FYI, "turf" doesn't mean fake grass.
Not only have you added nothing of value to the topic at large, you provided incorrect information. The intent was obvious enough that you felt confident “correcting” me. Thanks for playing.
I don't think people in Phoenix have lawns because there is more local water.
As far as Tuscon, Brad Landcaster's neighborhood has a tree canopy, and it's all watered by rainfall, and street storm water runoff harvested in eddie basins.
Tuscon is on top of a mesa, and its biome is the upper Sonoran. It's not quite high desert. The aquifer in the mesa has long been drained and Tuscon has to pump water from the central canal uphill to the mesa.
But it isn't as if the Phoenix is really flushed with water. An accident of legacy water rights from Colorado via the canal makes water available, but that doesn't mean that water supply is local nor sustainable.
Further, those existing water rights are being challenged by Native interest -- water rights are recognized by the age of the claim as senior water rights. Arguably, native tribes have the most senior rights, but even those claims that have been acknowledged by the legal system has not been historically enforced.
Tuscon is also where the Arizona laws allowing greywater was pioneered, as well as curb cuts. It seems to me there is more interest in this kind of stuff in Tuscon than there are in Phoenix.
Here are Tuscon development that are neither lawns nor xeriscaping:
Brad Landcaster's neighborhood - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KcAMXm9zITg
University of Arizona - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HtabtkWMxBc
Odd to be well so informed overall but somehow not aware of the SRP?! I think Phoenix is flush with water because of the CAP and SRP combo. It sits on the confluence of the Salt and Gila rivers while CAP water comes down canals from the CO plateau.
Also, most of those golf courses are taking advantage of 150+ year old water rights laws that no longer make sense in our current environment.