What was intended as a gift aimed at attracting positive attention and creating an iconic downtown destination in the nation’s tenth largest city has become a point of division and contention for some vocal residents of San Jose.
Despite backlash from dozens of residents and environmental advocates, San Jose leaders have decided to move forward with plans for a new downtown landmark that they hope significantly enhances the area for Silicon Valley residents and visitors.
The proposed structure, known as “Breeze of Innovation,” was selected in March as the top choice among three finalists by the 14-member jury assembled by Urban Confluence Silicon Valley, the nonprofit group created to spearhead the effort. In all, a total of 963 proposals were submitted from 72 countries around the world.
Designed by Fernando Jerez and Belén Pérez de Juan of SMAR Architecture Studio, the 200-foot-tall proposed structure, which will be located at the southern end of Guadalupe River Park, consists of 500 steel rods that will sway gently in the wind and generating power to illuminate it at night. The public art display will feature multiple levels of walkways, a cafe, an exhibit space and a viewing platform that should offer expansive views of the valley.
SMAR Architecture Studio wrote that its design aims to create a landmark that promotes the harvesting of clean energy, “in order to trigger, to change perception, to question reality… to inspire.”
The structure will be gifted to the city by the San Jose Light Tower Corporation, an organization that began an effort nearly five years ago to build an artistically inspired iconic landmark meant to pay tribute to San Jose’s former lighthouse, which stood downtown from 1881 to 1915. With the city council’s unanimous approval, the corporation will begin a fundraising effort to cover the cost to build and maintain the structure — a price tag estimated at up to $150 million.
The project must still return to the city council several more times before any shovels are in the dirt. And, city leaders need to sign off on the project fundraising plan, a gift acceptance agreement that will outline the expectations of the San Jose Light Tower Corporation, approval of the project’s final design, an environmental impact report and a business and maintenance management plan.
Opponents of the proposed landmark wrote and called into Tuesday night’s city council meeting to urge city leaders to reject the planned design, calling it an “ecological disaster,” “despicable gift,” “harmful source of light pollution,” and “waste of philanthropic dollars.” They argued that the nighttime illumination would cause light pollution that would not only be harmful to the local wildlife but community members living nearby as well.
Dashiell Leeds of the Sierra Club Loma Prieta Chapter said if built, the structure would “become a symbol of environmental destruction.”
“By building a structure that emits light at night against the wishes of the community and scientific experts in one of the most ecologically sensitive areas of the city, I can’t help but wonder what message this will send,” he said.
Although construction of the project will be funded by private donors, the effort has — and will continue to — require some public funds. To date, the city has spent an estimated $43,000 on the project and city staff estimate an additional cost of up to $150,000 in staff time will be required next year, according to the city figures.
Pamela Campos, a lifelong resident of San Jose, argued that philanthropic dollars could be better used, especially as residents attempt to recover from the devastating COVID-19 pandemic.
“I recognize that the city of San Jose has a long history of appeasing the interests of the wealthy and it’s the people of color who are oppressed, particularly in East San Jose,” she said. “We have a dire need to invest in that community for the future economic disparity of our citizens.”
Still, the city council emphasized that the proposed piece of public art was a gift and that the environmental concerns would be addressed in an upcoming environmental impact report, which will be overseen by city staff.
Mayor Sam Liccardo said the landmark “is something that will add significantly to our skyline” and “create a statement” that the city has been looking for. Councilmember Dev Davis called it an “iconic structure” that would bring “positive attention” to the city. They both argued that moving the project forward and fully vetting the environmental concerns would allow the city to provide for a better decision in the end.
“We’re going to learn about impacts and I think through that process we’ll learn how some of those effects can be mitigated,” he said during the meeting. “I’ll certainly follow the science, but it’s important for us to ask the questions so we can get to that point.”
Resident Arthur Weissbrodt agreed with the city council, calling the structure a “wonderful gift” and a “beautiful design.”
“We have this wonderful project offered to the city with no taxpayer expense and so I think the only right thing to do is accept it and enjoy it for many generations to come,” Weissbrodt said.