How can I rewrite (or re-express) this sentence better?

I’m writing something (non-creative, professional-oriented) and have really been stumbling over how to express this sentence properly. I originally wrote it as thus:

“The logistics of placing swimming pools in a state as dry as Arizona is are complicated.”

That just seemed totally muddy, so I added commas:

“The logistics, of placing swimming pools in a state as dry as Arizona is, are complicated.”

Better, but the is/are proximity there bothered me, so I rewrote it to:

“The logistics are complicated, of placing swimming pools in a state as dry as Arizona is.”

More clear, but still seems somehow stilted.

Is there any way I can tweak this to make it better, or am I trying to shoehorn an idea into a construction that just won’t work for it? I’ve gotten so stuck on this sentence that I can’t think of drastically different ways to express this point. Any ideas welcome.

(NB: I’ve changed the subject matter of the sentence completely for this post but the structure stands.)

I’d leave out the “is” after Arizona and add a comma:

The logistics of placing swimming pools in a state as dry as Arizona, are complicated.

How about:

In a state as dry as Arizona, the logistics of placing swimming pools are complicated.

Use two clauses?

The logistics of placing swimming pools in Arizona are complicated, because it is a very dry state.

or

Arizona is such a dry state that the logistics of placing swimming pools there are complicated.

No comma:

The logistics of placing swimming pools in a state as dry as Arizona are complicated.

Complicated logistics apply when placing swimming pools in a state as dry as Arizona.

Placing swimming pools in a state as dry as Arizona involves complicated logistics.

My prediction is that if this thread is permitted to run long enough, we will see at least one recommendation for every possible permutation of the words and punctuations supplied by the OP.

Arizona is sooo dry…

How dry is it?

It’s so dry that the logistics of putting a swimming pool there are complicated.

:wink:

These are both good.

Thanks for the great answers, everyone. Sometimes you just need some outside perspective when you’ve been crunching away at the same tidbit for too long. I ended up going with:

“In a state as dry Arizona is swimming pool, logistics are is pool pool Arizona swimming pool in dry dry dry state dry.”

Just kidding; Baracus’ suggestion was most consistent with my overall style so I went with that.

Everyone seems to be overlooking the fact that, like physics, ethics, politics, etc., logistics is a singular noun, not a plural. I.e, there is no such thing as one logistic. So the sentence should read “In a state as dry as Arizona, the logistics of placing swimming pools **is **complicated.”

I grant that this sounds quite awkward, partly because of the proximity of the plural noun “pools,” so I’d suggest the following possible rewrites:

In a state as dry as Arizona, the placment of swimming pools is logistically complicated.

or

In a state as dry as Arizona, logistical considerations in placing of swimming pools are complicated.

Or some such.

Personally, I would start this one with “because,” as in:

Because it is so dry, the logistics of placing a swimming pool in Arizona is complicated.

or maybe

The logistics of placing a swimming pool is complicated because it is so dry.

I don’t like the “state as dry as Arizona” construction, because it sounds a little folksy for what seems like a pretty technical statement. That and it implies there are “wet states” and “dry states”- something we haven’t had since banning liquor was popular…hehehe. But more seriously, it is more accurate to talk about areas that are extremely dry, not states.

Either that, or you could drop the word “logistics” and use something less formal.

Where I come from. logistics is a generally plural noun. I’m slightly surprised to learn that this is not also true in Arizona.

The sentence should be rewritten, not only for style reasons but because I suspect “logistics” may not actually be what is intended here. I would have though that,if anything, a restricted water supply actually simplifies the planning and organisation of swimming pool placement. You can rule out any location that doesn’t have a sufficient water supply, which presumably leaves you with fewer placement options that require investigation, planning and management. If the point is simply that, in parts of Arizona, it’s not feasible to have a swimming pool, why not just say so?

Or, as well as being a singular noun, does “logistics” have a different meaning in the US?

As Yoda write it you should:

Arizona aint got no water.

So gittin a cement pond there is damn bloody hard.

Is the bit about “logistics” really needed? It doesn’t tell you anything and seems like unnecessary verbiage.

In a state as dry as Arizona, placing swimming pools is complicated.

If you want to swim, stay away from the desert.

Try this for size.

Logistically the placing of a swimming pool in a state as dry as Arizona is complicated.

I hummed and hawed about a comma after the first word but I don’t think it necessary.

If we’re going to split hairs: it is not the placing that is complicated but the filling.
The draught in Arizona poses problems for those who want to have a swimming pool?