Tucson Development Thread

[Thirsty]

Originally Posted by Ted Lyons

I wish UA would get their act together on this. The remaining university buildings that won't be part of this project are all eyesores on lots that are not big enough to be developed into anything significant on their own.

The article said UA pulled out because it is writing an new development plan. I'm guessing this means they have their own plans for the eyesores.

I don't know who to credit, the university or the neighborhood associations, but the UA has by choice or by force begun to make infill a focus of its growth.

[Ted Lyons]

Originally Posted by Thirsty

The article said UA pulled out because it is writing an new development plan. I'm guessing this means they have their own plans for the eyesores.

I don't know who to credit, the university or the neighborhood associations, but the UA has by choice or by force begun to make infill a focus of its growth.

Sadly, I'd say there's probably no way the university has any significant plans for 1145 North Campbell. They may have some ideas for the whole Babcock facility on the other side but I don't know these developers were really looking to use that space.

[Thirsty]

Originally Posted by Ted Lyons

Sadly, I'd say there's probably no way the university has any significant plans for 1145 North Campbell. They may have some ideas for the whole Babcock facility on the other side but I don't know these developers were really looking to use that space.

the article was all about how they have to re-zone and redesign because they can no longer build on the Babcock property now that UA is out.

[Ted Lyons]

Originally Posted by Thirsty

the article was all about how they have to re-zone and redesign because they can no longer build on the Babcock property now that UA is out.

I missed that specific reference to Babcock but, regardless, that's just one of the neighboring properties and the most likely to be redeveloped by the university at some point. The properties to the east, which will be on a tiny island of very visible, almost undevelopable land are more concerning to me.

[Qwijib0]

Originally Posted by southtucsonboy77

Qwijib0, I respect your rebuttal...but I did not say a couple of things, for example:

- I did not say Downtown Links was a worthless solution. I said that we would have Downtown Links and a 2 lane roadway (Broadway) connecting off of it. Look at I-10 from Phoenix to Tucson. ADOT has built 3 lanes each way for a majority of the route...except there are areas where it gets narrowed down to 2, the biggest segment being the Gila River reservation section. Heading into and out of Phoenix, it causes a bottleneck. Who would of thunk that the Gila River leaders would build so much economic development on that section 20 to 10 years ago? On a smaller scaler, this is what will happen on Broadway. I'm thinking comprehensively and regionally, not the outer fringe of another central Tucson "fill-in the blank" neighborhood. I'm afraid many people think about their own section of town. I ride the Xpress bus from Marana...but how efficient would that route be if I-10 was still a 3 lane "freeway" from downtown to Prince? Or 2 lanes? Stats and numbers could be used in any way...but numbers are also down in that segment of Broadway due to many businesses leaving. Its deserted and dead, especially at night. Doesn't mean it will not get redeveloped or get new life in years to come. Also, areas east and west of that segment are thriving.

- I did not say we need more roads...or Broadway should be 3 or 4 lanes. I said Broadway should have 3 lanes. Period. That is widening a road, not adding a road. Having a crosstown, aka east/west freeway, is not a city that would be saturated with freeways. Its have a (one) freeway. Its having balance. Economic development leaders, planners, businesses, ect. will tell you our transportation infrastructure is pretty bad...and they are not talking about transit. I support transit. I ride transit. I worked for PAG when the RTA was created. I'm all for it. But taking away (again) the true intent of why a roadway was funded for improvement and enhancement is just...another Tucson blunder. AND, just to point out...if we're talking about wasting money...the overkill and abundance of neighborhood meetings for 22nd, Grant, and Broadway have been money pits. I've seen the numbers. The RTA was regionally approved by voters. But Tucsonans still want to mess it up. SMH.

All of this is just an opinion.

Sorry about putting words in your mouth I think we actually may be closer in opinion than not. Cross-town movement is important but I think that the Grant and 22nd improvements plus LINKS (also sorry for mis-characterizing your opinion of) will be able to handle the expected load, given current volumes without dedicating 3 lanes of broadway to cars as well. That stretch of Broadway is pretty much the last unimproved thoroughfare in 'old' Tucson that was built with human-scale and walkability in mind. I'd hate to not try extending a multi-modal road (car+transit+bike+walk) from downtown rather than prioritizing vehicles in the last stretch of the city where there are valuable bones close to a university population that is heavily walk and bike that might be revitalized given streetscape and transit investment. Impressions of what Tucson can be have changed dramatically since the RTA vote so I think revisiting it is worthwhile.

[Thirsty]

Originally Posted by Ted Lyons

I missed that specific reference to Babcock but, regardless, that's just one of the neighboring properties and the most likely to be redeveloped by the university at some point. The properties to the east, which will be on a tiny island of very visible, almost undevelopable land are more concerning to me.

Babcock sits next to the corner lot. If you're talking about the NE corner, I agree. Moving west of the tower site sits, Babcock, McD's, a bank and then the underpass. West of that is mostly parking that was once planned to be a new campus for the engineering college... don't know what came of it.

Originally Posted by Qwijib0

Sorry about putting words in your mouth I think we actually may be closer in opinion than not. Cross-town movement is important but I think that the Grant and 22nd improvements plus LINKS (also sorry for mis-characterizing your opinion of) will be able to handle the expected load, given current volumes without dedicating 3 lanes of broadway to cars as well. That stretch of Broadway is pretty much the last unimproved thoroughfare in 'old' Tucson that was built with human-scale and walkability in mind. I'd hate to not try extending a multi-modal road (car+transit+bike+walk) from downtown rather than prioritizing vehicles in the last stretch of the city where there are valuable bones close to a university population that is heavily walk and bike that might be revitalized given streetscape and transit investment. Impressions of what Tucson can be have changed dramatically since the RTA vote so I think revisiting it is worthwhile.

Very rational post. I'm of the 'reevaluate camp', but it isn't from an anti-car or anti-progress POV. Having lived on the East side, I know everyone driving to I-10 already avoids Broadway b/c of downtown. People will catch Barazza/LINKS at Golf Links or 22nd (or not at all if coming from the NE).

Four-lanes each way, with right and left (or even double-left) turn lanes at intersections and hopefully a RoW LRT is just too much for the walkable urban atmosphere we're hoping to create in that little corner of the city. I don't think it is unreasonable to draw a rectangle with the university and I-10 at 22nd as the corners and focus on density, walkability and transit inside those boundaries. A fifth of Tucsonans live and/or work in that area. Can we preserve at least that section of Broadway, Stone and both 6th's for people who don't drive 20+ miles to work?

[Ted Lyons]

Originally Posted by Thirsty

Babcock sits next to the corner lot. If you're talking about the NE corner, I agree. Moving west of the tower site sits, Babcock, McD's, a bank and then the underpass. West of that is mostly parking that was once planned to be a new campus for the engineering college... don't know what came of it.

Yeah, I'm talking about the very corner of Campbell & Speedway, which is the most visible portion of the entire block. The Babcock property is definitely large enough to be redeveloped. The two lots I'm referencing are not.

[Qwijib0]

Originally Posted by Thirsty

Very rational post. I'm of the 'reevaluate camp', but it isn't from an anti-car or anti-progress POV. Having lived on the East side, I know everyone driving to I-10 already avoids Broadway b/c of downtown. People will catch Barazza/LINKS at Golf Links or 22nd (or not at all if coming from the NE).

Four-lanes each way, with right and left (or even double-left) turn lanes at intersections and hopefully a RoW LRT is just too much for the walkable urban atmosphere we're hoping to create in that little corner of the city. I don't think it is unreasonable to draw a rectangle with the university and I-10 at 22nd as the corners and focus on density, walkability and transit inside those boundaries. A fifth of Tucsonans live and/or work in that area. Can we preserve at least that section of Broadway, Stone and both 6th's for people who don't drive 20+ miles to work?

I'm not so sure 6 lanes plus that much bike landscape and ped buffer is a death knell for that section of Broadway being unwalkable. San Fran replaced a freeway with surface street when it collapsed in the quake but the street needed to carry some amount of traffic. It works well as both a walkable scape and road.

In the cross section I posted of a 6 lane Broadway, the sidewalk is 28 feet from traffic with a landscape buffer. It's not going to be a compact walkable boulevard, but with Hawks or traffic lights at park, highland, cherry, plumer and treat I think it would be very navigable and appealing.

[southtucsonboy77]

Originally Posted by Qwijib0

Sorry about putting words in your mouth I think we actually may be closer in opinion than not. Cross-town movement is important but I think that the Grant and 22nd improvements plus LINKS (also sorry for mis-characterizing your opinion of) will be able to handle the expected load, given current volumes without dedicating 3 lanes of broadway to cars as well. That stretch of Broadway is pretty much the last unimproved thoroughfare in 'old' Tucson that was built with human-scale and walkability in mind. I'd hate to not try extending a multi-modal road (car+transit+bike+walk) from downtown rather than prioritizing vehicles in the last stretch of the city where there are valuable bones close to a university population that is heavily walk and bike that might be revitalized given streetscape and transit investment. Impressions of what Tucson can be have changed dramatically since the RTA vote so I think revisiting it is worthwhile.

It's okay...we're just one lane each way from being on the same page! But I do see your point...and it's a good point. And I enjoyed everyone's comments on the subject. I always use the analogy of sports...I'm a Cowboys fan...my brother is a Raiders fan...but we both love football (although my team is clearly the better team).

[andrewsaturn]

According to its Facebook, the new downtown market will not open by December. They are hoping for a January opening date instead.

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Johnn...81044618724294

[garygeo]

Originally Posted by Ritarancher

How old and white were the protesters? They're just upset there isn't another Matter Firm

Sorry to bring this one back to life, but I just came across the Bike Ranch at Cyclovia today (which was awesome). It sounds like they have an uphill battle to get their plans approved at the next supervisor meeting (Nov 18th). They are doing a good job, getting the word out (http://bikeranch.com/), but this kind of thing really gets under my skin.

Tucson invests so much in trying to create the infrastructure, events, etc to be a bicycle friendly community and we finally have some private enterprise looking to invest to grow our attractiveness to cycling tourist and it is being stopped by a few.

This land is zoned for development, so it will get built on either way... the question is do you want mini-estates with large horse corrals or a business that is creating jobs and treading lightly on the desert.

Anyway... I am obviously a riled up about this one, but thought I would share for those out on the east side. Definitely worth visiting their website.

[Thirsty]

FYI, I noticed Google (finally) has updated their satellite view of Tucson in that past week or two.

Originally Posted by garygeo

...

Tucson invests so much in trying to create the infrastructure, events, etc to be a bicycle friendly community and we finally have some private enterprise looking to invest to grow our attractiveness to cycling tourist and it is being stopped by a few.

This land is zoned for development, so it will get built on either way... the question is do you want mini-estates with large horse corrals or a business that is creating jobs and treading lightly on the desert.

Anyway... I am obviously a riled up about this one, but thought I would share for those out on the east side. Definitely worth visiting their website.

Totally agree. Thanks for the link.

[Mark H]

http://www.tucsonweekly.com/TheRange...use-has-closed

Saint House closes downtown... it's unfortunate to see a restaurant go belly up that quickly. It'll be interesting to see what takes the space over. According to the article, Stiteler has about two dozen interested restaurants.

[andrewsaturn]

Originally Posted by Mark H

http://www.tucsonweekly.com/TheRange...use-has-closed

Saint House closes downtown... it's unfortunate to see a restaurant go belly up that quickly. It'll be interesting to see what takes the space over. According to the article, Stiteler has about two dozen interested restaurants.

That's really sad seems like people really enjoyed their food and drinks

[Qwijib0]

Originally Posted by andrewsaturn

That's really sad seems like people really enjoyed their food and drinks

Problem for me was the limited menu with no rotation. I went twice and never went again because I had tried everything I wanted to and none of it was good enough to get me back over another option.

[Ritarancher]

I found an article about the proposed I-510 that will run south of the city.
http://m.tucson.com/news/local/govt-...ile_touch=true

I'm confused, is the final decision based off of Robin Clark from Avra Valley? Is this woman from a town of 5,000 really making this decision for the metro with 1,000,000?
Everyone I've spoken to who lives in the city wants this freeway. Why should her opinion count that much? You don't see me protesting roads being built in Phoenix. If she wants to make these decisions for Tucson she needs to live in Tucson.
I'm not certain, but if this is the case and this woman's opinion matters that much then I'll realize how much potential our city really doesn't have.

[farmerk]

Originally Posted by Ritarancher

I found an article about the proposed I-510 that will run south of the city.
http://m.tucson.com/news/local/govt-...ile_touch=true

I'm confused, is the final decision based off of Robin Clark from Avra Valley? Is this woman from a town of 5,000 really making this decision for the metro with 1,000,000?
Everyone I've spoken to who lives in the city wants this freeway. Why should her opinion count that much? You don't see me protesting roads being built in Phoenix. If she wants to make these decisions for Tucson she needs to live in Tucson.
I'm not certain, but if this is the case and this woman's opinion matters that much then I'll realize how much potential our city really doesn't have.

It's from AZ Daily Star, the NIMBY paper (and $1 billion in debt). So this makes Robin Clark a hero, a NIMBY hero image always favorably created by AZ Daily Star.

Arizona, the state, is not in good shape economically relative with the rest of the 49 states. The state gov't is $1.0-$2.5 billion short next fiscal year. It's already $500 billion short this fiscal year. So for Metro Tucson and Pima County rejecting this or any kind of 'business attracting' infrastructure at this time would further seal it's anti-business culture.

Next 2 years, I don't see anything positive in the public infrastructure building business especially in AZ. The Repubs took over the US Congress. AZ still has the same 'fiscal conservatives' in state gov't.

We've seen there's a very strong demand for urban housing downtown Tucson regardless of any economic situation. The new apt units downtown are almost filled to full capacity. What (still) really irks me is how freak'n slow construction of buildings downtown. The taller the buildings the more tax revenues gets collected for the City of Tucson. The more people packed in a small area the more attractive for business to setup shop. How about a city Target at the bottom of a 30+ floor mixed used building in place of Bourne's ugly cookie cutter 'high rise'? Downtown Tucson doesn't have enough space to build except to build up....since we all know that neighborhood associations (taken over by fanatical NIMBYs) like to keep their neighborhood butt ugly.

[Thirsty]

I saw an episode of Arizona Highways profiling downtown Tucson.

The segments are up on AH's YouTube page. There are about a dozen videos, but weirdly out of order. Anyhow, here is the link:

https://www.youtube.com/user/AzHighwaysTV/videos

[Ted Lyons]

Movement on the Main Gate Square hotel project. Not clear if it's still slated to be a Residence Inn, though.

http://tucson.com/news/local/educati...9f8fdc6c2.html

UA creating a members-only club at hotel

The 7,200-square-foot facility will be located inside a new hotel to be built just west of the UA as part of the Main Gate Square retail development. Construction is set to start next year and the hotel could open for business in the summer of 2016, UA spokeswoman Andrea Smiley said.

. . .

The fees will bring in more than enough to cover the club’s expected operating costs of $473,000 a year, the report to the regents said. More than half will go for lease payments to Tucson Hotel 1 LLC, which is involved with the project.

http://www.hcwdevelopment.com/news-h...son,-az-28.php

[Qwijib0]

New-ish renders from downtown links:













I like that the old rail bridges are staying with new ped/road bridges in parallel. I hope they refurbish them and replace all the broken lighting.