An Open Letter to Mayor Jonathan Rothschild Regarding the Overlay Ordinance
Ever since retiring as a city employee in 2011 (after 20-plus years of service), I have avoided all news associated with the city. I left with less faith in government than when I started. All too often, I listened as city management and department directors talked about how “they” knew what was best for Tucson, not the “pesky” residents. By chance, I read the Tucson Weekly article on the new overlay-district ordinance (“Overlay Approved,” Currents, March 8).
As I read through the new ordinance, it struck me that it could easily have been written by developers. What are design and environmentally conscious standards that must be met? A trellis? Using native plants (duh)? Shade over a bike rack? Last, but not least, a couple of bump-outs in the building plane? Total cost? A grand more or less, even at retail.
The city’s website claims that Tucson has “the progress and innovation of a metropolitan community and the friendly, caring atmosphere of a small town.” The second phrase should be deleted. The planning process for this ordinance does not reflect a friendly, caring atmosphere, unless perhaps you are a developer from out of town. Couldn’t we at least have neighborhoods compromised by a local developer?
I’m not opposed to multistory buildings as long as they fit the character of the neighborhood and reflect a human (not monolithic) scale. A developer recently built apartment buildings on a lot in my neighborhood that some could construe as mini-dorms. While single-family homes would have been my preference, the lot is close to a major street with buildings only two-stories tall. I can’t imagine skyscrapers eight to 14 stories high in any Tucson neighborhood.
You might as well face up to the looming disaster of the modern streetcar. The money supposedly set aside to operate it will likely be needed to complete construction and pay for the cars.
Of course, you noted in your State of the City address that you will be coming to voters in the future with requests for new, dedicated funding sources. Why should disregarded but concerned citizens heed that call? Where do I go to sign the referendum to repeal the ordinance?
Cathleen Shirley
This article appears in Mar 22-28, 2012.
“I left with less faith in government than when I started.”
Sadly you are not alone.
The false choice between towering apartment buildings such as those at the center of this proposal, and the mini-dorms we’ve been fussing over for years now, raises an important question about the supposed shortage of student housing we keep hearing about: what, exactly, do they mean by “student housing” anyway? Because really, we’re talking about private, off-campus apartments. Of a particular kind.
There is certainly not a shortage of residential rental vacancies in Tucson. What distinguishes the modern, purpose-built student developments from ordinary-folk rental accommodations (like what I and probably you lived in in college) is, to be quite frank, luxury. We could, if we wanted to be painfully honest, just say there’s a shortage of teen-oriented luxury/party rentals around the university, and that’s getting in the way of the Board of Regents’ growth strategy. There’s just not enough swank living around the campus for kids from households that can afford $25,494 in annual tuition (that’s what it is for non-resident undergrads this year, and it’ll soon go up) and would happily shell out that much, or even more, on posh digs for their wayward Wildcats.
At a crowded public hearing on January 26, Stephen Bus of Campus Acquisitions (the slated to build the 14-story mega-dorm with a rooftop swimming pool at Speedway and Tyndall) told the audience this:
“We do student housing nationwide. And one of the key factors that goes into a parent’s and a student’s decision on what school to attend is availability of new, upscale housing with nice finishes, amenities and located close to campus.”
That’s right: new, upscale housing with nice finishes and amenities. (You know, like a rooftop pool and hot tub. If you check the website you can also read about the steam rooms, tanning beds and more.) Anyhow, Mr. Bus went on:
“And when it comes down to the decision of that parent to decide if they want to go to the University of Arizona or some other school, that’s a factor that weighs in heavily. And so we think it’s important for the long term competitiveness of the University of Arizona.”
So there you have it. He’s probably telling us more than he even should.
It would all be good and fine if the long-term competitiveness of the University of Arizona could painlessly be prioritized above all else for City of Tucson taxpayers, whose scarce public funds are already financing a modern streetcar project that will heavily subsidize the university’s growth at the expense of taxpayers miles beyond its periphery, and whose roads are crumbling with no real remedy in sight. The university, after all, is an enormously important entity. But it’s not more important than the city itself, or the interests of the folks who live and vote in it. And that seems to be what’s gotten lost in this conversation.
The City Council’s historic deference to neighborhoods has long been an angle of political attack for regional growth lobbies, and sometimes it’s easy to forget that the university itself is among them. We go out of our way to do right by our beloved U of A—in this case, going so far as to play Punch the Hippie with the West University Neighborhood Association. But to do wrong by our neighborhoods, regardless of how tantalizing the hors d’oeuvres might be on the other end of the discussion, is to do wrong by our voters and taxpayers. And it appears this council, minus Karin Uhlich much to her credit, did just that.
Another minor detail that is not being discussed is the kind of mischief 1000 kids under one roof can get into. They think mini-dorms are bad they haven’t seen anything yet because its usually contained on campus. I truly feel for those that will live next to these buildings. I didn’t even LIKE living in a dorm such as this (which I did) while in college. Hard to study, easy to party, grades tanked, the elevator pee/puke stink every weekend made me thankful I lived on a lower floor.
Re: “I can’t imagine skyscrapers eight to 14 stories high in any Tucson neighborhood.”
The only one I can think of is Tucson’s 4th highest building, the 16 story (246 ft.) building in the SW corner of the Highland Vista Cinco Via neighborhood, at Broadway/Rosemont.
Ugly Tucson!
So, let me get this straight….no one here (virtually) owns any of the aforementioned properties, yet you think it’s your responsibility to tell a private company what and how to build a structure none of you are paying for? Secondly, yes there will be college kids partying and misbehaving but tell me where that doesn’t occur. I’d rather have partying college kids with parents who are capable of paying for any damage than some crackhead tweaker stabbing his mate or stealing from my shop.
This arrogant oppressive attitude by those who need to mind their own business is why our nation is in decline. Mind you own damn business, live your life not someone else’s.