---

he University of Arizona’s recent unveiling of its science center-as-a-bridge concept signals a new phase to Rio Nuevo. The UA has added the third dimension to the two-dimensional site plan that we’ve seen to this point. We have an actual proposal for one of the new attractions, and it’s not just a big box by the freeway or the river. It promises to be the Downtown gateway that has been talked about for years, a dramatic architectural statement, and a significant attraction to establish Downtown Tucson as a destination for local and out-of-town visitors.

You’ve got to give the UA credit for the ambitiousness of this proposal. Being the first major new project out of the blocks presents the UA with unique challenges that subsequent projects won’t face. That is why revitalization is not easy, because no one wants to be the first to risk capital. The UA assumes financial and conceptual risks that will have diminished for the future projects that will build on the success of the science center and other attractions. Once Rio Nuevo has established a track record of success, say in 6-8 years, there may be a stampede of worthy and not-so-worthy projects that ask for a piece of the tax-increment-financing pie. Future projects will build on the success of the pioneers. The UA is to be commended for stepping up as one of the first pioneers.

At this point, the connections between the west side and the east side of the project area are just lines on a map. How will visitors to the regional visitor center on the west side be drawn to the science center on the east side? No problem; build your own bridge connection and make it part of the attraction. Don’t just build a bridge; BE the bridge.

As of now, the view from Interstate 10 of the Rio Nuevo project area consists of parking lots and vacant land. Much of the public may believe that a science center is a stuffy place with static exhibits, a place they will want to visit once to show out-of-town guests, if that. If you’re the UA and you anticipate building the first attraction (perhaps still surrounded at the beginning by vacant land), and you know that much of the public is not now stampeding up to Phoenix to see its science center, how do you draw attention to yourself? No problem; build a spectacular bridge over not only the freeway, but the Santa Cruz River, and make the dome of the “Unispherium” a prominent landmark at the midway point. Create an architectural flourish to get everyone’s attention. Once they’ve stopped by, impress them with the substance of the center, and get them hooked with a dynamic, eclectic experience that will make learning about science fun. Entertain while you enlighten visitors. Personally, I’m looking forward to an IMAX-type movie experience in Tucson. Who needs Tempe’s Arizona Mills anymore?

There has been much rhapsodizing about what Rio Nuevo means to the community. Rio Nuevo needs to be of, for, embedded in, embraced by, and representative of, Tucson. It needs to express what Tucson is, where it’s come from and where it is going. We have set a high standard for Rio Nuevo projects. They need to not only be appealing as attractions, but they need to embody the essence of the Old Pueblo. The UA Science Center, as presently conceived, meets or exceeds all those criteria. Tucson is a world-class center of astronomy, optics, and other scientific endeavors. The science center will be a world-class showcase of those strengths. Tucson is located in a unique natural desert setting. The science center, especially with the Arizona-Sonora Desert Museum as a partner, will interpret this environment. Tucsonans have developed unique technologies that are responsive to that environment, and the science center will provide an opportunity to show those off to a wider audience as well.

There have also been concerns that “outsiders” will come in with grandiose ideas for “what’s best” for Tucson, without appreciating the intrinsic qualities of this city, and the result will be attractions that “don’t fit” Tucson. There was much criticism of the aquarium concept, based on this notion. But this project is being spearheaded by the University of Arizona, which has been based in Tucson since 1885, when Tucsonans were disappointed about losing out on the new insane asylum project that was awarded to Phoenix. The science center is clearly a Tucson project, of, by and embedded in, Tucson. The UA has the will, the technical expertise, and the local credentials. If the UA can’t pull this off here, who can?

Project director Alexis Faust and her team have already done an admirable job of reaching out to the Downtown neighborhoods to assure them of their genuine desire to be a good neighbor. They have also assured us in the core that they aim to develop an attraction that won’t shut down at 5:00. It will be active and well-used evenings, weekends, and holidays, almost 365 days per year.

This summer, an economic feasibility study will be complete, and in the following months, the Rio Nuevo Citizens Advisory Committee, Rio Nuevo District Board and the Tucson City Council will have to decide if the $20 million that the UA is asking for is a worthy expenditure of a rather large percentage of the $120 million on public money that is expected to be available over the next ten years. From my perspective, one or two projects done in a world-class manner will be far more impactful than several small projects that divvy up the pie but fail to generate any critical mass of visitors or interest. It also makes sense to invest more in an initial project than later ones, for two reasons. One is to provide incentive to take the risk; the other reason is that is critical that the early projects be successful, and to be successful they need to be well-capitalized. The success of the early projects reduces the risk for the later ones, which justifies a smaller subsidy for them.

Assuming that the feasibility study brings good news, let’s give everything we’ve got to make this project successful, while we continue to support the Fox Theatre, Rialto Theatre, and the other pioneers.

Donovan Durband
Executive Director, Tucson Downtown Alliance
President, It’s Happening Downtown, Inc.

To The Editor:

To the Editor—

In your article about the Mystic Moon, “Shut Door, Open Window,” you make a comment “God bless those pagans” with reference to the Rainbow Planet Coffee House. While I appreciate the free publicity, we are not a pagan establishment. We have a diverse clientele. But we are not oriented to pagans nor does our establishment have anything to do with paganism or religion itself. We serve coffee, coffee drinks, tea, soup, sandwiches, snacks and desserts, unaccompanied by any ideology of any kind. And we offer a comfortable and relaxing place for people to gather and enjoy themselves.

Bob Bowers
Owner
Rainbow Planet Coffee House

Editor’s note: Please read this month’s column of Major Carter’s Harley for a follow up. Thank you and we encourage and welcome responses from the community at any time. Please write to info@downtowntucson.org.

---

---

Guest Opinion

---

he community of artists currently working in the Warehouse District appear to be at a crossroads of what should be done with Toole Avenue and the surrounding arts district. Artists have met with City officials and their consultants, with much fiery and sometimes hysterical debate. Artists currently there are afraid of losing their low rents to a high-rent gallery district that might follow if commercialism is the plan. There seems to be much resistance to going more commercial. The City wants the area to be part of the Downtown revitalization plan.

An arts district needs to have low-rent space available for artists coming out of art school who need a place to work at perfecting their craft until they can make money at selling their art. A high-functioning arts district also needs art schools, places for workshops and exhibits, eateries, galleries and studios willing to be open to the buying public, just like retail stores. A typical artist might go to art school, spend five to ten years learning to perfect his or her art and not make much money along the way. This is why low rent is so important. Many artists have left the city in search of affordable shop space on their own property due to the difficult permit process within the City of Tucson.

I operated a studio at 15 E. Toole for many years. My father, Buck McCain, was there before me, and for a while we shared the studio. We produced large-scale sculptures and paintings. After he left, I opened the doors daily, and fixed up the front of the warehouse with a gallery open for business while I worked there every day. It was extremely difficult to try to run a business a few doors down from the homeless feeding station (since closed), trying to deal with the parking problem, and being unable to secure a lease. Zee and I were the only ones on the street open for business on a daily basis. When the gallery that represented my art on the east side of town gave me an ultimatum—close my gallery, or lose their representation—I chose to move my studio home and let the galleries run my business.

Before I moved out of the Downtown area I tried to find a building on the same street with parking. I wanted to open my space down the street and continue business in a much better fashion. I was appalled when I found out that non-profit organizations were able to not only obtain leases when I was not, but that their rents were at a reduced rate.

The warehouses were acquired by the Arizona Department of Transportation for the purpose of extending the Barraza-Aviation Parkway to the interstate. They are in the process of being handed over to the City of Tucson, which has taken over that project. All these years we have been able to have really low rents, without leases but still responsible for the maintenance of the buildings. The low rents were deceiving, though, because the money that has been poured into the buildings to bring the electrical up to code, put in heat, cooling, replace windows knocked out by vagrants, repair leaking roofs, etc., has brought the effective rent right back up to what seems to be close to what the City now wants to charge. The fact that I could not secure a lease made it impossible to sink real money into that building to build a business. Now the City wants the artists to sign leases at a higher rent. I am all for having leases, but the timing of the rent increases is bad with tourism at an all-time low, and the overall economy doing poorly. This could be devastating. Quite a few art galleries in Tucson have gone out of business since September 11. The sale of art relies heavily on the tourism market. A lot of the artists who are making money have long since moved out of Downtown or were never there to begin with.

In many cities that are destination points, art is the natural draw. Look at Sante Fe, Laguna, and Carmel. They all started with artists. Unfortunately, those cities are now very commercial, and the artists can no longer afford to live there. This is what the artists in Downtown Tucson are afraid of. The City wishes to have a natural draw for tourists and locals, created by artists—an exciting arts district to help revitalize Downtown. The dilemma is in developing the arts district as an economic engine, without driving away the artists themselves. Since we live in a capitalistic society, and rents are determined by how popular a location might become, the question is can you control rents in a district where business is conducted next to spaces where art is created by young artists (without an emphasis on sales) and low rent is needed? For the artists who wish to make money to be successful in doing so, it is imperative that they form a cluster, to be located together where capitalism is accepted as the goal, not undermined by other agendas. Toole Avenue could become such a cluster if the City and the artists are serious about making it successful.

In order for Toole Avenue to remain an arts district and allow artists to make money there, the City and the artists should emulate what other areas that draw art-buyers do. All of the art studios and galleries on the street should be open for business during regular business hours; the properties should be fixed up and maintained; and parking that is convenient for potential customers should be made available. Non-contributing uses such as social service agencies and other non-profits that are not arts-related should be relocated. If the idea is to lure people to Downtown and promote real revitalization, we need to recognize that the presence of social service agencies accomplishes just the opposite. By their nature, such facilities are not interested in luring customers; they provide service to people in need—a worthy activity, but one that could be pursued on another street. It is difficult to pay rent by selling a product when your next-door neighbor does not have the same goal.

Revitalization will not happen with a few businesses or galleries sprinkled here and there. The few warehouses that have parking should be rented to artists that will open galleries and bring the people Downtown. The foundry that creates the bronzes could be relocated. The one in Santa Fe is a huge tourist draw, with a large sculpture garden and a national reputation. Art schools should be recruited to relocate into the district.

If luring people Downtown and being part of the revitalization is not a goal of the Downtown arts community, then we can continue as we’ve been, with much of the Warehouse District remaining closed to the public most of the time, with artists working in their spaces and very little public activity, other than a few tours and exhibits now and then. But if we do want an arts district that contributes to the economic revitalization of the area, we need to act accordingly. Artists who create art but choose not to be open for business should be provided affordable space in the district, but not on the street where we are trying to lure buyers of art.

—Jessica McCain