We surveyed the field to see where Tempe City Council candidates stood on housing. Presented below are the questions in full. Responses are listed in the order received. Minor edits have been made to formatting and punctuation. This was updated on 2/25 to add responses from Hugo Tapia.

To quickly jump to a question, click on the links below:

1. Should the city address the skyrocketing cost of rent? 
2. How do you propose making Tempe affordable for young families again? 
3. Tempe’s population has continuously grown. What should our attitude be towards people who want to move to Tempe?
4. Tempe faces a housing shortage which has driven up the cost of housing. What policies do you support to increase Tempe’s housing supply?
5. Tempe is currently considering expanding Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs). Do you support expanding where ADUs can be built? 
6. Do you support a bond question to fund the construction of new affordable housing?
7. A major barrier to new affordable housing projects is the current permitting process, which can delay, deny, or add cost to these developments. Do you support streamlining the approval process for affordable housing in Tempe? What steps would you take to ensure existing funding for affordable housing is maximized?
8. How would you respond to a resident who says “I want affordable housing, but not in my neighborhood”? 
9. Do you support Prop 478 (Tempe General Plan 2050). Why or why not?
10. Should Tempe reduce minimum lot sizes? Should we allow the expansion of missing-middle housing, including into commercial areas?

Other Issues

1. While slowly recovering, Valley Metro ridership still remains far below pre-pandemic levels. What steps can Tempe take to increase public transit usage? 
2. How would you support multimodal transit and bike infrastructure in Tempe? Should Tempe expand protected bike lanes? 
3. Culdesac Tempe has won national media attention for its car-free development. Experts suggest that reducing parking requirements for new projects is an important step for making housing more affordable and sustainable. Should Tempe reduce parking mandates, especially near public transit? 

KEY QUESTIONS

1. Should the city address the skyrocketing cost of rent? 

Mayor Corey Woods: We need to continue to work with the Arizona State Legislature to repeal the statewide preemption on rent stabilization, which would allow all cities and towns to proactively address skyrocketing rents.

Councilmember Randy Keating: Yes. Tempe is working hard to be a city for everyone with an economy that works for everyone. We should always be exploring practical ways to make our city a more affordable place to live, work, and thrive. While we have a variety of tools to do so, first and foremost we must deal with the critical lack of housing supply in our urban core.

Nikki Amberg: Yes. As a start, we need to address the issue of supply. Vacancy rates in Tempe are the lowest they’ve been in years. We need to accelerate programs like Hometown for All to identify more opportunities to create more housing units, especially affordable units, to make a significant dent in rental prices. But increasing supply is only part of solution and doesn’t do much to help those who are already struggling to make ends meet. We to need to do more to keep people in their homes. As a candidate for city council, I want the city to increase awareness about existing rent and mortgage assistance programs and look at ways to expand eligibility to help more folks avoid eviction.

David Lucier: Yes, but sadly rent control is illegal in Arizona, The State Legislature preempted a city’s authority to enact rent control or create rent stabilization boards back in 2014. But there are other ways to assist the growing numbers of people who are rent-burdened. Here’s what we can do:
● Direct financial assistance using Tempe’s “Hometown for All” funds (as originally conceived by the program in 2020/21)
● Purchase and rent out more homes through Hometown for All (as was originally conceived, however those purchases ceased a few years back) and keeping them permanently affordable
● Work intensively with Newtown Community Land Trust, which I helped get started decades ago. Newtown assists first-time homebuyers, many of whom are rent-burdened, with forgivable loans and grants for down payments and enables people to build equity.
● Fully fund programs that help rent-burdened families. One example is TempePRE, which used to pay for high-quality preschool and day care for 360 kids from families whose incomes fell within 200% of HUD’s definition of poverty. We now fund only 160 free positions and need to, at the very least, restore the program to its original intention.

Councilmember Doreen Garlid: Yes, I believe we need to do what we can, within our power as councilmembers, to address this.

Hugo Tapia: Yes, but we would have to change the laws in our state to be able to do that. For that we will need to address those limitations at the state legislature. We can continue to assist families and individuals that are cost-burdened by providing economic support through city programming, such as Tempe’s Hometown for All. We can also develop programming that can assist folks that are cost-burdened navigate the difficult process of the Arizona Department of Economic Security. We also need to continue to collaborate with our local school districts to assure that our children have what they need to develop in their education when their families are cost burdened.

2. How do you propose making Tempe affordable for young families again? 

Mayor Woods: I am fully committed to expanding the initiatives the City Council and I have spearheaded during my time as Mayor to address Tempe’s housing crisis. Tempe has both affordability and supply issues that we need to address. We need more homeownership and rental options in all categories; affordable, workforce, and market-rate. My focus on affordable housing, as demonstrated by our innovative “Hometown for All” program, will continue. With this specialized fund, this program has already invested $4.5 million in expanding affordable housing, received an additional $3.3 million in contributions, and secured additional commitments of $17.5 million. By continuing to pursue a diverse range of housing options, Tempe can remain an inclusive community for all.

Noteworthy achievements include the purchase of the old Food City complex at Apache and Dorsey, a strategic move to revitalize and repurpose the area with up to 400 mixed-income units while preserving essential needs like groceries. Additionally, initiatives like La Victoria Commons, a partnership between Copa Health and Newtown Community Development Corporation, will provide new affordable rental units and affordable for-sale homes, reflecting my commitment to creating new housing opportunities in all categories. Throughout these efforts, I will continue to engage with neighborhood leaders to incorporate their input, ensuring that every project contributes positively to the community’s well-being.

Councilmember Keating: It must be about increasing our affordable, workforce, and market rate housing supply to drive prices down, increasing access to public transit, and increasing the availability of grocery stores to ensure Tempe is free of food deserts.

Nikki Amberg: I would like to prioritize creating more affordable homeownership opportunities. Too many younger folks who are just starting out are completely priced out of Tempe’s single-family house market. To address this issue of affordability, and to get more families on the road towards accruing generational wealth, we must create not only rental units in our city, but affordable condo units, as well.

David Lucier: ● By seriously getting into the business of building affordable and workforce housing, working with nonprofit developers, such as Newtown Community Land Trust, and the very few community-focused developers like Gorman, to build public-private mixed income projects using local incentives and state and federal assistance. We need to build missing middle housing.
● By passing a major bond that addresses affordable housing in a serious way (far more of a dire need than pavement quality). Tempe 1st had been lobbying for this inclusion and now Council has agreed to add $32M in affordable housing capital funds to the bond election planned for November 2024, but I think we need a more robust number, looking at the City of Durham NC, another university town, as a best practice.
● We need to, as we used to until a few years ago, invest the sale and rent of city-owned lands into affordable and workforce housing. For example, the South Pier project will bring in $36.5M to the city’s coffers over a 10-year span of that money has been dedicated to affordable and workforce housing. Costa at the Lake may be prohibitively high for missing middle housing, but sales of land along the Lake should go to building housing elsewhere.
● ASU needs to become a full partner in creating affordable and workforce housing. Graduate students, especially ones with families, need options near the university, and ASU needs to be fully activated in helping to solve the housing crisis.

Councilmember Garlid: Increasing our available housing stock is one way, which means looking at a variety of housing options as we plan for the future, from apartments and condos to mixed use developments, ADUs, and even rent controlled units. We need to look at all options available to us in working toward affordable housing for young families.

Hugo Tapia: Tempe is in desperate need of serious collaboration with community partners that can bring opportunities for young families to be able to develop healthy living that includes affordability and quality of life. We need to bring in stakeholders that are in the space of developing affordable housing not just by development, but also by assistance for young families to have access to homeownership opportunities within our city. When I was a board member of Trellis Community Development in Phoenix, we focused on implementation of programs and assistance that would develop those opportunities for first time homeowners. As a city, we need to fully engage and develop those partnerships with the community that are already working on this difficult issue around the Metro area. We also need to engage with Arizona State to become a full partner in our efforts for the development of workforce housing.

3. Tempe’s population has continuously grown. What should our attitude be towards people who want to move to Tempe?

Mayor Woods: Tempe’s population growth is a testament to our city’s appeal and livability. People are moving to Tempe in large numbers because we are a great community that longtime residents love and newcomers want to be a part of. Wise strategic decisions and robust community participation have led us to a place of amazing prosperity.

Councilmember Keating: We are a completely landlocked and urban city, so we must approach growth as a positive opportunity – not as a negative. We do that and we will take a huge step towards ensuring growth improves everyone’s quality of life.

Nikki Amberg: I think Tempe should be welcoming to new residents. But we also need to be prepared. We’ve seen what happens in growing cities like Austin that do not make the necessary adjustments to absorb new people. Without a plan, housing prices continue to go up, traffic congestion gets worse, and our overall quality of life suffers. 

David Lucier: We want our nurses, our first-responders, our students to live close to where they work and study. We need to increase the number of units dramatically, but currently that vast preponderance of housing is market rate and beyond. We need missing middle housing. We need to inform developers at the first point of contact that, if they want entitlements, variances increased height/density bonuses to add units to their project, all well and good, but they need to share in the wealth and under adoption of an Urban Code, trade those bonuses for a certain amount of affordable or workforce housing OR a substantial contribution to our Hometown For All program. Of course it cannot be required, as inclusionary zoning is illegal in Arizona, since 2015.

We also need to ask what our attitude should be toward people that already live here, who are facing aging infrastructure, traffic congestion, and a decline in services that impact quality of life. Now that the Legislature has prohibited the collection of rental tax, we must rely upon sales and property taxes to support parks, infrastructure, and Police and Fire Medical rescue service and the city is facing a $20 budget cut in the next fiscal year.

Councilmember Garlid: Our population is forecasted to continue to grow because Tempe is a desirable place to live. I welcome anyone who wants to call Tempe home! Tempe has always been a welcoming and diverse city and I hope it stays that way. Growing our population also means economic growth and opportunities for Tempe, and I want to maximize those opportunities to grow our economy. 

Hugo Tapia: Tempe has always been a welcoming city and needs to continue to be as it was when I arrived here at the age of 17 to go to college. It is evident that to be able to do this, we need to significantly increase our housing availability. Unfortunately, due to the level of luxury development, rather than affordable workforce housing, our teachers, restaurant workers, commercial food workers and first responders are not able to live close to their work. This is the biggest challenge that our city is facing today as development is also impacting the lives of current citizens and significantly taxing our infrastructure and demanding more first responder resources. We need to develop smart and be cautious of the types of developments the city brings in to assure that without the ability to collect rental tax, we find ways to continue to meet everyone’s needs.

4. Tempe faces a housing shortage which has driven up the cost of housing. What policies do you support to increase Tempe’s housing supply?

Mayor Woods: I am in favor of updating our Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) policy to allow additional smaller, flexible housing options that encourage more multi-generational living in our community. I support the creation of a density bonus program that I believe could be greatly beneficial in our downtown urban core. We need to ensure that we are not requiring new projects in the Mill Avenue District or Apache Boulevard to have more parking than is necessary due to the existence of light rail and modern streetcar. I would also be in support of updating city policies related to minimum lot sizes to encourage more building of duplexes, triplexes, and fourplexes in areas where appropriate.

Our “Hometown for All” program is making great progress in the area of affordable housing, and I’m committed to making it even stronger. Organizations like Newtown and Habitat for Humanity are important partners in this effort, and we need to work closely with them and other attainable housing developers to keep moving forward. Voters can further support affordable housing by approving a $32 million housing bond in November 2024. This money will create more affordable homeownership and rental options across our city.

Another part of the solution is working with the State Legislature to change state laws that create challenges with addressing both supply and affordability. Right now, there’s a statewide ban on inclusionary zoning, which could help make sure new developments include affordable housing. We need to work with state lawmakers to get rid of this ban. I am also a big supporter of Tax Increment Financing (TIF), which is a proven tool to help create additional attainable housing while addressing blighted areas. Arizona is the only place in the United States where this tool is not accessible to cities and towns, and I believe that needs to change.

Councilmember Keating: ADUs, increased incentives for affordable housing construction, creating the economic conditions for “affordable by design” projects such as Parc Tempe in the Maker District, eliminating barriers to rental equality.

Nikki Amberg: The cost of housing, including rent, relies on several factors. One of those factors is housing supply, particularly when it comes to affordable housing units. That is why I am a strong supporter of Hometown for All, which creates a dedicated funding stream for the city to identify and purchase under-utilized sites for affordable housing. But we must do more—both inside and outside Tempe’s city limits. I am pushing for a regional partnership with other cities and towns to create more affordable housing units. As a landlocked city, Tempe cannot solve this crisis alone. As Mayor Woods and the City Council has done thus far, we must continue to lead in affordable housing creation; however, we must also work together with our neighbors to make a significant impact on housing supply and skyrocketing rental costs.

David Lucier: The above responses answer your question.

Another factor driving up the cost of housing are investors and private-equity firms like Blackwater buying up large swaths of Tempe homes. They are perverting the free market and twisting the equation that increasing the supply will result in a reduction of rent. The housing being built is mostly all market rate and market-rate developers have little clue on building affordable and workforce housing.

In addition Air BnBs and short-term rentals are driving up the cost of housing as well, but the Legislature, in all its wisdom, has preempted cities from regulating short term rentals. Tempe is impacted but other Arizona locales are being crippled by air bnbs and people who work there cannot afford housing. It is a crisis.

Councilmember Garlid: I’m a big fan of our Hometown for All initiative, which I’ve launched along with Mayor Woods to create more affordable housing options in Tempe. I also support the adoption of ADUs, mixed use development, condos and multi-family housing in line with our zoning and neighborhood character areas.

Hugo Tapia: Policies that include not only an increase in housing supply but affordability to those citizens that are cost-burdened is critical and important to have. Since new development is mostly market rate, it is important for those collaborations discussed above to be developed and prioritized. The city cannot do this alone; we are going to need community collaboration and unity when making decisions about what is best for our city and its citizens. All citizen populations need to be heard and be part of the conversation in decisions made by the council.

5. Tempe is currently considering expanding Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs). Do you support expanding where ADUs can be built? 

Mayor Woods: Expanding the availability of Accessory Dwelling Units can contribute to creating a more inclusive and diverse community in Tempe while promoting sustainable land use and
allowing for multi-generational living. ADUs offer more housing choices for residents, which is particularly important in addressing housing shortages and providing affordable housing options. By implementing appropriate regulations, such as guardrails to maintain the intended use of ADUs, we can ensure they serve their purpose of providing long-term housing options instead of becoming short-term rentals.

Councilmember Keating: Yes.

Nikki Amberg: Yes, I support the expansion of ADUs with appropriate safeguards that address quality of life concerns of neighboring residents. I believe ADUs could fill an important need for additional housing units in a city experiencing extreme low vacancy rates. Also, ADUs provide an opportunity for more Tempeans and their loved ones to age in place. I know of at least one homeowner who plans to move into an ADU on their property so that their grown children can live in the main house. With housing increasingly scarce and unattainable for many, we need more tools—such as responsible and smart rules and regulations covering ADUs—to fill in the gaps. While it is true that ADUs will not solve our housing crisis, we can’t afford to leave any options on the table to address the problem. 

David Lucier: Theoretically, I support the expansion, if enforceable guardrails are in place. Based on past performance, though, I just don’t think the city will be able to enforce these guidelines (owner lives on site, etc). We also have a powerful state law, which I opposed, that preempts authority of cities from regulating short-term rentals. We need to really chew on this proposed expansion. I can’t support it until I see what it looks like. Right now, the proposal is preliminary and has flaws.

We need to clearly distinguish between guesthouses, which former Councilmember Lauren Kuby worked to expand a few years ago when she was on Council. It used to be that Tempe residents needed a 15,000-square-foot lot to build a guesthouse. Now you can build a guesthouse in a smaller lot (a minimum of 8000 square feet), opening up the possibility of casitas and units for family members. We need to encourage the building of guesthouses, which are cheaper, since the plumbing and electrical can hook into the main house’s supply.

I want to encourage the guesthouses and would support a pilot that expands ADUs where we can examine their impacts. The City estimates that $170K is needed to install an ADU and I think it will be mostly corporate entities that will be able to afford these additions, not Tempe residents. Article of interest.

Councilmember Garlid: Yes, with the right parameters in place, I think ADUs are a great option. The key is finding smart parameters that work well for all Tempe residents so that we can add that housing option with minimal downsides.

Hugo Tapia: It is important to distinguish between Guest Houses and Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs). Guest houses are for family and friends that are staying with a homeowner. These are designed to provide the privacy and independence of those that are close to us and need to be living within proximity to us. An ADU is designed to be a rental to provide additional resources to the homeowner. ADU’s will require enforceable guardrails to assure that neighborhoods are safe and that our infrastructure is not heavily impacted by the increase in use. We also have to ensure that developers are limited in increasing density in our neighborhoods with little monitoring through short- rental agreements that are difficult to address due to state laws limiting cities from restricting short-term rentals. I would support the expansion with those enforceable guardrails in place.

6. Do you support a bond question to fund the construction of new affordable housing?

Mayor Woods: Yes, a 32-million-dollar bond question will be on the November 2024 ballot. It has my full support.

Councilmember Keating: Yes.

Nikki Amberg: Yes, I support a bond question for the voters to decide whether the city should make an additional investment in affordable housing creation. I would vote in favor of such a bond, and I would encourage others to do the same.

David Lucier: Yes, as stated above. but the amount will barely make a dent in the growing need to create missing-middle housing. Let’s look at the CIty of Durham, North Carolina. They have 13 colleges and universities nearby – including Duke University. Like Tempe, it is a college town. In 2019, Durham voters overwhelmingly passed a $95 million affordable housing bond with the goal of upgrading the city’s affordability. I would like to see more public discussion on the bond. The City of Phoenix had a robust public engagement before they put their recent bond up for a vote. Not so, the City of Tempe.

Councilmember Garlid: Yes.

Hugo Tapia: Yes, and it needs to be a robust bond that will assure that we can make a dent into this substantial and existential challenge in Tempe.

7. A major barrier to new affordable housing projects is the current permitting process, which can delay, deny, or add cost to these developments. Do you support streamlining the approval process for affordable housing in Tempe? What steps would you take to ensure existing funding for affordable housing is maximized?

Mayor Woods: Yes, I would support streamlining the approval process for affordable housing projects in Tempe if it can accelerate their delivery to the market. While I’m not currently aware of any specific issues with the permitting process, I’m open to exploring removing potential
barriers and finding ways to improve efficiency without compromising on quality or safety
standards.

To ensure existing funding for affordable housing is maximized in Tempe, leveraging the infrastructure of the existing Tempe Coalition for Affordable Housing (a 501(c)(3) organization with a separate board) is key. This structure provides a framework for transparent and accountable management of resources, ensuring they are directed specifically towards affordable housing initiatives.

Councilmember Keating: Yes, we should be examining all avenues to increase our affordable housing supply and I have a long record of supporting innovative solutions to fix it – and yes, I am open to taking a critical look at our current permitting process to see where it may be possible to streamline in a way that encourages more affordable housing projects.

Nikki Amberg: All developers need to follow the rules. But given the cost of labor, materials, and new sustainable construction goals, our city needs to make housing—especially affordable housing—easier to build. To achieve this, we should initiate a comprehensive review of our permitting process to ensure fairness to applicants while maintaining compliance with important safety and quality of life rules. When it comes to maximizing funding, we need to prioritize the construction of affordable units near existing transit corridors—locations where additional density makes sense and where people will likely put less cars on the road. 

David Lucier: The major barrier to new affordable housing projects is that market rate developers have no interest in building affordable housing, unless highly incentivized. It doesn’t pencil out. There are market-rate developers, who are for profit developers, and there are non profit developers, such as Habitat for Humanity, Newtown, Native American Connections.

Councilmember Garlid: Yes, I support streamlining the permitting process for new affordable housing projects. We want to squeeze every bit of value out of that funding as we can, including looking at ways to grow those funds. I believe we get great value from partnering with land trusts and finding new ways to redevelop previously abandoned properties.

Hugo Tapia: A major barrier to developing affordable housing units here in Tempe is that there is no developer interest currently to do so. Market rate development brings in more profit and that is the interest. This is why it is important to engage with developers that are in the space of affordable housing development with a significant interest in the community and its needs.

8. How would you respond to a resident who says “I want affordable housing, but not in my neighborhood”? 

Mayor Woods: I appreciate the perspectives of all residents. However, it’s crucial to acknowledge that we’re facing an affordable housing crisis, and addressing it requires collective effort and sometimes difficult decisions. The proposed General Plan 2050 offers a framework for creating additional housing units without altering single-family zoning in existing neighborhoods, which can help alleviate some of the concerns while still addressing the pressing need for affordable housing. We have to be willing to have tough conversations with residents who may be apprehensive about affordable housing in order to find balanced solutions that benefit the entire community.

Councilmember Keating: It’s important that we respect the character of Tempe’s single-family neighborhoods as the people living in them spent their hard earned money to live in a community like that. However, I think it’s critically important to recognize the reality of Tempe’s situation – we are landlocked. Therefore, it is on all of us to take a collaborative approach to adding affordable housing in our city in a way that both meaningfully solves the issue and respects neighborhood character. I believe that is entirely possible, but it will take everyone coming to the table to work in good faith.

Nikki Amberg: I would say that I understand change can be difficult, especially when it comes so close to home. But I would remind folks that our current housing crisis affects everyone, especially younger people who are just beginning to start their own families. Our children and grandchildren deserve the opportunity to live in the neighborhoods where they grew up. That’s why I support Hometown for All and the expansion of ADUs as ways to get us closer to achieving this goal. But we need even more housing if we are going to meet the needs of the next generation of Tempeans, which is going to require all of us working together.  

David Lucier: I would respectfully suggest that affordable housing and workforce housing as part of mixed income housing improves the quality of life for all. It is a fallacy, though commonly held, that affordable housing, including residential-care facilities and supportive housing lower neighboring property values. However, numerous studies conducted over a period of many years and in various locations find that this widely held preconception is incorrect.

Councilmember Garlid: I think the key is addressing their concerns, clearing up any misconceptions, and trying to increase understanding about the need for, and benefits of, affordable housing for our city. Listening is important because it can lead to new understanding for both the resident and me. They may have legitimate concerns that I should know about, but I also want to help clear up any misconceptions or misinformation that may affect the way they feel. I want to honor our residents’ wishes in terms of keeping the character of our neighborhoods, but also be open to growth opportunities, and I believe we can do both. 

Hugo Tapia: I believe that affordable housing that fits into the culture and history of the neighborhood will be better perceived by the community that surrounds it. People in Tempe appear to recognize the need of an increase in housing availability, but want it to be something that does not take away from the livability of the people that already live in those neighborhoods.

9. Do you support Prop 478 (Tempe General Plan 2050). Why or why not?

Mayor Woods: Yes, Prop 478 has my full support. The General Plan 2050 had input from hundreds of Tempe residents and is a product of compromise, collaboration, transparency, civility, and, above all else, a shared commitment to making Tempe the best city it can be — both now and in future generations to come. One of the standout features of Prop 478 is its focus on creating more affordable and accessible housing opportunities throughout Tempe. This is a critical need in many communities, and addressing it demonstrates a proactive approach to ensuring our city remains vibrant and inclusive.

The plan’s embrace of emerging national trends like micro-mobility and remote working shows a forward-thinking mindset. Adapting to these trends not only keeps Tempe relevant but also enhances residents’ quality of life by providing flexible and sustainable options for transportation and work. Improving community safety through enhancements to roads, bridges, and transportation networks is another key aspect of Prop 478. By modernizing bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure, the plan not only promotes safer travel but also encourages healthier and more environmentally friendly modes of transportation. The incorporation of climate resiliency and environmental stewardship measures underscores Tempe’s commitment to sustainability. By prioritizing these initiatives, Prop 478 ensures that Tempe remains a leader in environmental responsibility and is well-prepared for the challenges of climate change.

Councilmember Keating: Yes. It was a two year, meticulous process involving hundreds of hours of staff, leaders, and residents working together to create a plan that provides critical updates to the General Plan 2040 but also protects Tempe’s single family neighborhoods. Any one saying anything differentis simply lying.

We don’t pass this, we fall behind and it will cost our community more to catch up. It’s that
simple.

Nikki Amberg: Yes, I support Prop. 478. Tempe’s General Plan 2050, which is on the ballot for the March 12th election, is an integral part of the effort to ensure that we accommodate everyone’s needs and grow our city the right way. In recent weeks, I’ve been disappointed to see misinformation about this plan. The proposal before the voters would not increase density in single-family neighborhoods. It does not add language that would make it easier for a developer to seek a variance of existing zoning rules. What it does have, for the first time in any Tempe planning document, is a section on sustainability. It also provides a road map for a responsible increase in density in Tempe’s downtown core and along transit corridors to accommodate more residents who drive less to home, work or school. A “no” vote would only delay these important initiatives—time Tempe does not have if we are to meet and exceed our environmental targets and accommodate new growth. 

David Lucier: No. I’ve seen ​three ​Tempe General Plans come and go as a resident — and the common thread​? ​Despite what a General Plan states, the Council invariably votes for variances and grants de​velopers​ their zoning requests. I was lukewarm supportive.

Over the past few months, I spoke with a whole lotta residents and studied this complicated document. And while I still think that much of the language — especially related to sustainability​, walkability and bike improvements is well and good, the underlying theme of overdevelopment ​concerns me greatly. The plan moves the goal post so that developers can justify their inevitable upzoning requests.

During my research, I spoke with a ​central Tempe resident who ​painstakingly charted the ever-changing land​-use maps and text​ as the General Plan 2050 evolved. He​ drew attention to Page 162 from the section “20 Minute City”: ​”Transit Oriented Development promotes high density and mixed uses in the immediate vicinity and WITHIN ABOUT A QUARTER-MILE OF TRANSIT SERVICE.”

He and other residents trie​​d to get the wording changed back to transit station or to “rail” transit as surely ​the City meant to encourage high density ​within 1/4 mile of the light rail and streetcar, not ​at intersections where there was only bus service, right? Wrong. Staff would not make that change.​ On the surface, the GP looks good​, but when I delved deeper, I saw the plan’s pitfalls. I stand with the neighborhood leaders of the Community Working Group who saw their recommendations turned back and are voting NO on approving the General Plan, Prop 478.

I think my experience going from​ a grudging YES to NO may mirror ​m​any Tempe voters who ​— showered with promotional mail and social media advertising — will ​review the complex Plan and land-use maps and conclude that GP 2050 is simply…. a developer’s dream.

Councilmember Garlid: Yes, I do support Prop 478. It’s a highly researched, comprehensive, living document that guides our plans for the future and was created with our residents. I especially like the attention given to housing, sustainability, improving our multi-modal transportation infrastructure and historic preservation. It does not raise taxes or make any changes to our existing single-family neighborhoods.

Hugo Tapia: Yes, I do because the issue with development is not the plan, but the variances that developers get when they want to go beyond to what the plan suggests it should be. It is up to the council whether those variances are allowed. The document is also a living document that will allow it to be modified by council if needed in the future.

10. Should Tempe reduce minimum lot sizes? Should we allow the expansion of missing-middle housing, including into commercial areas?

Mayor Woods: Reducing minimum lot sizes and allowing the expansion of missing-middle class housing into commercial areas would be beneficial for addressing the housing crisis and promoting greater diversity in housing options. Expanding missing-middle housing will help fill the gap in housing options. Additionally, repurposing underutilized commercial areas for housing can revitalize these spaces while providing much-needed housing in convenient locations. We should also explore more aggressive measures to facilitate office-to-residential conversions and repurpose existing buildings for missing-middle housing.

Councilmember Keating: I think it’s important to approach any rezoning questions on a case by case basis but always with our residents’ quality of life as the top priority. I’d be open to considering reducing minimum lot sizes.

Nikki Amberg: I would like to look further into exploring the issue of adjusting lot sizes and allowing for the expansion of residential uses in commercial areas. With return-to-work guidelines and other commuting patterns continuing to evolve, there may be opportunities to explore additional or alternate uses for underutilized commercial properties. Since we are not the only city to experience such a shift, I would like to study what other municipalities across the U.S. are doing, and how that might be best implemented in Tempe.

David Lucier: Perhaps, but Tempe has little single-family land left (although there are in-fill areas being bought out that might be good pilots for that reduction, where a project could have a shared space with community gardens and more, and townhouses around it).

To advance missing-middle housing, we need to embrace form-based codes, as Mesa has done. Within these codes you would have varying heights but the assemblage would respect the context of the adjacent neighborhoods and bring in local businesses, green space, and residential uses to build community not towers In any case you do not find affordable and workforce housing in projects over 5 stories, due to the higher cost of construction when you go tall.

I would like to see co-location of affordable and workforce housing onto school properties (Habitat is proposing legislation to enable just that) so that teachers could live on their school’s campus.

Councilmember Garlid: I would be open to reducing minimum lot sizes where it makes sense. I’m also open to expanding housing into commercial areas where it makes sense. I would assess any of these scenarios on a case by case basis.

Hugo Tapia: There are many empty commercial properties in Tempe. We need to be innovative in looking at options to redevelop those spaces into affordable housing. Many of those are around established neighborhoods so we would need to consider overall impacts to those spaces. There is no more available land in Tempe for lot size development.

OTHER ISSUES

1. While slowly recovering, Valley Metro ridership still remains far below pre-pandemic levels. What steps can Tempe take to increase public transit usage? 

Mayor Woods: To increase public transit usage in Tempe, we must focus on enhancing connectivity and accessibility. I continue to support initiatives like our Orbit system and providing free bus passes to our youth to assist them with getting around Tempe while making them comfortable using public transportation at an early age.

Moreover, securing federal and state infrastructure funding to expand service and lines is
essential. We must remain agile in adjusting services like Orbit based on ridership and demand as we navigate the recovery from the pandemic. Notably, since the opening of the streetcar in 2022, our ridership has exceeded expectations and continues to growsteadily. Students, professionals, and visitors alike rely on both the Light Rail and modern streetcar for both major events and daily commutes.

I understand the necessity of investing in these transit methods, particularly as Tempe’s
population is projected to grow. As we prioritize affordable housing, maintaining and
enhancing public transit options will be crucial in ensuring accessibility and sustainability
for all residents.

Councilmember Keating: The Tempe Street car and increased Orbit access are critical pieces to completing the public transit network within our city. Ensuring rider safety, eliminating the last mile problem and ensuring timely access to public transit should be our top priorities to increasing ridership.

Nikki Amberg: With changes in commuting habits and remote policies, it’s clear that we need to diversify mass transit trips to include more than just going to and from work. I would like the city to partner with Valley Metro to better highlight mass transit as a convenient, easy, and cheap way to get to popular destinations like the Footprint Center and Sky Harbor. As a city, we also need to expand Orbit service into more of South Tempe so that more residents can access our light rail system.  

David Lucier: We need to at the very least maintain, but I would hope, increase public transit
and micro- mobility designations across the city. We need to continue our
investment and not cut back (as is being proposed for the next fiscal year, as
people rely on public transportation to get to their jobs or school)

Councilmember Garlid: We’ve got to make it easier, cheaper and more convenient for people to get out of their cars. People need to feel safe enough to walk, bike, skate, jog, take the bus or light rail to their destinations. I believe we need to make public transit more appealing and accessible to everyone, especially low income communities. I also want people to feel safe when they use public transit. If people don’t feel safe, they won’t use it, so we also need to explore ways to make sure our public transit is safe and accessible.

Hugo Tapia: It is imperative that we continue to develop a continued educational campaign about the importance of ridership. We also must assure the safety of riders if they choose that way of transportation. We must at least maintain levels of ridership at this time.

2. How would you support multimodal transit and bike infrastructure in Tempe? Should Tempe expand protected bike lanes? 

Mayor Woods: It’s long been a priority of mine to enhance multimodal transportation options for Tempe. My own everyday lifestyle depends on a lot of walking around Downtown Tempe, where I live and work, and it’s not lost on me that both the youngest and oldest residents of Tempe need to be able to get around without driving—not to mention the people who simply can’t afford the costs of a vehicle or need to get around in another way for a variety of reasons.

Letting neighborhoods, local businesses, and stakeholders like neighborhood associations and community organizations lead has proven to be effective. The separated bike lane on the Smith Corridor is a good example. We had neighborhoods in the Escalante area and others who wanted a safer bikeway to Tempe Marketplace and the trails available at Tempe Town Lake connecting Tempe, Phoenix, Mesa, and Scottsdale.

‘The Culdesac community and local businesses along Apache also wanted a better north-south bikeway, especially since Culdesac is a car-free community. The Light Rail also connects right there and allows for bikes onboard. It was an easy decision when it came to connectivity, but the way the community led and advocated for that improvement is the kind of effort I want to continue to foster and support.

When we make bike routes like College Avenue, Alameda, Country Club Way, Smith, and other places attractive and safe for cyclists and pedestrians with heavy input from neighborhoods, we will have strategic success. Improvements from Apache to Rio Salado are underway and will include a separate bike lane.

The Tempe City Council and I have instructed city staff to be innovative when it comes to approaches to bike and pedestrian infrastructure. For example, the all-ways crosswalk on Fifth and Mill is a pedestrian-friendly approach that has worked in other cities across the country; it can increase foot traffic and business for Mill Avenue, which is in a transitional phase and is attracting exciting new restaurants and businesses. Furthermore, the years-in-the-making streetscaping and chicanes on Alameda and the planned connectivity of that bike route all the way from the 101 to Diablo Stadium will hopefully make biking more attractive along that crucial east-west connection. We’re working on similar improvements in other Tempe bike routes, such as Country Club Way. Connectivity among these systems as well as better infrastructure for biking and walking, are essential to making these options attractive, safe, and reliable.

Councilmember Keating: I have been a champion for increasing access to multi-modal transit in Tempe, including pursuing several experimental bike lane expansion projects that were ultimately not successful but that does not mean I’m going to stop trying.

Nikki Amberg: Tempe can best support multimodal transit and bike infrastructure by convincing more people to bike and take mass transit to their destinations. One way to do this is to make traveling along all our roadways safer. I support a ballot measure that could go before the voters in November that would accelerate the replacement of pavement surfaces on all thoroughfares and side streets across our city. I also support continuing the progress we’ve made to introduce additional dedicated bike lanes—especially around our schools, parks, and other places where safety should be our priority. 

David Lucier: Sadly, the McClintock bike lane controversy years ago served to chill substantial bike infrastructure projects along arterial roads. There have been modest improvements in bike paths away from streets, but we need a robust plan to build infrastructure to fill in the gaps. Tempe could be doing much better, but the loudest voices in the room are often those who do not want the streets to change (except for improving pavement quality). I support equitable policies and programs for sharing our streets amongst cars and other uses (peds, bikes, cars, skateboards). These include multi-modal zones. Tempe has double-to-triple the amount of public transportation, biking, and walking, compared to AZ as a whole. Council actions need to prioritize alternative modes and then create more multi-modal zones to encourage uptake of alternative transportation. Tempe has created good infrastructure in short segments, but there are a lot of disruptions. We need to:

• Ensure that the proposed bond, which Council will refer to the November 2024 ballot, includes funding for bike infrastructure and Complete Street design and actions. Because this issue is going before Council this Spring before the new Council is sworn in, it is incumbent upon the biking community (and I count myself in that group) to attend the Work Study sessions and other meetings to voice concerns and advocate for pro-active spending on bike infrastructure and safe-street design be included in the bond. 
• Build protected bike lanes along arterial roads (separators) if we really want people to ride their bikes (Phoenix is ahead of us). We can use recycled plastic to create these separators. 
• At the very least, we need to post more signs indicating bike-friendly routes through neighborhoods (leading them to arterial roads) and street signs that direct people to the safest route where there are gaps.

Councilmember Garlid: I think we are obligated to provide bike lanes on arterial streets where they are feasible, in addition to plenty of room for cyclists on unobstructed sidewalks on arterial streets where they aren’t. I’m a fan of creating more robust cycling infrastructure on our non-arterial streets where there is already less car traffic and reduced speed limits. One example of this is the recent addition of protective candlestick bollards along the bike lanes on College Avenue. In addition to safety features such as these, I’d like to see more buffered and protected bike lanes and connectability of our non-arterial streets and dedicated bike/pedestrian paths, such as the current Country Club Way project or the proposed railroad bridge at Los Feliz.

Hugo Tapia: It is a priority of mine to continue to emphasize the availability of biking in Tempe by improving the infrastructure necessary to keep riders safe and make connections from all our neighborhoods. Protected bike lanes are necessary on major streets with high speeds of cars.

3. Culdesac Tempe has won national media attention for its car-free development. Experts suggest that reducing parking requirements for new projects is an important step for making housing more affordable and sustainable. Should Tempe reduce parking mandates, especially near public transit? 

Mayor Woods: Yes, reducing parking mandates, especially near public transit hubs, can be a key
strategy for promoting affordability and sustainability in housing developments. In downtown Tempe’s urban core, the City Council is actively discussing ways to reduce parking mandates, particularly near public transit hubs, with a focus on increasing bike parking and encouraging alternative modes of transportation. This strategy promotes both affordability and sustainability in housing developments. In areas like downtown Tempe, where robust public transit options exist, excessive parking provisions are unnecessary. Residents often prefer walking, biking, or using public transit over personal vehicles. By reducing parking mandates, we can free up space for housing units, making housing more affordable and plentiful while encouraging sustainable transportation practices.

Councilmember Keating: I believe there has to be a balance as the Phoenix metro area still remains an automotive dominant City. I think we should explore requiring projects to build in plans for adaptive re-use of parking spaces as the Valley continues to expand its public transit infrastructure and the need for a car decreases.

Nikki Amberg: Yes, I believe we should seriously consider reducing parking mandates near public transit. Tempe spent a lot of money creating more transit options in key areas of our city, and one way to make a return on that investment would be to attract more residents who are willing to live a car-free, or less car-reliant lifestyle. Unfortunately, Tempe will always be a “cut through” city for commuters in adjacent communities. Anything we can do to decrease the number of cars on our overburdened roadways would be a win for Tempe residents. 

David Lucier: YES. Although I support the creation of car-free communities, I was disappointed that there were no affordable or workforce units included in that development. The developers saved millions by not having to build parking lots and garages, so why not pass on some of that savings to Hometown for All?

Councilmember Garlid: I think that makes a lot of sense in some developments going forward, specifically those in our urban core where there is ample access to public transit. For existing buildings near public transit, we should incentivize future plans to convert unneeded parking spaces to other usable space such as housing.

Hugo Tapia: I believe that parking mandates in development need to be modified to meet the current living of residents within that development. The availability of public transit to those spaces makes a significant difference in the effectiveness of such developments.