Posted in On-going Action, Politics and Editorials on May 22, 2014| Leave a Comment »
Tucson Residents for Responsive Government was an outgrowth of meetings during summer 2013 sponsored by Tucson’s Neighborhood Infill Coalition. These meetings werean outgrowth of the Urban Neighborhood Symposium a year earlier which culminated in a white paper, that led sparked interest in a coalition. The 2013 summer workshops that followed, produced a foundation document called This We Believe. In May of 2014, the BY-LAWS for TRRG was written and later accepted.
Posted in Edges and Overlays, Main Gate UOD, On-going Action, Politics and Editorials on April 2, 2013| Leave a Comment »
Last May 2012, the Main Gate Urban Overlay District (UOD) saw its first major building permit, a 35 million dollar high-rise student housing project. That set the path for the Main Gate overlay district and painted a disappointing picture of what a UOD looks like to neighborhood sustainability. Overlays aren’t new. Tucson has been using zoning overlays as planning tools for decades. An original overlay, the Historic Preservation Zone is well liked. The newest one, the Main Gate Urban Overlay District became an icon to mistrust in public process. City planners passed a UOD fast track enabling ordinance in 2010. Its reasons were mixed. Infill conditions for a 63 million dollar federal streetcar grant was one. Other reasons are downtown infill, a needed warehouse district, a desire to add density along arterial edges and the fallout of the deepest real estate recession since 1929. Click here to view the rest of the article.
Posted in Main Gate UOD, Politics and Editorials on August 29, 2012| Leave a Comment »
CAMPUS ACQUISITIONS scores a win over public process. Tucson’s mayor and council chambers was packed with angry neighborhood residents who watched their elected officials favor a Chicago based student housing developer over their plea to downscale the development and most likely lose the project which Tucson’s development stakeholders did not want. Many core neighborhood associations supported WUNA’s alternative plan, but it didn’t look like a design issue. It doesn’t even look like public process for that matter. Forty five years and counting, a divide and conquer strategy has worked for developers and planners; one neighborhood at a time. Maybe that tide is shifting now as neighborhoods react to what they see as a planning coup. The Main Gate Urban Overlay District Zoning was adopted following a historically quick notification and meeting process with a small handful of WUNA residents. Under the pressure of a deep economic recession, came an almost a unanimous approval by Mayor and Council, save for Councilwoman Uhlich. Old neighborhoods have suffered serious attrition in the past and this certainly continues that unfortunate reality. On February 28th, 2011, historic neighborhoods were shut up again.
Posted in Politics and Editorials, Rio Nuevo on June 19, 2012| Leave a Comment »
You can view a sort of fox in the hen house historical re-cap of Rio Nuevo to date, in: A Historic Recap of Rio Nuevo. Also view Steve Kozachik’s latest summary in his Media Release.pdf and the Daily Star’s latest update in Rio Nuevo Audit Finds Questionable Spending of $33.8M….and as a matter facts, the blog, poco bravo’s take on the MLK Apartments….
Posted in Main Gate UOD, Politics and Editorials on April 1, 2012| Leave a Comment »
The April 1st Sunday Star features a key moment in a referendum initiative by West University Neighborhood. After celebrating in front of City Hall, the initiative ran into an anticipated brick wall at the clerks office as this citizen’s tool for process was not very well received by the City Attorney’s office. View Josh Brodesky: Opposition by 12,000 underlies the overlay. Since Josh wrote this update, roughly 6,000 of the signatures were disqualified on a very minor clerical technicality which had no bearing on the quality and intent of the signatures, as West University painstakingly followed every rule. Photo shows clerk rejecting petitions. Stay tuned for whats next. Here are some recent updates from April 2nd: Josh Brodesky, Daily Star → Fox 11 News
Posted in Conversations, Main Gate UOD, Politics and Editorials, Preservation on February 29, 2012| Leave a Comment »
Posted in Politics and Editorials on September 15, 2011| Leave a Comment »
Steve Kozachik – Tucs
on Progressive. Tucson Progressive Blog by Pamela Powers. Pamela is prolific in her discussion around Tucson’s core issues. Check out her blog.
Posted in Infill, Politics and Editorials on September 10, 2011| Leave a Comment »
Please click on this title to view article “Power Shifts at City Hall“.
Posted in Politics and Editorials, Preservation on August 19, 2011| Leave a Comment »
The following commentary is worth listening to. Bob Schlanger is calling out for a body of individuals to take on a regional plan for residential areas surrounding the University of Arizona. This would not be unlike the Tucson Planning Commission which the Mayor and Council have consistently relied upon to guide general planning objectives and their outcome in greater Tucson. Tucson has plenty of commissions, but what has been lacking is a commission to specifically take on the future of residential areas surrounding the U of A and lapping into the downtown area where the University is also expanding. Please view this commentary on you-tube right here: Bob Schlanger’s commentary Preserving the Tucson Lifestyle – YouTube. For further insight into what has happened to one neighborhood that illustrates this problem, please view another you-tube video by Joan Hall, also, a Jefferson Park Neighborhood resident.
Posted in Conversations, Politics and Editorials, Preservation on April 13, 2011| Leave a Comment »
“The city’s controversial minidorm ruling will almost certainly be settled in court. But the issue reflects a lack of planning on the parts of the city and the University of Arizona to address the growing need for more student housing” Daily Star – Read the rest of the article right here
Posted in Conversations, Ideas, Land Use Code, On-going Action, Politics and Editorials on April 7, 2011| Leave a Comment »
Tucson residents don’t want to imagine exploding gas prices in a typical sun belt city designed to rely on lots of roads. That day of reckoning is moving upon us and the message is fewer cars and more sustainability. These notions might reflect in current trends to provide student housing that will rely on the modern street car and other public transportation. The University of Arizona recently reached a goal to house freshman students on campus. Now, developers want to tap into the rest of the market for high density sustainable housing projects with one of the first, looking to be The District at UA. Not withstanding, the anxiety of homeowners, West University Neighborhood is particularly unhappy with it because its edge relationship with the neighborhood is too abrupt. That is simply, an omission of planning that the UA and City of Tucson choose to ignore. Nonetheless, the District still speaks more of an urbanized housing future than popular inefficient alternatives. This is a question about the balance between an urbanized university and its neighbors.
The market driver is the 30 thousand perennial UA students scattered around a few dozen neighborhoods. They are a shifting market geared towards much less driving. That begs the question; will the vacuum that this shift creates, be in-filled with better and more stable single family housing around the U of A. As vehicle-free high density housing projects are built, market pressure will lessen to build vehicle dependent group home style mini-dorms, which lease as fast as they are built right now; to make a point. They are the antithesis of sustainable student housing. Now, as the City of Tucson sees it, group homes are not actually a residential use in its recent zoning determination. The alternative scenario is more urbanized student housing solutions and re-vitalized single family zones surrounding the U of A.
On a bigger planning level, Tucson’s latest vision project, Imagine Greater Tucson (IGT), actually introduced a survey of what Tucson citizens want to see happen to the greater Tucson region at the Marriot Hotel on April 7th. Out of (9) focus areas, the University of Arizona and the subject of Urban Planning were (2) of these. Our problems are all around us. Its a matter of identifying and solving them, unlike Tucson’s past vision exercises.
Posted in Politics and Editorials, Preservation on March 22, 2011| Leave a Comment »
With the real estate still struggling, pressure to acquire and raze U of A area vintage dwellings and turn them into two-story rentals is pretty hot. Demolitions are common. Developers know the value of property near the U of A. Student group homes are going up as fast as they can be leased. While U of A area homeowners continue to languish, the University, conversely, has a different vision about off campus student housing. The University of Arizona has been working with private housing developers to insure appropriate off campus housing occur in the right places and is supportive of their off-campus mission, which we would all benefit from knowing more about. U of A planners see major sustainable urban housing statements along nearby edges and linkages, i.e., the street car linkage, downtownLINKS, Rio Nuevo, downtown… Yet, amidst this market battle to capture the demand for housing in the best way, the U of A’s focus also begs acknowledgment and a want for vibrant family oriented communities surrounding campus, offering something that nothing else can. Deep down, I think U of A area homeowners want the University to win this unintended fight, but sentiments continue to be loss and frustration as the counter intuitive group home phenomena seems to be going viral. Jefferson Park Neighborhood (JPNA) continues to be slammed by alleged zoning abuses and has been crying for enforcement. You can see their frustration in the Weekly’s piece, Mini-Dorm Vigil in Jefferson Park. Feldman’s Neighborhood Association (FNA) is another area hit even harder as half of the old neighborhood is effectively gone and quite a few more properties are targeted for re-development on 1st Avenue, Euclid and Helen Street, just west of Euclid Avenue. Consequently, the City of Tucson is wincing over a claim for 3.2 million dollars if FNA’s design manual interferes.
After months of research, formal complaints and determination requests from JPNA, the City of Tucson responded on March 14th to an obvious question; what is R-1? The Zoning Administrator provided a bold description of what R-1 and presumably R-2 is and that is not great news for some rental uses. So, on with the battle for what constitutes a “single” family. CLICK for a pdf version of the determination. So, one must wonder, will this ruling preserve the real intended use within single family zones and how many appeals and lawsuits will it have to weather. It is hard to imagine the financial punishment this could be to all of us, but it is gathering press: Tucson Weekly: Ruling: Mini Dorms Are… , Koz & Mini-Dorms…, MIni-Dorms: Ulich vs. Koz., Tucson Citizen.com: Mini-dorm controversy, thread…, The Star: City Needs to Stand Up… The issue will certainly heat up. You can also check out Arizona Illustrated. We will keep you posted.
The City of Tucson’s determination is gutsy and faces a serious test and not the least, the distinct possibility of enforcement. Albeit, a day late and dollar short, it is at least an inconvenient truth that begs action from every leadership spectrum about the future of an urban university district. Getting caught short-sighted is obvious, and the City of Tucson has its work cut out on this one. The good news is, we have a good excuse to do something. What do people want? What does the City want? What does the University want? What do stakeholders want? What can everyone agree on?… Consensus, commissions, plans, visions, manuals, community forums, incentives, enabling overlays, sub-overlays, infill districts, urban districts, and so on, always skirt around the subject of understanding housing around the University. Since, the real estate crash, city leadership has been pro-active with business districts downtown. Now its time for U of A residential zones to have a spotlight. Hopefully, a very inconvenient answer to an old problem will be a catalyst for something good to happen.
Posted in Politics and Editorials, Preservation on September 18, 2010| 1 Comment »
Since the loss of dozens of U of A area Joesler Homes more than 30 years ago, a drive for preservation created 5 historic preservation zones (HPZ) in Tucson. Falling short of needed votes, Feldmans Neighborhood missed an opportunity in 1997 for HPZ status. In 2006, a new property protection law affectionately known as “Prop 207” ground the teeth off new attempts at preservation. Feldmans Neighborhood has just became a test case for a one such post prop 207 attempt known as the Neighborhood Preservation Zone (NPZ).
The demolition of 1127 N. Euclid is indicative of the NPZ’s weakness as we witnessed the loss of an exceptionally unique Craftsman Bungalow in the Feldman Historic District last Saturday, Sept 11th, 2010. The 1400-square foot residence”was” one of the very few all-stone Craftsman Bungalows in Tucson, constructed of “A-Mountain” basalt. Faint cries to save it were met with an even more deafening silence from the City of Tucson.
The writing is on the wall. This is not the end of demolitions of historic structures. It is a sign of the times as an economically stressed out Tucson looks the other way and preservationists watch helplessly in dismay. Action in this case can not equal regulation. Feldmans Neighborhood is a registered historic district with an NPZ and that didn’t help either. The message is that Arizona’s property rights laws allow this to happen. If the City of Tucson, university and downtown area residents and preservation activists don’t think outside the regulatory box, older neighborhood context will fade away.
After its own heavy-handed history, even the University of Arizona now recognizes the value of being nestled in historic family oriented housing districts as it reflects preservation goals in its master plan and is directs its sights to upper level students housing blocks in appropriate rundown core areas that link the U of A Campus with downtown. This is the kind of the energy that diminishes the attraction to tear away at the hearts of U of A neighborhoods. It’s a form of incentive when a large institution can assure success. What can and will make a difference in the preservation and revitalization of vintage neighborhood context are a combination of strong incentives and a desire from the City, the U of A , builders and activists to want this. The City for instance, wrote a minimally effective U of A area plans, 21 years ago, that is in need of updating. That document, re-written, can potentially express anything in the imagination. Commercial incentive overlays now targeted in the core area of downtown are planting seeds of hope that could also potentially be applied on a residential scale and if for no other reason; just to be democratic to non-commercial zones. Why not? Incentive overlays are powerful, because our Mayor and Council can adopt things that individuals can’t do on their own without lots of money. Areas hardest hit around the University and downtown are residential and commercial edges. Application of incentives and policy statements can evolve methodically along such edges. Every investor and builders recognizes the value of an attractive incentive. In an era of weakening regulation, this is where to look if we want to save history. Historic description and photos provided by Phyllis Webster, Feldman Historian.
| M | T | W | T | F | S | S |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | |||
| 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 |
| 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 |
| 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 |
| 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | ||
Bill Ford
Urban University Interface.com 