Tucson residents groaned as developers showed them slides of fancy modern high-rises coupled with words like “vision,” “analysis” and “refinement.”

The blowback was probably not what the Tempe-based architect had hoped to hear when showing a PowerPoint presentation at a neighborhood meeting last week. The slick plans did little to sell the hundred Tucsonans, who came out on a Tuesday night, that tearing down 12 historic homes in favor of five-story student housing is a good thing.

“It’s very difficult to make everyone happy,” said Eric Zobrist, an associate with Ayers Saint Gross Architects, clicking through slides of possible floor plans.

The houses and property, practically the entire northwest block of Speedway and Euclid, are owned by Michael Goodman, whose modus operandi is buying old campus-area homes, tearing them down, and building new homes for students that stretch the number of bedrooms to the zoning limit. A few of his mini-dorms (or as City Councilman Steve Kozachik puts it, “big, ugly yellow things”) are in the Jefferson Park and Feldman’s Historic District.

Neighbors and city officials have often clashed with Goodman over plans to tear down the old to make way for the new. In 2007, the City Council passed a building code amendment that added stricter regulation for any structure built before ’54 within the city’s Historic Central Core—so basically all the homes that existed back then.

In March 2008, Goodman took legal action against the city. He claims the City of Tucson owes him more than $12.5 million for the diminished value of his 23 properties affected by the code amendment, according to court documents.

Goodman and the city eventually came to a tentative agreement that he develop the corner of Speedway and Euclid, where he owns 14 homes. In return, he’ll drop the lawsuit and his ambition to max-out the bang per buck at his other properties.

“We want to make sure this project meshes as well as it can with the neighborhood,” said attorney Rory Juneman, at the neighborhood meeting. Juneman works for a local law firm that was hired by Atlanta-based Peak Campus developers, who are working with Goodman as well as Tempe-based Ayers Saint Gross.

That property is “very attractive,” Juneman said. “And quite frankly, it will be developed, sooner than later.”

The proposed student housing would be five stories along the main streets, stepped down to three and two stories on the inside, next to homes; no roof-top amenities or balconies (to mitigate noise); an 8,000-square-foot commercial plaza; underground parking for 200 cars; 163 units and 500 beds.

The details were met with gasps of horror from the neighbors. Two of the Goodman’s 14 houses would remain as an added buffer between the 500 college students and the longtime Tucsonans in their historic homes.

The cost of the apartments would be $900 to $950 per bed. It puts Goodman’s $12.5 million ask into perspective—the corner would earn that much in a little over two years.

Many of the residents at the neighborhood meeting were retirees who have lived in their homes for years, and they were not timid. Some asked smart questions, while others fell back on sarcasm. (“Just take the whole block!”)

Former state lawmaker Demion Clinco, now serving as executive director of the Tucson Historic Preservation Foundation, said that the developers are not from Tucson and their project would take income away from locals who rent to students. His comments were met with emphatic applause.

“We simply cannot support a proposal that proposes to tear down a dozen historic buildings,” he said. “How much are you going to extract from our community?”

Juneman told the crowd that the student housing proposal would be a good thing: “The mini dorms are not appropriate in the interiors, next to residence, but they have to go somewhere,” he said. “We’re gonna have to grow up. You can’t keep building out in the desert.”

To close the meeting, Kozachik addressed the crowd, condemning the idea that the corner development has to be student housing. He thinks a commercial development—coffee houses, restaurants and retail shops—would better serve the University of Arizona and the neighborhood.

Projects like the The Hub at Tucson ll and the soon-to-be Honors College complex are “degrading the quality of life” in Tucson, Kozachik told the Weekly. But he does think the UA needs to grow up, literally—turning one- and two-story buildings on campus into seven stories.

Paul Durham, who was sworn into the city’s Ward 3 seat this week, also attended last week’s meeting. He said he agreed with Kozachik but has to review the agreement with Goodman further before he decides if it’s worth a multi-million-dollar lawsuit.

But Kozachik seemed ready for a fight.

“If Goodman sues us, he sues us, but we should not allow one guy to drive development on that corner,” Kozachik said. “At some point you gotta sleep in your own skin. Be a community asset instead of a community ass.”

This article appears in Dec 7-13, 2017.

10 replies on “Student Housing Shakedown”

  1. Kozachik is right to question this issue and Durham, who ran on “progressive values” should watch his lead carefully and follow it. This developer is definitely one to stop. The poorly named Michael Goodman has already destroyed one neighborhood after another in his quest to make more and more mini-dorms…and more and more money for himself. Jefferson Park has had a nightmare of a time trying to stop his developments, with long-term residents being boxed in by the big ugly yellow things. If you’ve noticed that we have fewer and fewer historic homes, you probably can thank Mr. Goodman, who really has made a complete mockery of what “historic” even means. At some point, the city and the University need to sit down and come to a decision about how much is enough–should the whole of center city Tucson be turned over to the behemoth and its high priced housing, or should those of us who live in Tucson be allowed to have a historic city center to enjoy ourselves?

  3. “Former state lawmaker Demion Clinco, now serving as executive director of the Tucson Historic Preservation Foundation, said that the developers are not from Tucson and their project would take income away from locals who rent to students. His comments were met with emphatic applause.”

    This is hilarious. Why exactly should students have to subsidize slum lords who are happy to leave there asbestos filled, swamp cooled blight in a perpetual state of neglect? Maybe this will force them to lower prices or improve there homes.

    Sorry, but this is the kind of development that we need. Its in a high density, walk-able area close to UA. Tucson is a city of million people not a glorified retirement community and its time we start acting like it.

  4. I remember the dumps I lived in in college, the roach-ridden, floor sagging, stinking houses built in the 1920 that were rented to students for exorbitant prices. The plumbing was horrible, the kitchens worse, the bathrooms a place you didn’t want to ever go.

    This was in Texas, but the slum lords were the same quality. I would have given anything to have been able to live in housing like Goodman is building. And “destroying neighborhoods?” Give me a break. These are not neighborhoods of old friends and neighbors. They are slums for students.

  5. I used to live in this neighborhood and it is a catch-22. Goodman’s projects have doubled the population density as it is and there is a lot more noise, traffic, etc. BUT this neighborhood, Feldmans and Bronx Park/Sugar Hill area are all much safer than they were 10-15 years ago. There are more parties but fewer break ins, assaults, rapes, gang crime, etc. Goodmans properties are the nicest maintained in the area, even if they are ugly.

    Goodman might be garbage as a person and profit oriented but the city should not target him just because they don’t like him. It sounds like that is exactly what is happening. This could open up more lawsuits and cost us money. Put this project under an architectural review process to ensure its not cheap and ugly and allow smaller bedroom units. This was the mistake the city made with Goodmans other properties and we ended up with giant yellow stucco 10 bedroom homes because they were code compliant when building 3bedroom triplexes would not have been. The city has already tried fighting and the community lost. Now they should try working with the developer to get something positive for everyone.

    The pressure to live in this area is only growing. These apartments are the only chance these neighborhoods have at becoming single-family owner occupied residents again. Right now, Feldmans is probably 40% rentals and students which is way too high. Building apartments will take the pressure off of these neighborhoods in the long run, increase rents and property values and encourage people to turn these homes back into owner occupied residents. Right now there are just too many slum level homes that people can rent out at super high prices because there is not enough supply in the area. Fuck these people, the city should not be protecting them.

    On another note, the city has already destroyed more historic homes along Broadway than this project will destroy and for what? Widening a road that every analysis says doesn’t need to be widened? Adding nothing to the tax base? Come on. At least this project adds people and businesses to an area that needs it. Just make it look good and ensure that it’s not a party tower. This is not rocket science.

  6. Is the Honors College Dorm going to pay property taxes?
    Is the City going to sue them to pay property taxes?
    Does Kozachik have a conflict of interest regarding the Honors Collage Dorm?

    Did the lawsuit against the mini dorms address the issue of unrelated people living in the 8-bedroom residential houses?

  7. You make a great case about Steve K and the conflicts of interest that he has sponsored and voted on. Would we allow a Walmart employee to make rezoning decisions for big box stores?

    He is right where the UA needs him to be. But how does that help average Tucsonans? Isn’t it odd that ever since government was formed …that they try to help citizens but it never seems to help. In many cases it actually gets worse.

    Then we demand MORE government? What is wrong with us?

Comments are closed.