Relentless traffic clogs Euclid Avenue, passing a church, a bank and a cluster of old houses that survive as refugees from the UA’s endless expansion.
In Tucson’s rush to plant high-density housing near the planned modern streetcar line, and under white-hot pressure from big developers, even those old dwellings may soon feel the ax. The City Council took a big step in that direction Dec. 13, when it voted unanimously to loosen historic-preservation protections in a new urban overlay zone.
If that leads to an expected rezoning of this area, demolition of those homes could be a done deal, as they make way for two high-rise student apartment complexes.
Critics might be pardoned for thinking the fix is in, especially since the developer—Chicago-based Campus Acquisitions—has already submitted its paperwork to the city’s Planning and Development Services Department, before the rezoning has been granted to allow its projects.
Detractors may be rightfully concerned, considering that this rezoning could result in the loss of nearly 30 historic buildings. According to the city’s historic preservation officer, that would fuel a trend, potentially threatening the West University Neighborhood’s status as a nationally registered historic district.
For a glimpse into the future, one needs to look no further than The District, a 756-bed student housing project rising on West University’s southern flank. That project added insult to injury by prompting the demolition of two old homes in its path, including an 1880s adobe.
The collegiate behemoth arrived in West University thanks to the infill-incentive district, another city-initiated zone encouraging downtown-area development by reducing or waiving permit fees, and scrapping height and density restrictions.
Such sweeping changes, planned for nearly a half-dozen “overlay districts” circling downtown, have put leaders of inner-city neighborhoods on high alert.
Among them is John Burr, president of the Armory Park Neighborhood Association. The neighborhood encompasses a residential area south of downtown that also includes an expansive, federally registered historic area. Burr argues that planned changes where West University brushes against the UA—the so-called “transition zone” near Speedway Boulevard and Euclid Avenue—should raise red flags for everyone.
“It’s the first time the city has decided to backtrack on one of its federal historic districts,” he says. “I find it threatening if this sets a precedent for disregarding historic districts as being important to the overall cohesive character of downtown.”
Preservation activist Ken Scoville is blunt.
“This has probably been the first time, that I know of, where there’s been a major assault against a major historic district,” he says. “It’s a Trojan horse to see if (the city) can get this through and incentivize the demolition of historic properties by these height overlays.”
Scoville is referring to a key component of the transition-area overlay zone, which relaxes current height restrictions on area properties. While city officials say the move is meant to encourage adaptation and reuse of historic properties, Scoville calls it a recipe for destruction.
“The city can say anything they want about the property owner still having to go through the demolition process” for a historic home, he says. “But that height overlay will ultimately win out, to destroy the property.”
Under the proposed overlay, preservation could become voluntary for those owning historic properties. For instance, they might seek demolition approval from the City Council by showing that their old structures couldn’t be readapted in any economically sensible way.
“I think it would possibly be a tool” to demolish historic properties, concedes Ernie Duarte, director of the city’s Planning and Development Services Department. “Still, what we’re building into the (urban overlay district) are incentives … to rehabilitate historic properties for commercial purposes that you can’t do right now.”
The city’s historic preservation officer, Jonathan Mabry, takes a darker view. Because the City Council wasn’t interested in granting him an agenda slot, Mabry filled out a speakers’ card at its Dec. 13 discussion of the transition zone. He then used his four minutes to describe how 55 structures have already been demolished since West University’s historic district was created in 1984.
“Clearly, previous councils found rationales compelling (demolition) about 50 times,” Mabry said. “Twenty-nine property owners in the transition area now have a significant incentive to apply for demolition applications. Based on the historical trend that I just described, it’s not far-fetched to think that 10, 15 years from now, all or a majority of those historic properties will have demolition applications approved for them. … That type of erosion to the historic district may lead to a loss of the historic district designation over time.”
Contacted later by phone, Ward 3 Councilwoman Karin Uhlich described her unsuccessful motion at that meeting to have a historically rich portion of the transition zone reconsidered by the city’s Planning Commission. “I didn’t feel comfortable with the extent of the process,” she says.
This breathless approach also sparked concerns from the Tucson-Pima County Historical Commission, which was nearly left out of the discussion altogether, and now opposes the current plans.
Indeed, process—or the lack thereof—seems to be the hallmark of this shotgun debate. Critics call it part of a blind rush toward downtown development. But to Duarte, the “goal is to encourage transit and pedestrian-oriented development, as there is a $300 million investment with the city of Tucson in the streetcar, and it will cut right through this area.”
But that goal could affect historic areas across the heart of Tucson, from the El Presidio Historic District in Ward 1 to Armory Park in Ward 6.
Ward 1 Councilwoman Regina Romero didn’t return repeated calls seeking comment. But Councilman Steve Kozachik, representing Ward 6, says that everyone has enjoyed a chance to pipe in. “Neighborhoods aren’t locked out. But the fact is that nobody is going to get everything they’re after.”
Unless, of course, you’re a big developer with money to burn. At least that’s the experience of Chris Gans, president of the West University Neighborhood Association. Gans watched plans for The District take shape on his doorstep. “The neighborhood expressed concerns about the heights, the zero setbacks, densities, the architectural aspects,” he says, “and none of that was responded to. In fact, we got greater density; we got greater heights and no change in setbacks. And architecturally, it is nothing that relates to our neighborhood.”
This attitude puts the very heart of Tucson at risk, he says. “A longer-term vision is really required here, and I don’t see that coming about. They’re really just trying to do something that’s convenient and quick.”
This article appears in Feb 9-15, 2012.
Tucson had a ‘streetcar’ years and years ago. For whatever reason, it was decommisioned, and done away with. (it was cheaper to pave over the tracks than to remove them)
Then came some U. of A. Students, and decided to resurect the streetcar as a TOY. It ran weekends for the amusement of those Students. Silly and expensive, but OK.
Then comes the City of Tucson. For SOME FOOL reason they (city) decided there was a ‘need’ for a “Modern Streetcar”. Someone PLEASE tell me WHY? All I can find in favor of them is that they are ‘quaint’. Downtown, no one needs ‘quaint’.
Traffic needs to move clearly and smoothely. We who drive there do not need to be held up while people get on and off a streretcar, which will not and CAN not ‘move over’. Pedestrians, especially disabled pedestrians, do not need to be turning ankles or getting crutches and canes stuck in the tracks. Bicyclists do not need to have their wheels trapped in those same tracks.
The “modern” streetcar is in a MUSEUM. It has been replaced by personal transportation and city busses. (Subway car makers can MAKE streetcars. Some are pretty nice.)
A compromise once existed in Scranton, PA. Electric BUSSES. They were powered by a flexible trolly system. They plyed the streets like busses, as far as the electric service for them extended. They may still exist. I haven’t been back in 50 years.
Long and short, this thing cannot be justified. Even as a TOY for STUDENTS. And an awful lot of POT HOLES could be repaired for the cost of it.
Tucson is unique, in part for it’s people and in part for its still visible history. If we disregard who we are, our past, our uniqueness, our character, and replace it with modern infill, we are no longer unique, but we are ______________ (put any one of several other cities here.) I wish we would learn some lessons from our own past and from other cities; we CAN have infill development to fill in some needs WHILE preserving our character. The streetcar was proposed to help alleviate current traffic issues and encourage alternative forms of transportation in a progressive, yet harmonic way, to enhance Tucson and our way of life. If we lurch forward to increase density to the extent possible by these proposals, we create new traffic issues, remove integral parts of historic character, and we are right back to where we were with congestion and without our uniqueness. Think about it, this direction of development makes non locals rich at the expense of locals. It is the exact opposite of the trend and desires of people across the country and within our area to make local good again, to honor ourselves.
Kozachik moved to APPROVE the STAFF recommendation vs the PLANNING COMMISSION (i.e. people who represent citizens) recommendation, which Uhlich attempted to approve.
Who is staff Tim? It isn’t Mabry so please specify. Whoever they are they have Steve K.’s support (or is it the other way around?). Important to know, so you know who to lobby.
Commission’s recommendation
“After closing the public hearing, the Commission recommended (vote: 10-0) approval of the
staff proposal except for Subarea C, the area at the southeast corner of Speedway Boulevard and Euclid Avenue.
In response to issues raised during the public process, the Commission specified the following changes to the staff recommendation:
1. Maintain the current neighborhood plan policy for Subarea C (the western half of the block bounded by Speedway Boulevard, Tyndall Avenue, First Street and Euclid Avenue). That is to say, existing zoning uses and residentially scaled office uses with a building height limit of 16 feet are permitted; and
2. Place the stand-alone portion of Subarea C located at southwest corner of Tyndall Avenue and First Street into the main TOD area (Area 1, Sub-AreaA). TOD land uses are allowed, as well as a building height of up to six stories;
3. Prior to using the urban overlay district’s zoning option, any demolition proposal of a contributing structure within the National Register District of the Transition Area must undergo the HPZ demolition process, including final approval by the Mayor and Council.
The Commission attempted in its vote to balance historic preservation and transit-oriented
development policy. Several commissioners remained concerned that Subarea C needs to be
considered further at a later date.”
I have no problem preserving historic neighborhoods in Tucson specially if the houses get renovated. However, I am sick and tired of the same old excuses by NIMBY’s in these historic neighborhoods preventing progress for economic development. The new construction projects that are being developed are NOT within the boundaries of your historic neighborhood!! So what this means, is that the developer has a right to build a 40+ story high rise just right outside the boundaries of your supposedly utopian enclave.
That light rail project has and will be creating further economic development to keep your crappy neighborhood from falling into further decay! You have done a disservice by turning our ‘historic’ neighborhoods into a slum. Your excuses has turned Tucson into a laughing stock of America. It’s time for downtown to look like a real downtown – urban density with high rise. When you have a downtown and a major university sitting beside your historic slum, expect density. You don’t like it, sell your house and move to Benson!
The Future, I agree. It’s about time Tucson needs to act like a big urban city. We’re no longer the cow town that used to be. 1 million residents warrants new development especially downtown. Despite the radical efforts by Tucson NIMBY’s over 60 years, people still keep coming in the Old Pueblo. Tucson needs to adapt and catch up to the changes.
Tucson is an American city. But it’s starting to look like a third world city from the 70’s. I looked at this site, http://www.urbika.com/ and asked myself, ‘Where is Tucson?’ . The NIMBY’s have created so much damage and suffering in Tucson. I blame them for the high unemployment (even during good times), the low pay, the disrepair and neglect of our infrastructure in Tucson.
Why listen from these supposedly preservationist when they themselves are to blame for neglecting their neighborhood. Enough is enough. The voice of the few from the last 60 years must stop and let the majority take over their city! Let’s build Tucson! Let’s create more development! Let’s build a crosstown freeway! Let’s build more high rises! Let’s create more jobs so hungry families can feed and house themselves. Majority rules! That’s democracy!!
Just because these houses are old doesn’t mean they should be kept around to look like crap. If west university wants to complain about the new zoning then maybe they should clean up their yards first. West university is one of the most unattractive parts of town. The houses are old but not very well kept. the streets look like dumps! maybe they should look in the mirror before complaining about actual progress in this town.
I just laughed at these despicable ‘Historical Preservationist’. They want Tucson to revolve around their neighborhood. If it doesn’t fit with their crappy dumpy slimy neighborhood, don’t build it. If a developer wants to build a 40+ high rise mix used complex (we need it) a block from their dirt bag neighborhood and these so called ‘historical neighborhood experts’ says no because it doesn’t complement their smelly neighborhood, I just laugh my bottom off!!! What Tucson needs is more choices. Some folks like to live in a crime ridden ugly neighborhood like West University. Some folks like to live in a high dense urban neighborhood (which is lacking in Tucson…thanks to these idiot NIMBY’s).
Tucson isn’t a large museum. It’s a freakin city of 1 freakin million!! About the same size of Portland, Vegas, Honolulu and Atlanta – real cities with a crosstown freeway btw.
What have these historic neighborhoods contributed to Tucson? Answer: Ghettos . Unless you are expecting to do crime in these slums, I don’t see anyone visiting these run down trash bins for tourism. And owners brag about them. Fix your crap then we’ll talk!
And if people do actually visit their neighborhoods, these prima donnas complain about too much noise. Shut up and clean up your yard!
To Answer:
“What have these historic neighborhoods contributed to Tucson? Answer: Ghettos.”
Correct Answer:
WRONG! Money & Tourism, whether you believe it or not, is a major contribution to Tucson.
And Ghettos? I doubt it. Many downtown-area homes are valued higher per square foot than their “outside-downtown-equivalents” meaning higher property taxes. Most homes are owned by people of reasonable means because they have to be… without the money continually invested to help keep these homes safely livable while still appearing to be in their original historic conditions, most would have fallen into unlivable ruins by now. Many larger properties are being renovated inside and restored outside to provide historic-looking exteriors with rather high-priced, modern living apartments or condos. Small to medium-sized homes homes get renovated up to modern codes yet remain as historic-looking modern single-family homes on the inside.
And Finally, to Address This:
“Unless you are expecting to do crime in these slums, I don’t see anyone visiting these run down trash bins for tourism.”
Maybe you don’t see it because either you don’t look or you don’t want to see it.
Check the crime rates in these ‘hoods. For many downtown neighborhoods with well-functioning neighborhood associations (FAR different than HOAs) the crime rates per capita are typically much lower than most of the rest of Tucson!! Go ahead, check the police dept.’s website. Sure there are some homeless people at parks during the days, petty things every now and again, but considering the number of people living in all those places you seem to think are nothing but “old decrepit slums,” I’d have to ask YOU to look in a mirror regarding both crime and property values.
Even through the hardest times of the recession many home values downtown increased… slower, but still increased… while outer areas decreased and fewer homes were foreclosed. And while crime elsewhere in Tucson was on the rise, many downtown neighborhoods still faced primarily little more than minor “nuisance crimes” or crimes of opportunity (where something left out was stolen) at the same rates as always (i.e. lower-than-Tucson’s-average) and several areas even saw overall decreases in criminal behavior due to long-active programs similar to a “Neighborhood Watch.”
“And owners brag about them.” You bet they do! There’s a lot to brag about. People actually pay to come and take guided tours, to walk the safe sidewalks, to visit family-owned homes and properties and to observe works in-progress to see what’s involved with renovating old homes.
“Fix your crap then we’ll talk!” Ok, let’s talk… How many people travel and PAY to come and look at YOUR neighborhood? YOUR house? Your neighbor’s house?
When people are out of their cars, looking at homes and properties instead of being forced to watch the road, streetlights, and bumpers in front of them, those older, close-knit areas suddenly ARE more interesting and people notice the cool things they won’t see when they’re just driving through from Points-A-to-B.
And that is one reason a Modern Streetcar loop of downtown can be a benefit. If your car is already parked when you’re at a location at one end of downtown and you don’t know if you’ll be able to find parking at another downtown location… especially if you have more than one stop to make… then jumping on a streetcar that goes within a block of each of your destinations makes a lot of sense! Fewer cars fighting for space, (streetcar riders not fighting for space at all), less time drivers who are “just driving through” need to wait, and on and on.
It’s pretty much like an above-ground subway. What’s the problem? It isn’t much different than light rail in many other cities… except smaller (for now). The only reason it wouldn’t work is if the whiners and bitchers simply refuse to even TRY IT.
Most of the houses around the ‘Hoods’ downtown used to be places you don’t want to live. Thanks to developments around these ‘Hoods’ (including the light rail), the ‘Hoods’ around downtown are being upgraded.
EJ, the whiners and bitchers you are against are FOR high rise urban development and the light rail. They are against the NIMBY’s who live in these ‘Hoods’ who bitched about existing developments outside their historic neighborhoods. I believed they are not promoting the destruction of these neighborhoods, in fact, they want them fixed. All they are saying is don’t destroy downtown urban development and the light rail because they happen to be right besides their ‘slum’ (mocking).
If you know the history of these neighborhood associations , you’ll see why there’s a lot of anger towards them. They always get their way. Now, that there’s momentum in the light rail and development downtown, they hate to see it stopped by these same ‘prima donnas’ (mock)
Let me add, the historical neighborhoods were left in disrepair the last 30 or so years and consequently have been constant targets for crime. While at the same time, the owners of these neighborhoods would successfully block any new developments within and surrounding (UofA , downtown) their neighborhoods. The end result is a blighted degraded downtown and UofA students looking for housing further away from the University of Arizona which causes more congested traffic and therefore, air pollution and accidents.
My parents ,who grew up in Armory Park, would remind me downtown used to be the place to be until these neighborhood associations destroyed it (along with Armory Park). They blame them more than they blame the suburban movement that started 40 years ago. They also blame them for the blatant destruction of Armory Park. Thanks to the light rail and developments downtown, Armory Park is coming back to life. I hope this continues.
I lived within these historic neighborhoods downtown over the last 30 years and never heard of these neighborhood associations. What legal authority do they have? I’m just busy with my daily life. Do people vote these guys in? It seems to me they’re just a small group of community activist who want to shove their own demented ideas into everyone’s throats.