PHOENIX – About once or twice a week, tour buses of true crime fans visit the home where  Winnie Ruth Judd lived with her two victims before she shot them in 1931.

The double murder and Judd’s sordid tale are now part of central Phoenix’s lore.

Robert Warnicke, the home's current owner, now shows tourists what he thinks is blood-stained flooring and his collection of vintage postcards of downtown Phoenix to inspire a love for the historic parts of the city.

Warnicke worries the charm that made people fall in love with the city’s historic districts might be imperiled with a new law.

In 2024, Gov. Katie Hobbs signed House Bill 2721 into law. This bill was meant to create more “middle housing,”  and it requires all cities and towns with at least 75,000 people to allow the construction of townhomes, duplexes and triplexes on at least 20% of each neighborhood's lots. This law takes effect on Jan. 1, 2026, and cities, including Phoenix, must update their own ordinances to come into compliance. 

Homeowners in historic neighborhoods, like Warnicke, are outraged.

“It will bring uncertainty to these historic neighborhoods that we've worked so hard to bring back from blight,” Warnicke said.

On Nov. 19, the Phoenix City Council passed the ordinance. Members of the council said it was out of their hands and that the city had to comply with state law.

If they hadn’t approved the law before Jan. 1, 2026, the law states middle housing would be allowed on all lots of a neighborhood “without any limitations.” The law doesn’t define what exactly that means, but it could mean that height and design restrictions wouldn’t apply to new multi-family housing.

Warnicke, a lawyer and vice president of the Phoenix Historic Neighborhoods Coalition, saw value in the Judd home and bought it in 2015 to use as a law office and save it from demolition to add more apartments. 

Now, he is worried similar homes across Phoenix will be torn down. Warnicke said these houses add a lot of history and character to Phoenix and that the middle housing law could put them in jeopardy.

“It could encourage people to move out and then quit investing in the house, because it's going to be worth more as property than a house,” Warnicke said.

Robert Warnicke, vice president of the Phoenix Historic Neighborhood Coalition, in his law office in La Hacienda, one of 36 neighborhoods effected by a housing plan unanimously approved by the city council.

Screenshot by Kiera Seapy/Cronkite News

Contemporary apartments and parking structures tower over the one-story house already. Blue trim lines the home's concrete frame. Many people who walk by don’t understand the significance of the house as the location of one of Arizona’s most infamous murders, Warnicke said.

Homeowners from neighborhoods like La Hacienda and Willo are worried that their historic homes are going to be replaced with modern fourplexes. 

On Nov. 5 and Nov. 19, many residents packed into the Phoenix City Council Chambers to argue their opinions. Public comment lasted more than three and a half hours across both meetings. The question before council was how to deal with the issue of getting local zoning ordinances to come into compliance. 

Those in favor of the law believed additional housing is necessary to support low-income Phoenix residents and accommodate the increasing population. Arizona’s population has increased by about 500,000 people since 2020, and the population is expected to continue growing, according to the World Population Review. Phoenix has followed suit, growing nearly 5% since 2020. 

Ashley Harder, founder of Harder Development and Ashland Place resident, said she believes Phoenix’s historic districts need to be protected since they only make up about 1% of the city. She also said Phoenix needs more affordable housing, and she is running for council to try to add more housing while preserving the beauty of historic neighborhoods.

“We just have so little inventory already, so that's why it's important to prioritize the preservation,” Harder said. “However, we have real housing challenges, and people are struggling to afford and find places that they can afford to live in, and that's a real problem. We do need to grow. We do need to be adding more housing. We just have to do it softly.”

A majority of the attendees at the Nov. 5 council meeting dressed in white to show their opposition to the law. One worried that the historic homes were going to be “bulldozed to the ground” after the law goes into effect. 

Some residents who spoke out against the city’s zoning ordinance are worried it will result in the construction of modern condominiums that would ruin the neighborhood. 

City staff explained this law does not aim to add more condos or apartments to these neighborhoods and instead encourages building townhomes and duplexes that meet all neighborhood restrictions. 

Warnicke explained the council should have included a sunset clause that would allow Phoenix to easily change the zoning ordinance if the state made an exception for historic neighborhoods.

Many historic homeowners are worried these new buildings could take away the neighborhood's historic status. To count as a historic district, at least 51% of homes must be considered contributing, meaning they are historic and add to the aesthetic of the neighborhood. Renovating or replacing a home removes the home's status as contributing. 

Many historic neighborhoods already have lots zoned for multifamily housing. Warnicke said many of the homes on corners or busy streets are already duplexes. The house he owns was originally a duplex, but during his renovation, he took down the wall in the middle to make it a functioning office space.

Phoenix Vice Mayor Ann O'Brien said while she believes the state law is poorly written, Phoenix is required to follow it or it risks losing funding from the state and any existing zoning rights.

“Phoenix proactively tackles housing challenges, and the state responds by tying our hands. We're being punished for finding solutions at the local level,” O’Brien said. “I've heard murmurings that some people want to seek a referendum on this ordinance. I would encourage any interested parties to do so. That's what the process is for. I also encourage you to call your state legislators and demand they stop preempting local authority.”

According to the Phoenix Budget and Research Department, it is unclear if Phoenix would have lost funding, how much or how long. The state would have made a legal decision if the Phoenix City Council hadn’t approved middle housing.

Warnicke said it’s unlikely that Phoenix would have lost any funding and that the city had options. He said if they hadn’t complied, the state Legislature would file a complaint, and then the attorney general would investigate and decide if the city broke the law and what the penalty would be.

“Let's just assume, for a moment, that the attorney general did that. The city gets 30 days to fix it,” Warnicke said. “So, no, they're not at risk for having $700 million withheld from the state.”

Warnicke said members of the city council have been willing to hear his concerns about the ordinance. He had meetings and phone calls with multiple council members before the vote to explain why some homeowners are upset and why he thought historic neighborhoods should have been given an exception. 

“I would like to commend the members of the City Phoenix Council,” Warnicke said. “I'm very happy that city council is receptive to hearing things like this from people like me, from, you know, constituents, stakeholders.”

This article first appeared on Cronkite News and is republished here under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.