Bruce Wright said the way to improve UA relations with its neighbors is to sit down at the table and discuss issues face-to-face. As assistant to the president for economic development and community affairs, Wright is a central figure in the university's battles with displaced home owners and angry campus-area merchants who charge the university is running them out of business. Wright sat down with an Arizona Daily Wildcat reporter last week to discuss the University of Arizona's relationship with surrounding communities.

Wildcat: Looking back at 1995, what do you see as the biggest accomplishment for your department?

Bruce Wright: I think there have been two. First, the creation and development of the Science and Technology Park, which we were handed in January and have been on a very fast track with, including leasing space to Microsoft, which will begin moving in February.

I also think we have made extraordinary progress with our relationships with our neighbors to the south. If we are successful in negotiating a land agreement with them the whole quality of life for the campus will be enhanced.

WC: Expansion at the UA seems to bring tremendous growing pains, more so than at other state universities. Why is that?

BW: Both Arizona State and Northern Arizona University have completely different land bases. The UA was built in the middle of the desert and the community grew up around it. As the campus and its land needs have grown, it has put us in conflict with the community.

ASU is not surrounded by anything except itself and they have not had to displace home owners and businesses.

The same thing is true with NAU, which had a nice piece of land granted to it.

The UA is a traditional urban university and I think that is reflected in the problems we have had over the years.

It is convenient to be critical of the university and how it's managed its development, but this all needs to be put into context. This is a community which has grown very rapidly in the last 40 years and only recently has the community engaged in thoughtful development.

The UA was in the same situation as the campus exploded with growth and began to throw up buildings during the 50s, 60s and 70s just to meet the demand. It wasn't until about 1985 that we said we need to study both the quality of the education and the quality of the campus environment.

WC : Wasn't that rather late to begin serious campus planning?

BW: Well, maybe it was, but I do not think its dissimilar to what happened throughout the West where we had lots of land and lots of growth and because of the growth we had more money coming into the system. And then the university faced limited resources, found itself surrounded by property and we had to face a different kind of growth, and I think we did it pretty thoughtfully. The UA was the first governmental entity to develop a comprehensive plan (in 1988) and we do not operate in isolation. We must work with the City of Tucson, school districts and the neighborhood associations.

(In October the UA presented a joint planning agreement to its neighbors to the south. If approved, it would return 36 acres to the neighborhood. In exchange, the neighborhood associations would modify their boundaries to coincide with the university's plan.)

WC: What did you give up by relinquishing the 36 acres?

BW: We had assigned uses for that land. By withdrawing those boundaries we have had to shift our facilities development. Prior to initiating the agreement, we reviewed our planning and found that we could concentrate the building of academic buildings on the north of Sixth Street and build student recreational fields on the south side adjacent to the neighborhoods. There is a real desire to be creative and innovative with this and a couple of things have happened which have alleviated some of the university's pressure regarding expansion. That includes capping UA enrollment and building the new campus. But, the UA is still short about 1.5 million square feet of office, classroom and research space. Acquiring the Science and Technology Park also opened up possibilities for the UA regarding potential research possibilities.

WC: Is there land, then, on the north side of Sixth Street that the UA will be buying?

BW: We still need to purchase six parcels of land, all between Park Avenue and Highland Street. This includes four businesses. A second environment and natural resources building will be built along with a parking structure on that land.

WC: For the businesses that are there now, what type of agreement would they have for a future site in the area?

BW: The university would probably not build a new commercial development. We would maintain ownership of the land and most likely have a private developer build a new commercial area. It would either be on the bottom floor of a UA building or it would be a new area. We would lease the land to a property management firm.

WC: Would this bring you back to that argument that the UA is competing with private businesses?

BW: All we would be doing is leasing the space. We would obviously derive lease revenue, but it is not our intention to get into the commercial development business. But, we want to retain ownership of the land and ensure that quality businesses go in there, that they are not failing businesses and they are suitable for the campus community. I think that is our responsibility to the students, faculty and state to use land resources wisely and have reputable businesses in the area.

WC: Hasn't it been difficult for the businesses around the campus, especially Sixth Street merchants, to make plans when the UA itself has been undecided?

BW: Absolutely, as a result of both decisions made by the UA and the city over the last 30 years, we have made it very difficult to do business along Sixth Street because nobody knew what we were going to do. Hopefully, the joint planning agreement will allow us to decide where we're going and will give the businesses an opportunity to decide whether they want to be a part of it.

WC: Who are the winners and losers in this situation?

BW: Potentially everyone can be a winner if we do it right. We get better neighborhoods and a stronger commercial area, which makes the UA a beneficiary as well. We will all be losers if we continue to be antagonist and adversaries rather than partners. There is no reason why you cannot have really nice neighborhoods and a good commercial area surrounding a university. That is the goal here. There will be some individual losers, some homeowners and businesses will be displaced, but as a whole the goal is to make everyone a winner.