Quote:
Originally Posted by southtucsonboy77
I have to disagree with the general sentiment here. With no crosstown freeway running east/west through Tucson, the best that we can do is AT MINIMUM make our major arterials stemming off the I-10 freeway seamless as possible. That means 22nd St (NIMBY issues), Grant Rd (NIMBY issues), and Broadway (NIMBY issues). Yes, the economy took a downturn, therefore jobs, population, and yes, traffic projections took a hit. But does that mean we stop planning and building for the future? We'll have Downtown Links (classic NIMBY case) running through connecting to two lanes east out of the downtown area? Broadway between Euclid and up to Country Club is an eye sore...there's no point to that statement except its ripe for renewal and demolition. Twenty (20) years from now are our kids or next generation of Tucsonans are gonna look at us and say, "Why is this road this way? Why does Tucson's roadway and freeway system suck?"
Honestly, how is this different from the Streetcar? You have critics and naysayers saying there's not enough population to support it...not enough housing...not enough jobs...not enough events or destinations. Broadway has to be at minimum 3 traffic lanes...not 4 or 5 as we've seen in larger cities. Two lanes? Stamp "Vamos NIMBY Tucson" all over it.
|
More roads do not equal more mobility freedom, and freeways more often than not
generate the traffic they were meant to alleviate. Of the arterials you are discussing, two are being improved-- Grant road being widened with indirect lefts will increase capacity (with the indirect lefts accounting for about 15% of that), and the bridge over 22nd at Kino will also reduce some of the worst congestion on that arterial.
You call out downtown links as a worthless solution, but it will be two new lanes to the 210 for all intents and purposes. And your condemnation of Broadway as an eyesore between Country Club and Euclid is spot on-- but the answer is not tens of feet of asphalt on both sides. If you look at the property acquisition map the city has done a pretty good job weaving a proposed 6-lane alignment saving what buildings have architectural merit, and as a result taking the worst properties down.
One proposed design has potential to look quite attractive even with some of the strip malls, which would hopefully attract more investment once the area around them is appealing to people using multiple modes of transportation rather than solely car.
As for your assertion that broadway _needs_ 3-4 lanes, there's no data to support that. The weekday average traffic at peak between campbell and country club was
~1500 vehicles per hour in 2013. A surface street lane is designed to carry between 800 and 1000 vehicles per hour. That means worst-case Broadway can carry 1600 vehicles per hour, which is more than it is currently asked to do. Optimizing the current 2 lanes by removing transit is an extremely reasonable solution given that data.