A City of Tucson clerical error in the has put the brakes on a planned project to remove stop signs and add speed tables on Third Street.

Ann Chanecka, the City of Tucson’s bike and pedestrian program manager wouldn’t elaborate on the mistake, but said it required the project to be put on hold and required working more closely with the residents in the area who opposed the change.

Chanecka said she would be going out to the people in the neighborhood to listen to their concerns and try to get their support for the project, but added support from the bike community might help get the project back on track.

“I’m going to be talking to them and trying to understand their concerns,” Chanecka said. “We are not hearing from the bike users about this project. It doesn’t hurt to hear from bicyclists.”

Cyclists who want to voice their support for the removal of the signs can send an email to Jesse Soto at

20 thoughts on “Clerical error halts Third Street improvement”
  1. Probably the most traveled bike route in town and the city is concerned about what the residents say?  The residents have far to much say in this town.  NIMBY-i-tus is our number one problem.

  2. 3wheeler even you have a backyard 3wheeler and I suspect that there are at least a couple of governmental interventions and or development projects that would have the ability to raise your ire if the were occurring in your backyard. 
     Personally and subjectively I dislike the tarred with the NIMBY brush argument because at its core it is simply ad hominem fallacy.  I think the number one problem we’re facing in this city is the lack of a coherent community wide conversation.

  3. A few things on this…

    You may be wondering who is Jesse Soto and why should we email him–according to his Linked-In page he is a Transportation Project Manager at City of Tucson. Apparently this (3rd and Treat) improvement is his baby.
    City of Tucson employee email addresses never have a period between the last name and the @. In general, the only period prior to the @ is the one between the employee’s first and last name. You don’t put a punctuation mark immediately before @.  That’s been email protocol for decades.
    The “huge” project simply involves removing a couple of silly stop signs and installing some sensible and modern traffic-calming infrastructure.  The neurotic hobbyists’ outrage would perhaps be even more exponential if current 3rd Street were to be  demolished and replaced with proper pavement and proper drainage.

  4. Hey all – Just found out there will be an open house to discuss issues with this project on Monday, December 9th from 6-8 p.m. at Himmel Park Library.  Please let cyclists know who have an interest in this topic.  They can contact me if they have questions.  Thanks.

  5. @Ann Chanecka  
    Wow! A meeting to correct a “clerical error.”  The whole “clerical error” thing is specious, if not absurd.

    One can only hope that someone at the meeting actually understands relevant City ordinance and how it can be used by a few to stymy needed progress for the community. 3rd and Treat isn’t the only stupid City of Tucson intersection…there are implications for all.

  6. And meanwhile back at the ranch….. we still don’t have bike parking on the Main Library Plaza.

  7. Red StarOne can only hope you will be at the meeting to share your understanding of the “relevant City ordinance and how it can be used by a few to stymy needed
    progress for the community. 3rd and Treat isn’t the only stupid City of
    Tucson intersection…”.

  8. Red Star Yes, I thought there had already been a ‘learning curve’ for this exact process when creating the bike boulevard. Is a ‘re-learning curve’ necessary? Really, sort of seems that way especially when dealing with bicycle things.

  9. @Orvis 3wheeler 
    Couldn’t disagree with you any more.  I don’t even know what town you’re even talking about.  It sure couldn’t be Tucson.  As for me, if a project actually helps the community, I’m for it even if it goes in my backyard.

  10. @Randy Garmon
    NB: page five, you may have to zoom in to see the draft thinking on 3rd and Treat.

    This draft plan was composed more than two years ago by COT DOT and though it was only a draft, one would think that professional planners would, at some point, give some thought to the devilish nitty-gritty of implementation. Apparently that point has finally been reached. After two and a half years.

    There are many worthy projects (red dots, etc.) on that map, Randy Garmon. Do you long for Red Star to attend each inevitable meeting?

  11. 3wheeler context is everything and if the Treat stop signs were in my neighborhood I’d be all for pulling them.  Which part do you disagree with?  That using nimby is name calling and not helpful or that a coherent community wide conversation would be better than the current Balkanized woorld we’re living in?  Helps the community, who gets to define that?

  12. Red Star What I long for is for people to be active in the community, not just offer advice.  Not knowing who the individual is behind the name “Red Star”, I have no idea if you are active … if indeed you do more than offer advice via this forum, thank you.

  13. @zz Red Star I have been informed by the “Keep Tucson Stupid” crowd that re-learning curves are indeed necessary. Well, OK, then.

  14. @Randy Garmon
    Funny how when one drills down through ad hominem (such as yours re: Red Star) one finds — surprise, surprise circular reasoning…

  15. @Orvis 3wheeler 
    I am for the proposed changes to 3rd St.  There already were open meetings to let the “community” give their input.  We don’t need any more input at this point.  We need city officials with guts who are willing to do what’s right for the majority and tell a few whiners to live with it.  I don’t know how long you’ve lived in this town, you don’t seem to have any knowledge of the history of NIMBY disasters.  Decision making methods usually come out of massive screw ups.  Tucson’s boner was when they tore down the barrio to put in the community center down town.  There were other locations it could have gone, but racism motivated the decision.  Over time, that bad from-the-top decision was the lever that started to turn the tide.  We now have finger-in-the-air politicians who won’t make a decision without a major study, community input and support from all parties.  I am not saying decisions should be made without good information, or public support.  My point is that you will never have complete agreement on anything.  There will always be somebody who’s against whatever is being decided.  Going back to tearing down the barrio, it’s ironic that Albuquerque makes a ton of money from tourists who visit the barrio next to their downtown.

  16. 3wheeler I’ve lived in Tucson all my life and I lived through the Urban Renewal era.  We continue to pay the price for that one witness the ULI  recommendation to tear down La Placita.  Process is not a dotted i or a crossed t even though the city of Tucson seems to think it is.  The goal should be some semblance of consensus coupled with actual process but that doesn’t mean that people in Sam Hughes get to dictate the placement of stop signs on city streets only that they like ALL of the other users should have a reasonable shot at providing input.  I’m not sure if you’ve seen the 3 soon to be 4 towers rising at the sw corner of Park and Speedway.  If neoghborhoods have all this power and politicians are fingers in air checking to see which way the wind is blowing how did that re-zoning go forward absent the consent of the adjacent residential property owners?  But back to bikes, how about that intersection at Toole and Congress?  It’s kind of 3 strikes and we’re out.  It doesn’t work for any of the current 3 modes that use it, bikes, peds, automobiles.  Maybe it will work for the Modern St Car, we’ll see.  I guess it worked ok for Jim Campbell.  Oh and yes we could have been the Santa Fe west if we hadn’t knocked all of those adobes down but that’s Tucson isn’t it?  Destroy the past to build a tackier future.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.