Jose Theatre EIR Answered

by Tom Simon

Our efforts to save the Jose Theatre have increased within the last few months. The Redevelopment Agency (RDA) has released the Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR), which is required by state law to assess the environmental effects from such a project. Impacts on historic resources are required to be explored in an EIR. As we expected the EIR found significant and unavoidable historic impacts from the project that RDA is proposing. In addition to the immediate harm from the loss of a city landmark, the EIR found that this project could lead to weakening or total loss of the Downtown Commercial National Register Historic District. The EIR points out that once that happens, with loss of tax credits and project design review, the entire historic downtown could face demise.

PACSJ provided comments prior to the preparation of the EIR, and submitted comments on the EIR once it was released. We hired two consultants who are experts in historic rehabilitation and reuse projects. Charles Loveman, Bruce Judd and local preservationist Gerry Grudzen prepared historic evaluations, alternative project plans and financial information we thought was missing from the RDA's EIR. We did this because the EIR is supposed to look at feasible alternatives to give elected officials an understanding of the choices available to them when they approve or deny a project. In fact the RDA board, which is the city council, is required to approve only projects which have no significant environmental impacts, or they must find that there are justifiable reasons for the approved project's impacts.

The State Office of Historic Preservation (SHPO) also submitted comments on the EIR which focused on many of the same issues we identified with the project. Of these, the alternatives analysis was foremost.

We believe that the Jose Theater can be saved along with the Hong Kong market, and the proposed housing can be restructured so that it has more affordable units and is somewhat smaller. This enables the use of affordable housing credits and historic tax credits. This is money that the RDA has not even explored using. The existing developer subsidy can go toward rehabilitation of the historic buildings. In this way the city can bring in more money to help complete the project, create a viable housing project, restore historic buildings and eliminate the blight in the project area. This meets all the project goals and should be the preferred project.

The Planning Commission is slated to review the project on June 11. Call Planning at 277-4576 to confirm that the hearing will take place as planned.

Conflict With Previously Adopted Mitigation Measures
The original EIR for the Downtown Strategy Plan states that: "The most critical protections for designated landmarks and other officially recognized historical resources are the mitigation measures and procedures incorporated into the project ... 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."

The city is violating these adopted mitigations in the Downtown Strategy Plan Environmental Impact Report, which require that for historic structures "preservation should be a key consideration in the development review process." The city is bound by the 1992 EIR to "foster the rehabilitation of individual buildings and districts of historic significance," especially when it will "preserve the historic fabric of the area."

Blight
One of our most serious concerns is based on how badly planned and designed contemporary construction can become blighted in a short period of time. Nearby on South First Street it is possible to see the effect of "instant blight" at the "Dimensions Nightclub" building, created by inappropriate modern construction. Actually this project is trying to remedy blight that has been significantly aggravated by inappropriate modern development. Yet it is the historic structures that have retained their integrity and offer the greatest contribution to overcoming this blight. It is hard to understand how a project which will permanently remove historic structures and add inappropriate elements in a historic district can provide a long term solution to blight. Most cities across the country have found that preservation and rehabilitation of historic structures is the single best long term means to solve blight. This premise is supported by Cherilyn Widell's letter of January 16th which states, "While the State Office of Historic Preservation applauds the Redevelopment Agency's initiatives to revitalize the downtown through residential and mixed commercial development, such projects have been most successful in cities that have incorporated their historic patrimony into their revitalization planning. Historic properties provide character, continuity and sense of place. We would strongly urge the Agency to reconsider demolition as a preferable alternative."

Public controversy
It is worth noting that this project is controversial. We have collected nearly 700 signatures urging the agency to reconsider its plans and save the Jose Theatre. We are submitting copies of signatures we have gathered. Almost universally San Jose natives who learn of the proposed demolition have fond memories of attending movies at this theater and are upset that this part of their past will be destroyed.

Missing Elements Required in Project EIR Analysis
  • The EIR process for this project has not adequately addressed the following:
  • consultation with theater preservation architects to further and fully assess historic value of the structure,
  • evaluation of projects in other cities where theaters have been preserved,
  • analysis of the need for theater space in downtown, and whether demolition will require additional future construction of replacement facilities,
  • proactive consultation with SHPO on the possible loss of district status,
  • proactive consultation with National Trust/National Register on the effect of the project,
  • use of the State Historic Building Code to produce the preservation alternative cost basis,
  • the impact on the entire landscape within the redevelopment agency sphere of influence due to potential loss of design review with a diminished or absent National Register Historic District.

Modified 5/97