It being difficult to grow trees that provide good in phoenix is literally the nick cake "you don't say" meme.
Expecting something like that work without questionable degree of investment to make some tree work survive of its element is contradictory to all the adaptations that make plant life suitable for arid climates (i.e not providing a ton of area to the sun relative to their mass).
Fair. I used Phoenix because it's the only published city shading plan I've come across. It could just be that arid/hot climates are the places trees are needed. The study linked was in Houston, Texas.
The Phoenix report is valuable because it provides lessons that should be avoided going forward: change the laws so property owners are not liable if a tree outside their business hurts someone, don't plant a tree if you can't irrigate it, work with local residents to plant and water trees to save on labor and increase success, etc.
If there's other municipal shade reports I'd love to read them. Helping people find shade is what I do for a living. [1]
Like the startups which try to make solar systems to condense drinking water from the air. They demonstrate it in wet climates where the idea works but the solar panels don't because it's cloudy and cool. Those environments don't need drinking water because they are rainy. Then they try it in deserts where the water is needed and the solar panel bit works, but the whole thing doesn't work because there's no water in the air - that's why the water is needed there(!).
ThunderF00t Busted! videos on scammy startups keeping on raising money for this fundamentally unworkable idea:
Expecting something like that work without questionable degree of investment to make some tree work survive of its element is contradictory to all the adaptations that make plant life suitable for arid climates (i.e not providing a ton of area to the sun relative to their mass).