan and take a hard look at the company's finances. The council is expected to consider the project May 2 or May 9.

"We have not analyzed the project with numbers," Ibarra said, noting Nimbus was supposed to have specific financial information for the project in January. "That makes me nervous." The committee instructed Town West to meet with neighborhood stakeholders to inform them of the new plans for the brewery project and to get their views.

One community stakeholder has already come out against the plan. Warehouse Arts Management Organization board member Natasha Winnik told the panel her group was against the plan because very little in the project was geared toward the arts.

Town West said it needed no financial help from the city to construct the $40 million project other than for the city to sell it the land, valued between $1.5 million and $3 million, for a nominal fee. In all, the project includes Nimbus' $5 million, two-story brewery with outside seating, an outdoor stage and amphitheater, 130 condominiums in four buildings, a health club, retail and office space, and two levels of underground parking. The plan also calls for the city to vacate part of Ninth Avenue to provide parking for the project. The four buildings all have first-floor retail and office space. One building located in the north of the project is two stories, while the buildings fronting Franklin Street step up from five stories to seven stories to 12 stories.

Counts was visibly choked up at the end of his speech when he implored the council to approve his project, which he said has forced him to be away from his wife for the last three months. After acknowledging that he has "ruffled some feathers" with his project, he began crying and told the panel, "Sorry, I'm getting emotional."

[Don B.]

^ You have got to be kidding me:

One community stakeholder has already come out against the plan. Warehouse Arts Management Organization board member Natasha Winnik told the panel her group was against the plan because very little in the project was geared toward the arts.

Now, if that isn't a prime example of cutting off your nose to spite your face, I don't know what is. What an idiot! Not every project needs to be "geared to the arts." Lame!

--don

[PHX31]

Originally Posted by soleri

Downtown Tucson has a lot more potential than downtown Phoenix. The setting, as you note, is lovely, and the surrounding neighborhoods are priceless. Keep the faith. Tucson's day is coming.

I don't want to start a *heated* debate, but... I totally disagree. Downtown Tucson is much like the SW portion of Downtown Phoenix... government buildings with very little interaction with the street. Other portions of both downtowns actually have some decent semblance of "urban" pedestrian-oriented streets and buildings, the main difference of these areas is Phoenix seems more "big-city" while Tucson seems more "quaint". The surrounding neighborhoods of Phoenix are either hell on earth, or excellent (south of the tracks vs Roosevelt) and I think the entire downtown area of Phoenix is full of potential. The surrounding neighborhoods of Tucson are either shit or charming.
I guess I just don't see how DT Tucson has a lot more potential, nor how you are making it seem like Phoenix is/has nothing.

[soleri]

^DT Tucson still has its retail infrastructure. Granted, there's nothing there, but if and when the day comes that Tucson begins to recentralize, it's there ready to serve another day. By contrast, DT Phoenix has basically nothing, which more than anything else keeps it from becoming 24/7.

About a dozen years ago, the arts scene in Tucson coalesced downtown, and many of the old storefronts took on a 2nd life as galleries. This didn't last but it did show the exciting possibilities that exist there. Also, downtown ties into 4th Avenue, Tucson's hippest street and gateway to the university.

The crap in DT Tucson is the predictable "revitalization" product from 30 some years ago: the convention center, the dull-as-dirt "mixed-use" project (La Placita Village), and the neo-Stalinist government builidings. While excruciating in themselves, they didn't completely take out the old downtown. Whenever I'm there, I find myself inventorying the wonderful things that are left. I'll quote myself here: neglect can be the handmaiden of preservation, and downtown Tucson's relative lack of success can be also be seen as future potential.

[PHX31]

Again, I disagree to an extent. Phoenix doesn't have "basically nothing" as far as retail infrastructure goes. It may not be the same as a 4th Ave (which by the way is separated from DT Tucson by the tracks, although it is a nice street to have so close to downtown), and it may not exactly be whole streets lined with single story retail (not sure Tucson even has this), but there are plenty of areas of DT with retail, and short jaunts outside of downtown are close and ripe for revitalization to tie it all together again. I'm thinking about:
DT: Central & 1st Ave. There's already jewelry stores and small markets and a bunch of small restaurants, and the good thing is they are below taller buildings.
North on Central: Heading up central towards Roosevelt there are still semblances of retail possibilities. That whole strip with that hideous Jungle Cabaret, moving up towards the now old Jewelry Box, circles, etc, and even further there's the Greek restaurant and much more. We all know the potential of Roosevelt... but the whole street leading up to Roosevelt is full of potential.
Warehouse district: Already some bars, and then places like the poisoned pen, the bakery, etc.

The "Phoenix bashing" still tires me (not that you were necessarily bashing), do you not see the potential, or do you choose to ignore it simply because it should already be better for a city the size of Phoenix? (Maybe you're just bitter, as am I, about the building stock that was lost in Phoenix due to mid-century revitalization. But there is a bright side to that, starting with DT ASU. It's a totally different cat as compared to older, stately, pedestrian-oriented Phoenix, but, take the good with the bad.)

I agree Tucson has it share of great existing and potential areas, but to say Phoenix has "basically nothing" and Tucson has "a lot more potential" I just don't see it.

[soleri]

^I would agree that the Roosevelt neighborhood (basically everything north of Fillmore) represents Phoenix's best possibility for some kind of street scene. The problem is that we've yet to see that evolution save the clubs (Amsterdam, Palazzo, et al). ASU downtown will be a major spark plug, of course, although I'm not clear how it will manifest. The Jewelry Box, Jungle Club and all that crap will be torn down - a blessed event, to be sure. I love the Bentley Projects, but it's pretty much it's own island in the lower downtown area. Over time, with the Summit and other condo projects getting built, there may grow some kind of connective tissue between it and the rest of downtown.

I bash Phoenix because I think we've got to penetrate the denial that's pretty much condemns our city to its suburban paradigm. When we don't tell the truth, anything that comes along is greeted as good news. This could be another dead zone parking garage, another historic building razed, or another superblock creation that doesn't energize the street or contexualize with what's there.

At the same time, I'm cheerleading as fast as I can. I give tours on a weekly basis to people I know, trying to get them interested in living downtown, selling its possibilities, and cataloguing its architectural treasures. It's not easy because I hate bullshitting anyone. What I will do is speak honestly about the potential downtown embodies, starting with ASU and light rail, and extending to the residential boom in and around downtown.

I think DT Phoenix has learned the hard way how not to revitalize. We're not unique. If you go to San Diego, you see many of the same dreadful decisions in the 60s and 70s. DT Denver was still a glorious city in the 1960s before urban renewal, which struck our sister city in a particularly brutal way. The devastation of historic landmarks still makes me cringe. I tell people that had Denver been much more sensitive about its vintage architecture, it would now be the Paris of North America.

Overall, I'm happy with the past few years here. Phoenix's downtown is very much an EARLY work in progress, but at least the omens look positive. Tucson is working hard, too, but doesn't yet have the same energy or wealth available. In this sense (an ironic one, to be sure), the growth on the edges of Phoenix has allowed some crumbs of wealth to fall into the center. Virtually everything that's happening downtown is a product of public money, and the few private projects are tentative spin-offs from this economic infusion.

I love Tucson for many reasons, but the foremost one has to be its architectural heritage. You can tell this is an older city, slower, and less eager to discard the past. Yes, they've suffered from a typically boosterish cabal of car dealers and land speculators who've made fortunes turning this gem into a Little Phoenix. But somehow, Tucson survives, battered and bruised, yet still vital in its center.

[kaneui]

Big pharma expands in Tucson

The Business Journal of Phoenix
April 21, 2006
by Angela Gonzales

One of the world's largest pharmaceutical companies is increasing its presence in Tucson. Paris-based Sanofi-Aventis, known for its Plavix blood-thinning drug, bought 11.5 acres in Oro Valley's Innovation Park to build a 100,000-square-foot research and development facility. The new complex will be three times as large as the company's existing 35,000-square-foot R&D space in Oro Valley. Employees are expected to move out of the old facility and into the new space in 2008.

Steve Corney, managing principal at the Phoenix office of Staubach Co., who represented Sanofi-Aventis in the $3 million land transaction, said the company looked at several biotech hubs in the Tucson area before picking the location. The Phoenix area was not in the running because the company already employs 65 people in Tucson and did not want to disrupt them, said Marc Greene, director of media relations for Sanofi-Aventis.

"We are planning to recruit maybe 20 more scientists over the next three to five years," Greene said. He said it's too early to say, but some scientists may be moved from existing research facilities around the world. Others could be hired locally.

The drug-maker is becoming more involved with the local community. It is expected to join Tucson-based Critical Path Institute's Predictive Safety Consortium in an effort to get drugs to market sooner.

Sanofi-Aventis would join Merck & Co. Inc., Johnson & Johnson, Pfizer, Schering-Plough Corp., Novartis, Roche Inc., GlaxoSmithKline and Bristol-Myers Squibb in the consortium, which is working with the U.S. Food & Drug Administration to establish research tools to predict the safety of new treatments before they go into clinical testing.

"I'm really pleased that they and other smaller companies are finding that (Tucson) is a good, positive environment to be a part of," said Dr. Ray Woosley, president and chief executive of C-Path. Woosley said Sanofi-Aventis' Tucson roots go back to 1990 when four University of Arizona professors created Selectide Corp., which was purchased by several other companies and finally by Aventis. Sanofi bought Aventis in August 2004.

[kaneui]

Looks like a Ritz-Carlton resort is coming to Tucson--specifically, at the Dove Mountain community in suburban Marana:


The Gallery South course at Dove Mountain



Of luxury and golf
Inside Tucson Business
by David Hatfield
April 24, 2006

More confirmation plans are moving along toward building a Ritz-Carlton luxury resort at Dove Mountain: J.W. “Bill” Marriott was in town recently walking the site. People in the industry say that doesn’t happen unless a deal has been struck. Marriott is the CEO of Marriott International, Ritz-Carlton’s parent company.

Although those involved remain tight-lipped when it comes to official announcements, David Mehl’s Cottonwood Properties has filed development plans labeled “Ritz Carlton Resort @ Dove Mountain” with the Marana planning department. It was Mehl’s firm that developed La Paloma and the Westin La Paloma Resort and Spa in the Catalina Foothills in the 1980s.

The plans for the Ritz-Carlton describe a resort northwest of the intersection of Tangerine Road and Dove Mountain Boulevard that would be composed of a four-story building with 199 rooms and 51 casita rooms located around the property. The entire development is 99 acres but that includes a new golf course and luxury homes.

Among those who expect the Ritz-Carlton to become a reality include pretty much everyone involved with the Accenture Match Play Championship that next year will start bringing the world’s top 64 golfers to The Gallery South Course at Dove Mountain each February for the annual tournament.

For the first few years, at least, it’s going to be a bit of a commute as the tournament “headquarters” hotel is going to be the JW Marriott Starr Pass Resort and Spa in the Tucson Mountains n probably a 40-minute drive on a good day.

Even if things continue moving smoothly on the Ritz-Carlton, ground breaking probably won’t take place until at least next year. Similar construction projects have been known to take as long as three years, which would mean the resort would open in 2010, coincidentally the final year of Accenture’s current sponsorship deal for the Match Play tournament.

About that Match Play Championship, here’s some advice for any business thinking it wants to show off and entertain a little bit at next February’s event: When presented with the opportunity to buy tickets, don’t dawdle. They haven’t even gone on sale yet but they’re going fast.

Although money hasn’t changed hands in all cases, every one of the planned V.I.P. suites and venues has been spoken for. Due to the nature of match play, they’re going to limit the number of tickets as the tournament progresses so that by the weekend there will be only 7,000 tickets issued each day. Considering 5½ times that number used to show up on a weekend day at Tucson National for the “B” list golfers at the Chrysler Classic, this is liable to be one hot ticket.

These tickets won’t be cheap either. Packages will range from $1,250 for two tickets to each day on up to $50,000, which gets you some extra goodies. Astounding to think about isn’t it? A Ritz-Carlton, $50,000 for golf tickets; somebody has a lot of confidence in Tucson.

[kaneui]

Rafael Vinoly's somewhat revised drawings of his proposed iconic bridge/museum to span I-10 in downtown Tucson, now estimated to cost at least $350M, draw mixed reviews. (Hmmm....wonder what would happen if a monsoon lightning bolt hit this thing?)


Spotlights would illuminate the bridge with rainbow colors at night.




The bridge's proposed Flandrau Science Center. Vinoly's latest design adds circular ramps to lead
people onto the bridge. And the middle of the bridge is now about 50 feet across.




Comments on bridge span range of opinions
By Jon Gambrell
ARIZONA DAILY STAR
4.28.2006

Everyone loves a rainbow, but when it comes to the color — or even the existence — of a proposed bridge containing the University of Arizona's Science Center, Tucson is undecided. About 175 people came to a Thursday-night event to question, laud or criticize the museum-and-bridge design by New York-based architect Rafael Viñoly.

After being shown artist's new and improved renderings of the proposed bridge spanning Interstate 10 and the Santa Cruz River, a show of hands found half the audience supporting having it white — the original color, which earlier drew some community criticism. The other half preferred an earthy brown.

But some, like Irma Juanita Moreno, questioned the project, which current estimates put at $350 million to construct. "I think the price is going to go higher," said Moreno, 67, of Tucson. "This is too dramatic, too out of context and too costly."

Viñoly's latest design, unveiled at the Thursday meeting, adds circular ramps to lead passers-by onto the bridge. And the middle of the bridge now stretches about 50 feet across, providing more of a promenade rather than just a catwalk across the interstate, Viñoly said. Teflon cloth runs over the bridge, diffusing the sun. The cloth also catches spotlights at night, with one artist's rendering showing a rainbow stretching from purple to red across the bridge's 1,250-foot span.

As of now, the UA has lined up about $100 million for the project, said Robert Smith, the university's director of Facility Design & Construction. Officials say they've started a capital campaign to raise funds and continue to look at other options to pay for the center. Construction could begin as early as next spring.

Audience members offered other critiques of the design, questioning the lack of bicycle lanes and requesting solar panels be installed along suspension bridge's curling spine. But pictures of the bridge illuminated like a rainbow drew the most support during the evening. "It is universal, it is timeless," said Teresa Toro, 34, of Tucson. "To me, being able to see a rainbow every evening would be beautiful."

However, Tucson resident Gayle Hartmann garnered her own applause when she suggested Tucson has a lot of "wonderful things we could do, and this is not it." "I guess what we need is a quiet bridge," said Hartmann, 64. "Not one that screams at us."

Seetha V. Ramaiah, a Phoenix resident who came to the hearing, urged the architect to move forward with the plans. "In my opinion, this will be a landmark in Arizona after the Grand Canyon," said Ramaiah, 70. "We have got to dream big and go for it. Tucson needs to be on the map."

[HooverDam]

As someone who lives in Phoenix, this is the first time I think I've ever said this, Im jealous of Tucson. Phoenix needs an iconic structure like that- maybe not a bridge, but SOMETHING.

Its a neat design, though whoever it was that suggested bike lanes and solar panels was right. And it doesnt seem like those thing would be very difficult to add either.

EDIT: Also, Im a little confused as to where exactly the Science Center is going. Is it going at the base of one of the legs? Or does it extend across the highway? My impression was that the bridge part was just a foot bridge, but maybe some of the exhibits are suspended up there as well?

[combusean]

^ Ditto. People come from miles around to see the St Louis Gateway Arch and that won't even be half of what Tucson will be getting if $250 million more can be found.

Designs and visions like these are a fantasy for my liberal tax-and-spend ideas at the local level, which really begs the question--if there's many "wonderful things [Tucsonans] could do, and [the bridge] is not it"--then what?

[JI5]

/\ /\ /\
I wouldn't be too jealous just yet. We're talking about Tucson here, the city that can't even get a freeway approved, never mind something that might be perceived as "art". Furthermore, I cant wait to see how they would attempt to get residents of Tucson, the city that likes to vote "no", to approve this bridge through the desert. I would be amazed if anything came of it. I would say the odds are about the same as Mesa passing a city property tax - it just isn't going to happen.

[soleri]

^You misunderstand Tucson's NIMBYism. It's not like Mesa's flinty no-taxes position. It's much more grounded in their architecture, environment and disdain for feeding the monsters of sprawl. A crosstown freeway would necessarily devastate a lot of neighborhoods. And for what? So a bunch of lard-ass SUV drivers can drive from their McMansions on the Fringe to a Wildcat game?

We're entering a new era of oil shortfalls, price increases, and a fundamental rethinking of our transportation choices. I'm amazed how many minds are still stuck in the 20th century. Or maybe they think they're on Sprawl.com.

[Don B.]

^ Incorrect. Having family in Tucson, having talked to a lot of the residents there over the last decade, it is mostly a "flinty no-taxes position." A lot of the people living in the unincorporated foothills of Tucson (400,000 at last count) and incorporated suburbs like Marana - including some of the wealthiest areas of Pima County - are just cheap SOBs who distrust big city governments and revere small taxes above all else. Many are older and feel like they've done their bit for King and Country, and don't want to feel connected to any sort of larger whole.

That's why the transportation ballots and other tax propositions have failed time and time again in Tucson, including some with significant mass transit components. Phoenix used to be the same way, until enough moderate people from other parts of the country (read: younger folk) came in during the last decade and changed the face of Phoenix.

Contrary to the broad brush you utilized to describe drivers, many (especially in a more socially conscious area like Tucson) drive smaller vehicles, hybrids and the like, yet they are stuck in the same horribly congested, shitty infrastructure that Tucsonians think is a city. They don't invest in curbs, sidewalks, fixed traffic signals (those cheapo ones swinging from wires are always classy) and so forth, and the city looks like a dump as a result. Ditches and potholed, narrow one-lane in each direction arterials do not a world-class city make.

--don