SAN JOSE — A plan to revamp St. James Park in downtown San Jose, a revitalization that would include a pavilion and an array of lively activities, is up in the air after a state court’s ruling.
The state Court of Appeal has ruled in favor of a historic foundation representing the interests of the Sainte Claire Club, located next to the park. The social club was alarmed about the prospect of live events at a pavilion that would be built as part of the revamp plan.
“We are very grateful for the Court of Appeal’s comprehensive review of our appeal,” said Stephen Walwyn, president of the foundation linked to the social club. “We fully support the revitalization of St. James Park, if the project conforms to the historic requirements and values of the district.”
In October 2020, the City Planning Department approved a municipal Parks Department request for a historic preservation permit to enable the project to proceed.
San Jose officials stated a revamp of the park would improve the neighborhood as well as upgrade the park, which has become somewhat blighted over the years. The park is at the corner of East St. James Street and North Second Street.
The Sainte Claire Historic Preservation Foundation linked to the social club objected, however, and filed a lawsuit to block the redevelopment and revitalization effort.
“The project proposes a problematic performing arts and music pavilion that would accommodate up to 300 events a year for up to 5,000 attendees,” the social club foundation stated in its lawsuit, which the group filed in November 2020.
The foundation representing the interests of the social club claimed city officials failed to properly assess the impact the project would have on historic structures in the area.
City officials responded in the original legal proceeding in Santa Clara County Superior Court that the municipality had followed proper procedures. The city also stated that the foundation linked to the social club had not specified the state environmental rules allegedly not followed by the city.
“The environmental impact report for the project sufficiently studied relevant issues and adequately responded to comments regarding the alleged issues of the project’s consistency with land-use plans, policies and regulations; parking in the project’s area; and potential phasing of the project,” city officials wrote in a January 2022 response to the original lawsuit.
City officials also stated they were well aware of the neighborhood’s historic nature and the potential impact posed by the revitalized and reinvigorated park.
“The proposal maintains and enhances the unique historic aspects of the park and re-organizes the now largely undefined central open space into outdoor rooms with distinct character, including the Levitt Pavilion,” CMG, a landscape and architectural firm that designed the park revamp, stated in a post on a city webpage.
In April 2022, Santa Clara County Superior Court Judge Patricia Lucas ruled in favor of the city, and cleared the way for the project to proceed.
In May 2022, the foundation representing The Sainte Claire Club filed an appeal with the state Court of Appeal.
On March 12, the state court reversed the county court’s decision, specifically stating that San Jose improperly followed city ordinances and rules.
“The city abused its discretion, largely by failing to proceed in the manner required by law,” a three-judge panel of the state Court of Appeals stated in the ruling, in part.
It’s possible that the city could appeal the ruling to the California Supreme Court.
“While losing in court is a hard pill to swallow, the city should take a fresh look at the park and the proposed project,” said Bob Staedler, principal executive with Silicon Valley Synergy, a land-use consultancy. “The project’s price tag was enormous and not feasible to build anytime soon.”
The Court of Appeal remanded the case back to the county court and the city, stating that the municipality should conduct a new city review process.
“The trial court upheld the City Council’s decision on the historical preservation permit but the appellate court reversed the trial court decision on that issue,” San Jose City Attorney Nora Frimann stated in an email comment she sent to this news organization.
The state court’s ruling leaves the revamp plans up in the air with an uncertain timeline for the project.
“Meeting with the social club and the neighborhood would be a good first step,” Staedler said. “Also, why spend huge dollars on the park when the city refuses to address the derelict First Church of Christ Scientist blighted property?” he added, referring to a historic church that stands in blighted condition next to St. James Park.
The revitalized St. James Park — if the project ever occurs — could evolve into a vital cog for downtown San Jose, which is battling to regain its economic footing in the wake of the coronavirus.
“The project re-brands St. James Park and creates an open space that becomes the center point and valued living room in this multicultural community within the constellation of city districts from SOFA to San Pedro Square,” CMG stated in the city website post.
