The architects have completed the blueprints; the owners/developers Barry Swenson and Jim Fox are now buying the land adjacent to the Jose Theatre necessary for their planned apartment/retail project; the application for a permit to demolish the Jose Theatre (saving only the lobby and facade) has triggered the notice of preparation of a supplemental Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and the owners hope to put shovel to ground by March.
The Redevelopment Agency's (RDA) proposal for a 107 unit apartment /retail complex to be built on the site of the Jose Theatre now meets the definition of a "project" since the owners have applied for a Historic Preservation permit to almost completely raze this City of San Jose Historic Landmark building. The proposal that was not a "project" received budget approval last June based on business terms agreed on between the owners and Agency Director Frank Taylor after six months of private negations. The Agency and the City Council (which sits as the RDA Board) acted in secret after the decision was reached not to pursue the planned restoration of the Jose, for no effort was made to inform either the public or the Historic Landmarks Commission of this arbitrary decision involving a historic resource that affects the whole community. Frank Taylor defends this disregard for the public's right to know by stating that anyone can go to a RDA/City Council meeting. Apparently, reporters didn't attend these meetings either, for the press was just as surprised as the public to learn the fate of the Jose Theatre when the RDA budget was unveiled to the public. Again, there was no public discussion beforehand about what the priorities should be for restoring funds to RDA projects.
There are many historic preservation policies contained in the city's "Plan for the Past," "Downtown Strategy Plan 2010," and the "General Plan 2020." All speak eloquently about the value of historic preservation to the city of San Jose and are supposed to protect designated landmarks. But these policies do not preclude the demolition of the structure. According to the "Final EIR Report on the Downtown Strategy Plan" (Nov. 1992)
"What they do is to preclude arbitrary demolition of the structures; guarantee that interested members of the community are allowed input into the decisions affecting the historic resource; and require that all feasible alternatives are considered."
We have already seen an arbitrary decision made concerning the disposition of the Jose Theatre. The general public would probably be interested to know that one of the "General Plan" historic policies states that because "significant sites, structures and districts are irreplaceable resources, their preservation should be a key consideration in the development review process." Is there any way the public can be included in this review process? A first step would be to require the RDA/City Council to inform the public within a certain amount of time, such as six months, about a proposal to demolish or significantly alter a historic landmark before it can be included in a budget proposal, so that there will be time for adequate public discussion and review by community members and the fourth estate.
What about the "guarantee that interested members of the community are allowed input into decisions affecting the historic resource?" If the only solicited input is public comment after an EIR, there is the risk of "too little, too late" if the City Council invokes "Overriding Considerations." And have all feasible alternatives been considered for the restoration of the Jose Theatre? Were interested community groups invited to explore viable alternative uses for the theatre? The RDA turned down an alternative project that had downtown community backing to build a "Mercado," or multi use retail and cultural complex including a Rigo Chacon restaurant, Al Rodriguez broadcast facility, a bookstore, coffee shop, etc. and would have included a restored Jose Theatre. The public would be interested to know that the "Downtown Strategy Plan" also states that "whenever possible, individual structures should be preserved and integrated into future development."
Finally, in the city's "Downtown Strategy Plan" this block is earmarked for retail use, not housing. Clusters of housing have been planned at other locations and this site is not critical to the success of the housing plan. A private apartment building will serve a very few at the expense of the nearly million residents of the city of San Jose and future generations who will lose access to the public space of this cultural marker of San Jose's history.
Modified 2/97