The following is the opinion and analysis of the writer:
I wish to respond to Council Member Schubert’s critique of the RTA Next plan in her opinion column on 1/26. She lauds Tucson’s efforts in the areas of climate, housing and neighborhood development, but really says very little about Tucson’s accomplishments when it comes to transportation.
It is true that transportation includes several modalities, including walking, biking, mass transit, and yes, cars. Any transportation plan needs to include all of these categories. In some cases, an individual’s destination can be met either on foot or on a bike. In other instances that involve greater distances, that need can only be met by bus or car.
In 1950, the City of Tucson comprised 9 square miles. By 1970, that size grew to 80 square miles. Today, Tucson consists of 243 square miles, triple the size from 50 years ago. The city currently includes areas and neighborhoods that are geographically dozens of miles apart. They include Rita Ranch, Tanque Verde, Flowing Wells, LaCholla, and Midvale Park. This doesn’t even include the cities and towns in greater Tucson such as Oro Valley, Marana and Sahuarita. And all of the people who live in those communities will inevitably find it necessary to travel to some other point in the city/region for any number of reasons which can only be done by car or, if convenient and practical, mass transit.
This is the reality we face. We no longer live in the Tucson of 1950 or even 1970. One can argue the soundness of Tucson’s decision to expand its boundaries over the years, but there is no turning back the clock. Walking or biking are excellent forms of transportation, but you cannot walk or bike from Sahuarita to downtown Tucson.
The RTA Next plan is, first and foremost, a transportation plan to get people from point A to point B as efficiently and effectively as possible in a 243-square-mile-plus region. There is no question that RTA has historically been flawed, but that can be said of any organization, political or otherwise. Importantly, the RTA plan dedicates nearly 30% of its funding to expand regional mass transit service, and an additional 10% goes toward pedestrians — focused improvements. Many roadways that RTA has already revamped include dedicated bike lanes and sidewalks.
Ms. Schubert bemoans the lack of “walkability” and the inevitable increase in cars and traffic accidents if the RTA Next plan is approved. To the contrary, roadway revitalization can allow for safe travel for both vehicles, and pedestrians. Plus, traffic safety can be enhanced with appropriate speed limits and robust enforcement.
Voting no on Propositions 418 and 419 will not result in fewer cars on the road. We no longer live in 1970 Tucson. The population has doubled and the size of the city has tripled. Cars are not going away, but what the RTA Next plan does do is offer people the option of increased mass transit and safer spaces for bicyclist and pedestrians. A no vote simply means cars, buses, bicyclists and pedestrians will be using the same inadequate, outdated, and dilapidated roads for well into the future.
Follow these steps to easily submit a letter to the editor or guest opinion to the Arizona Daily Star.
