City Council split over where to increase density in Tucson neighborhoods

Members of the Tucson City Council are split on a major change in zoning that could increase density across the entire city.

The City Council must vote on where to allow so-called “middle housing” because of a new state law designed to expand the supply of affordable housing in urban centers. That vote is set for their meeting on Tuesday.

If some members of the City Council get their way, property owners would be able to build duplexes, triplexes and quadplexes in any neighborhood zoned for single-family homes.

At least two members of the City Council told the Tucson Sentinel they want the middle housing rules to apply citywide, while three members say they want to keep the zoning changes in a smaller, central area of Tucson.

Mayor Regina Romero favors a staff proposal that covers a large area of central Tucson but does not want to expand the loosened middle housing rules citywide, according to spokesperson Adam Sarvana.

The city must adjust its development regulations to comply with a state law that requires cities of more than 75,000 residents to allow higher density in central areas.

Advocates say such middle housing could lead to smaller and more affordable homes, but critics warn it could result in more rental properties and fewer owner-occupied dwellings, less privacy as a result of two-story homes overlooking residents’ backyards and a disruption of the general character of existing neighborhoods as four-unit residences are built next to single-family homes.

Councilmembers Lane Santa Cruz of Westside Ward 1 and the newly elected Miranda Schubert of Midtown Ward 6 say they favor the citywide option.

“To allay concerns that I’ve been hearing from historic neighborhoods, as well as make it a viable option for as many people as possible – like not favoring the professional developer class (because) in some of these areas, it’s much more expensive to build than in other parts of the city – I’m in favor of applying it citywide,” Schubert said during her campaign earlier this year. 

Schubert said Monday she’d exempt lots that are zoned rural residential, although those can already have two additional housing units built on them.

Three other councilmembers – Paul Cunningham of Northeast Ward 2, Nikki Lee of Southeast Ward 4, and Kevin Dahl of Northside Ward 3 – say they want to see middle housing limited to a much smaller area so they can see how such development goes.

Lee said her “preference is for the minimum necessary to get into compliance with state law.”

“Then we can gauge demand, learn and consider expanding the map after we’ve had a chance to kick the tires,” Lee added. “That feels the least risky to me, especially given the concerns that we’re hearing from neighbors across the city.”

Dahl said he agreed it would be wiser to start with the smallest possible area to comply with state law and see if any problems develop. He said because the Arizona Constitution prohibits “takings,” the city would not be able to reverse course if increased density doesn’t make sense in some neighborhoods without facing significant legal liability.

“If we expand it and then need to retract it – say it’s not appropriate in this and that neighborhood – then we’re liable for having taken away property rights that were given to the property by this measure,” Dahl said. “If it’s a great thing, let’s expand it, by all means. I’m not necessarily opposed to it, but I don’t think we should go citywide, or even larger than we have to, without seeing how it affects our neighborhoods.” 

Cunningham said he’d also rather do a smaller area and see how it works out.

“I just don’t understand why we are moving so fast,” Cunningham said. “We are in such a rush to allow people to build a triplex in their backyard. It doesn’t make sense.”

Councilmember Selina Barajas, who was sworn into the Southside Ward 5 seat earlier this month, did not respond to the Sentinel’s inquiry regarding her position on middle housing.

But during her campaign, Barajas said she was open to expanding the middle housing proposal citywide.

“I’m open-minded about exploring ways to expand the housing supply, but it has to be fair and practical,” Barajas said. “Any expansion needs careful consideration of infrastructure and making sure these developments are in places that make sense, like nearby parks, schools, transit centers, and job hubs.”

Expanded boundaries

The city has until the end of the year to comply with House Bill 2721, a bipartisan measure that was signed into law by Gov. Katie Hobbs earlier this year. Among its provisions, the bill says that cities cannot prohibit two-, three-, or four-unit housing up to two floors on property that’s zoned for single-family residential homes within a mile of a city’s “central business district.”

Over the past year, city planners have had a series of meetings to gather feedback on a middle housing proposal that went further than just one mile around Downtown Tucson, which is considered the central business district for the purposes of the legislation.

City planners proposed allowing middle housing in an area roughly bounded by Country Club Road on the east, Silverbell Road on the west, 29th Street to the south and as far as the city’s northern boundary near the Rillito River on the north. The precise boundaries zig-zagged around the city limits of South Tucson and other areas.

Amanda Smith, a lead planner in the Tucson Planning and Development Services, said the city was looking at the proposed area for middle-housing development to take pressure off downtown neighborhoods, where housing costs have climbed as more new homes have been built on vacant properties and older homes have been renovated.

“A larger area would take some of the development pressure off of this concentrated (Downtown) area and spread it out, and that would have benefits to preserving certain types of neighborhood characteristics in these areas, as well as avoiding some of the development pressure and displacement,” Smith said at a public meeting in August. “It also spreads out the benefits of middle housing.”

But the  area has expanded far beyond those boundaries when the city’s Planning Commission voted 9-1 in November to recommend the city allow middle housing anywhere in the city limits.

City staff, meanwhile, has recommended its own expanded area that would stretch  has also recommended an alternative bounded by Wilmot Road on the east, La Cholla Boulevard on the west, Los Reales Road on the south and Grant Road on the north.

While councilmembers want to see either a larger or smaller area, Romero said she was inclined to support the staff recommendation.

As part of the plan, city staff has proposed reducing minimum lot sizes to make it easier for property owners to subdivide their property or build additional units.

Under the terms of the state law, the new middle-housing rules also must apply to 20 percent of the lots in any large-scale new development of more than 10 acres.

If cities don’t amend their zoning codes by Dec. 31, then the loosened middle-housing rules apply to all single family residential lots throughout their jurisdiction.

‘A developer opportunity’

At an August public meeting to discuss the middle housing proposal, Gayle Hartmann, a leader of the anti-mining group Save the Scenic Ritas and and longtime environmental and neighborhood advocate, said she thought the plan could disrupt the quality of life in established neighborhoods.

“When you buy a house in a neighborhood, you kind of expect it to stay the way it is,” she said.

Hartmann said said homelessness and rising housing costs are a major problem in Tucson, but “this isn’t going to address that at all” because the units will be too expensive for most people to build.

A city-commissioned middle housing report by the Drachman Institute
of the UA’s College of Architecture Planning and Landscape Architecture
suggests that no matter what the city decides, building middle housing
is a bad investment. A
financial analysis of costs and income showed that any kind of small
development, whether a single one-bedroom unit or four two-bedroom
units, ended up losing money.

“The bottom line is small scale
housing developments do not provide a positive return on investment,”
the report notes. “The relationship with construction costs, operating
cost and income needs to change radically for any zoning modifications
to have an impact in the city.”

Hartmann said she feared that with the current cost of construction, the only people who will take advantage of the provisions are property investors who will prioritize making a profit over the quality of life in the neighborhoods.

“To try to put this into single-family residence neighborhoods is counterproductive,” said Hartmann, a Sam Hughes resident who ran unsuccessfully for the Midtown Ward 6 City Council seat in 2001.

Fellow Sam Hughes resident Nancy DeFeo said she has watched homes move from owner-occupied to
rental units in her neighborhood east of the UA campus. 

She
said she was worried that allowing developers to increase density in established
neighborhoods would lead to even more rentals.

“It’s just a developer opportunity,” DeFeo said. “Build more rental units, put as many rental units in as you can.”

“Right
now, we have people who are buying houses in our neighborhood,” she
added. “They’re totally ripping out all the old trees to put ADUs in the
backyard, ripping out all the front landscaping so they can park five
cars. … This is just going to ruin the neighborhood in terms of our
historic neighborhood, and the way we want it to look.”

But other Tucson residents like the idea of the idea of higher
density. Logan Havens, who attended the August public meeting, said he
thought lifting zoning restrictions was a good idea.

“I would go citywide if I could, because I don’t think the pressure should just be in the center,” Havens said. “I think, in general, you’re gonna reduce carbon, water use, electric use, with higher density.”