Cities Index.
Exhibit B

San Jose City Council
September 16, 2025

Document
Exhibit B
Meeting
September 16, 2025
Body
San Jose City Council
Original file
21.5 MB
Text extracted from the city's file for reading and search. Open the original on legistar.granicus.com. That file is the official record.

[External Email. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.] This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

Outlook
RE: Notification for Buena Vista Neighborhood Association - H24-046 [1301 West San Carlos Street] From Lee, Jason <[email protected]>
Date Fri 2024-10-04 17:37
To 'BVNA Website'
Hello,

This is received, thank you. Obviously, Planning is in communication with the applicant on this, as are some other organizations. I believe they will be reaching out to you through this e-mail as well, if they have not already.

Thanks,
Jason

---
Jason Lee, Planner II
[email protected] | 408.535.3887

City of San José
Planning, Building, & Code Enforcement
200 E. Santa Clara Street, 3F Tower
San José, California 95113-1905
www.sanjoseca.gov/planning

From: BVNA Website
Sent: Tuesday, October 1, 2024 19:36
To: Lee, Jason <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Notification for Buena Vista Neighborhood Association - H24-046 [1301 West San Carlos Street]

Please see attached, the BVNA is formally opposing this project

On Sep 19, 2024, at 4:54 PM, Lee, Jason <[email protected]> wrote:

6/4/25, 12:24 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 1/2

Dear Buena Vista Neighborhood Association,

A Development Permit application (File No. H24-046) was submitted to the City of San José’s Planning Division on August 9, 2024 for 1301 West San Carlos Street for the demolition of a commercial building and the removal of twenty trees for the construction of a one-story quick- service restaurant (Chick-fil-A) with no drive-through. I am the Planning Project Manager reviewing this application. For additional project information, please e-mail me or visit SJPermits.

You are receiving this e-mail as the designated contact for the Buena Vista Neighborhood Association. The purpose of this e-mail is to inform your association about development proposals early in the Planning application review process. You may receive future e-mails regarding this project’s public meetings.

If you would like to update the designated contact(s) for the association(s), please e- mail GeneralPlanStaff@sanjoseca.gov.

Please let me know if you have any questions.

Thank you,
Jason

---
Jason Lee, Planner II
[email protected] | 408.535.3887

City of San José
Planning, Building, & Code Enforcement
200 E. Santa Clara Street, 3F Tower
San José, California 95113-1905
www.sanjoseca.gov/planning

6/4/25, 12:24 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 2/2

www.bvnasj.org

October 1, 24

BVNA, a Member of UNSCC

www.BVNASJ.org

To the San José Planning, Building and Code Enforcement Department,

The Buena Vista Neighborhood Association is writing to formally express our strong opposition to the Site Development Permit application File No. H24 -046, submitted by 4G Development. This project proposes the demolition of an existing commercial building and the removal of 20 ordinance-size trees to make way for a new Chick-fil-A restaurant at 1301 West San Carlos Street.

Our opposition is based on the project's inconsistency with established city plans, its detrimental impact on the character of the West San Carlos Urban Village, and the significant environmental concerns it raises.

Inconsistency with City Plans:
• The project directly contradicts the West San Carlos Urban Village Plan's vision for a pedestrian-oriented, mixed-use environment. The plan explicitly prohibits new drive- through uses, prioritizing pedestrian activity and transit -oriented development. This project, while lacking a drive-through, embodies the kind of car-centric approach that the Urban Village Plan and the city seeks to discourage. This project is mere blocks from VTA light rail, across the street from mass transit, adjacent 2 high density housing projects abutting a residential neighborhood, and a short distance from the train station ; there is absolutely no need to create such car -centric development especially when the City has formally removed parking requirements in attempts to get residents out of cars. • The demolition of the existing commercial building runs counter to the Urban Village Plan's emphasis on preserving existing structures and the unique character of West San Carlos Street. While it’s not clear which buildings are intended to be demolished but the plan encourages adaptive reuse and integration of existing buildings, recognizing their contribution to the area's identity.
• The removal of 20 ordinance -sized trees is unacceptable. The Urban Village Plan stresses the importance of a robust tree canopy and green spaces to create a more livable and sustainable urban environment. Replacing mature trees with saplings does not constitute adequate mitigation for this loss.

Detrimental Impact on the Urban Village:
• The proposed Chick -fil-A, even without a drive -through, will inevitably generate increased traffic and congestion, further undermining the pedestrian -friendly environment envisioned by the Urban Village Plan. The restaurant's popularity and lack of drive-through will likely lead to increased pedestrian and vehicle conflicts especially considering the expansive parking-lot.

www.bvnasj.org
• The project sets a concerning precedent for future development in the area, potentially opening the door for similar car-centric projects that detract from the Urban Village's vision. Approving this project could undermine the City's efforts to create a truly walkable and transit-oriented corridor. Environmental Concerns: • The removal of mature trees represents a significant environmental loss, diminishing the area's tree canopy and negatively impacting air quality, temperature regulation, and wildlife habitat. • The project's overall environmental impact needs thorough assessment, considering factors like increased traffic, noise pollution, and stormwater runoff. Alternatives: • We urge the City to prioritize projects that align with the West San Carlos Urban Village Plan's vision, focusing on pedestrian-oriented, mixed-use development that enhances the existing character of the area. • I encourage the developer to reconsider the project, exploring alternatives that preserve the existing buildings and prioritize the retention of mature trees. Increasing housing inventory is crucial to creating a vibrant and successful mixed-use environment along the West San Carlos corridor in San Jose, as envisioned by the West San Carlos Urban Village Plan. The plan prioritizes a shift away from car-centric development towards a pedestrian-oriented, mixed-use community where residents can meet their daily needs within walking or biking distance. Higher-density residential development is essential to support the existing commercial businesses and attract new ones, creating a thriving and walkable urban village. The success of this vision hinges on providing a diverse range of housing options to accommodate a range of incomes and household sizes, fostering a lively and inclusive community. None of this exists in the proposal. The proposed Chick-fil-A project represents a missed opportunity to contribute positively to the West San Carlos Urban Village. I urge the Planning Department to deny the Site Development Permit application for File No. H24-046 and instead champion projects that align with the community's vision for a vibrant, sustainable, and pedestrian-friendly urban environment. Sincerely, Mark B. Mark B. BVNA President [External Email. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.] Outlook
RE: Notification for Buena Vista Neighborhood Association - H24-046 [1301 West San Carlos Street] From Lee, Jason <[email protected]>
Date Mon 2024-10-21 10:20
To 'Loui Tucker'
Yes, I did give them Shasta-Hanchett Park’s contact information as well.

Thanks,
Jason

---
Jason Lee, Planner II
[email protected] | 408.535.3887

City of San José
Planning, Building, & Code Enforcement
200 E. Santa Clara Street, 3F Tower
San José, California 95113-1905
www.sanjoseca.gov/planning

From: Loui Tucker
Sent: Monday, October 21, 2024 10:16
To: Lee, Jason <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Notification for Buena Vista Neighborhood Association - H24-046 [1301 West San Carlos Street]

They should definitely reach out to ALL the local neighborhood associations.... SHPNA as well as BVNA.

Loui
From: Lee, Jason <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 21, 2024 9:51:46 AM
To: Loui Tucker
Subject: RE: Notification for Buena Vista Neighborhood Association - H24-046 [1301 West San Carlos Street]

Hi Loui,

No formal updates or resubmittal at this time. I’ve had a couple meetings with them and they’ve talked to people throughout the City in advance of a second submission, but nothing formal yet. I believe Chick-fil-A said they were going to reach out to your neighborhood association as well; let me know if that happened, and if not, I can let them know to do that as well if you all are interested.

6/4/25, 12:24 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 1/4

[External Email. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.] Thanks,
Jason

---
Jason Lee, Planner II
[email protected] | 408.535.3887

City of San José
Planning, Building, & Code Enforcement
200 E. Santa Clara Street, 3F Tower
San José, California 95113-1905
www.sanjoseca.gov/planning

From: Loui Tucker
Sent: Sunday, October 20, 2024 19:19
To: Lee, Jason <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Notification for Buena Vista Neighborhood Association - H24-046 [1301 West San Carlos Street]

You don't often get email from Learn why this is important Is there an update on this property and the proposed restaurant, removal of trees and adjacent businesses? Loui Tucker
On 9/23/2024 2:03 PM, Lee, Jason wrote:

Hi Loui,

Thanks for your e-mail. I am putting you on the Interested Parties list. At this point, I don’t expect that a community meeting would be required for this project; however, comments can be submitted to me at any point.

Regarding your concerns, I’ve asked for more information to be provided regarding the removal of all ordinance-size trees. The project site does allow a zero-foot interior setback, so the trees on the west side could conflict with construction, although staff needs more information to show that; the existing parking lot trees would be removed for recirculation of the site and be replaced with new parking lot trees. I’ve relayed the concerns about the demolition of the existing building and displacement of local businesses to the applicant, as well as the general proposal.

The City can only review projects when, where, and how they are submitted; the Urban Village character area for this area is a commercial-first policy which allows housing, so this type of use is generally allowed and residential uses are not required; however, the objection is noted and I am passing it on. I am also attaching the comment letter sent back to the applicant on this project.

Please let me know if you have any further comments or questions.

Thanks,
Jason

6/4/25, 12:24 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 2/4

[External Email. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.] ---
Jason Lee, Planner II
[email protected] | 408.535.3887

City of San José
Planning, Building, & Code Enforcement
200 E. Santa Clara Street, 3F Tower
San José, California 95113-1905
www.sanjoseca.gov/planning

From: Loui Tucker
Sent: Sunday, September 22, 2024 15:01
To: Lee, Jason <[email protected]>
Subject: Notification for Buena Vista Neighborhood Association - H24-046 [1301 West San Carlos Street]

You don't often get email from Learn why this is important Your notice about this came through the BVNA email list. I live about a block away from this site and am VERY concerned about the proposed development. I would like to be notified of any public meetings that are scheduled so I can attend and/or submit in writing my concerns. Please put me on any email list for updates.

1. Taking out 20 trees is crazy when we need MORE trees, not fewer. The olive trees on the street have been poorly managed but they are not in the way of development, nor are the trees on the west side which have been there for decades and are NOT in the way of any new proposed building.

2. I also don't understand why the commercial building next door (which houses a popular local restaurant) has to be demolished . Surely the Chick-Fil-A can use the same area that the old Burger King did. Why tear down those buildings to the north? There is already sufficient parking for any proposed restaurant.

3. In addition, this is on West San Jose Urban Villages plan, and it SHOULD include housing. We need more housing. Why isn't this important intersection providing retail AND HOUSING? Why isn't the Chick-Fil-A planned as the anchor restaurant in a larger building with parking and housing? Why spend the time and energy and money to build a single restaurant??? I realize the old Burger King lot is something of an eyesore and a nuisance, but this proposal for a single fast food restaurant does not appear to have been given a lot of thought.

Loui
Dear Buena Vista Neighborhood Association,

A Development Permit application (File No. H24-046) was submitted to the City of San José’s Planning Division on August 9, 2024 for 1301 West San Carlos Street for the demolition of a commercial building and the removal of twenty trees for the construction of a one-story quick- 6/4/25, 12:24 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 3/4

This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. service restaurant (Chick-fil-A) with no drive-through. I am the Planning Project Manager reviewing this application. For additional project information, please e-mail me or visit SJPermits.

You are receiving this e-mail as the designated contact for the Buena Vista Neighborhood Association. The purpose of this e-mail is to inform your association about development proposals early in the Planning application review process. You may receive future e-mails regarding this project’s public meetings.

If you would like to update the designated contact(s) for the association(s), please e-mail GeneralPlanStaff@sanjoseca.gov.

Please let me know if you have any questions.

Thank you,
Jason

---
Jason Lee, Planner II
[email protected] | 408.535.3887

City of San José
Planning, Building, & Code Enforcement
200 E. Santa Clara Street, 3F Tower
San José, California 95113-1905
www.sanjoseca.gov/planning

6/4/25, 12:24 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 4/4 [External Email. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. Learn more] Outlook
RE: Heads up re: Chick-fil-A Action Alert
From Lee, Jason <[email protected]>
Date Thu 2024-12-12 09:27
To 'Alex Shoor'
Cc Jake Wilde
Hi Alex and Jake,

Understood, thank you for the head’s up.

Thanks,
Jason

---
Jason Lee, Planner II
[email protected] | 408.535.3887

City of San José
Planning, Building, & Code Enforcement
200 E. Santa Clara Street, 3F Tower
San José, California 95113-1905
www.sanjoseca.gov/planning

From: Alex Shoor
Sent: Wednesday, December 11, 2024 3:35 PM
To: Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Lee, Jason <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; [email protected]; ; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>
Cc: Jake Wilde
Subject: Heads up re: Chick-fil-A Action Alert

City of San Jose,

Catalyze SV wants to give y’all a heads up that, after receiving direction from our members, Catalyze SV will be formally opposing the proposed single-story Chick-fil-A on West Can Carlos St, H24-046. As a professional courtesy, we also wanted to let you know ahead of time that we will be issuing an action alert next week encouraging the community to write into the City and to the Chick-fil-A developers suggesting a re-vamped proposal or relocating elsewhere.

6/4/25, 12:23 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 1/2

This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

Catalyze SV's position is largely in line with the Buena Vista Neighborhood Association’s and the District 6 Neighborhood Leaders Group’s. And we believe it is also in line with City of San Jose plans.

My colleague Jake Wilde, copied here, will be informing Chick-fil-A about our action alert too.

Happy holidays and I hope your city work winds down smoothly next week! — Alex

--
Alex Shoor
Executive Director | Catalyze SV
www.CatalyzeSiliconValley.org
Get Catalyze SV apparel | Schedule time w/Alex

6/4/25, 12:23 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 2/2 [External Email. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. Learn more] This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

Outlook
RE: Notification for Buena Vista Neighborhood Association - H24-046 [1301 West San Carlos Street] From Lee, Jason <[email protected]>
Date Wed 2024-12-18 10:44
To 'Mark Bett' Pawar, Rheya <[email protected]>; Quevedo, Matthew <[email protected]>; Mulcahy, Michael <[email protected]>; Davis, Dev <[email protected]>
Hi Mark,

Understood. I’m getting those letters too (and I will respond to them by the end of the week).

No rush on the D6 letter, just send it when it’s finalized and you all are able.

Thanks,
Jason

---
Jason Lee, Planner II
[email protected] | 408.535.3887

City of San José
Planning, Building, & Code Enforcement
200 E. Santa Clara Street, 3F Tower
San José, California 95113-1905
www.sanjoseca.gov/planning

From: Mark Bett
Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2024 10:19 AM
To: Lee, Jason <[email protected]>; Pawar, Rheya <[email protected]>; Quevedo, Matthew <[email protected]>; Mulcahy, Michael Davis, Dev <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Notification for Buena Vista Neighborhood Association - H24-046 [1301 West San Carlos Street]

Hey Jason,
I am still waiting on the D6 letter representing neighborhood leaders but it looks like now that word has been getting out others are taking an opposition stance to the project as well.

6/4/25, 12:25 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 1/6

[External Email. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. Learn more]

On Dec 4, 2024, at 10:49 AM, Lee, Jason <[email protected]> wrote:

Hi Mark,

This is understood. Send it over whenever it’s ready, and we will consider and respond if necessary.

Just for information, we are planning to do a Community Meeting for this project, likely on Zoom, likely Jan/Feb in the new year after the councilmember turns over for the district. Date, time, and manner still TBD, but I’ll notify when able.

Thanks,
Jason

---
Jason Lee, Planner II
[email protected] | 408.535.3887

City of San José
Planning, Building, & Code Enforcement
200 E. Santa Clara Street, 3F Tower
San José, California 95113-1905
www.sanjoseca.gov/planning

From: Mark Bett
Sent: Tuesday, December 3, 2024 11:55 PM
To: Lee, Jason <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Notification for Buena Vista Neighborhood Association - H24-046 [1301 West San Carlos Street]

Thank you

After discussing this with other neighborhood associations we all seem to be in agreement that this is a frustrating project that is going to under-utilize this property that is better suited for a high- density mixes use housing. The D6LG will be filling a letter of opposition shortly

On Dec 3, 2024, at 8:59 AM, Lee, Jason <[email protected]> wrote:

Hi Mark,

Got it. The appeal fee for a non-applicant this fiscal year is $250. If the project is approved, you can reach back out to me immediately after Director’s Hearing to start that process; as of now, I would expect that hearing to be no earlier than the second quarter of 2025.
6/4/25, 12:25 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 2/6

[External Email. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. Learn more]

Thanks,
Jason

---
Jason Lee, Planner II
[email protected] | 408.535.3887

City of San José
Planning, Building, & Code Enforcement
200 E. Santa Clara Street, 3F Tower
San José, California 95113-1905
www.sanjoseca.gov/planning

From: Mark Bett
Sent: Monday, December 2, 2024 7:16 PM
To: Lee, Jason <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Notification for Buena Vista Neighborhood Association - H24-046 [1301 West San Carlos Street]

You don't often get email from  Learn why this is important We expect planning to approve the plan and we want to pay to force that to go to the planning board for reconsideration
On Dec 2, 2024, at 8:55 AM, Lee, Jason <[email protected]> wrote:

Hi Mark,

I’m not sure how many people would like to meet, but you can call me (this week may not be good for that because I’m told we’re switching phone systems this week), or we could set up a Zoom, but it should generally be during business hours. I’m generally at City Hall Tuesday through Thursday.

There isn’t a fee for people to meet with planning staff on information for a project? I’m not sure what fee you’re referring to.

Thanks,
Jason

---
Jason Lee, Planner II
[email protected] | 408.535.3887

6/4/25, 12:25 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 3/6

[External Email. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. Learn more]
City of San José
Planning, Building, & Code Enforcement
200 E. Santa Clara Street, 3F Tower
San José, California 95113-1905
www.sanjoseca.gov/planning

From: Mark Bett
Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2024 19:02
To: Lee, Jason <[email protected]>
Cc: Alex Shoor
Subject: Re: Notification for Buena Vista Neighborhood Association - H24- 046 [1301 West San Carlos Street]

You don't often get email from   Learn
why this is important
Hey Jason

How do we meet with planning staff to oppose this project? Also, I’ve been informed that there’s a fee and would like information about that.

Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone.

On Sep 23, 2024, at 1:32 PM, Lee, Jason
<[email protected]> wrote:

Hello BVNA,

Thanks for this comment and this is understood.

I’m attaching the first comment letter for this project here to explain why this development would be allowed on this site. Please let me know if you have further comments or questions on this.

Thanks,
Jason

---
Jason Lee, Planner II
[email protected] | 408.535.3887
6/4/25, 12:25 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 4/6

[External Email. Do not open links or attachments from
untrusted sources.]

City of San José
Planning, Building, & Code Enforcement
200 E. Santa Clara Street, 3F Tower
San José, California 95113-1905
www.sanjoseca.gov/planning

From: BVNA Website
September 20, 2024 20:45
To: Lee, Jason <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Notification for Buena Vista Neighborhood
Association - H24-046 [1301 West San Carlos Street]

The BVNAopposes this project because it is not creating high density mixed use housing on a prime property on the Midtown redevelopment corridor. This property had easy access to bus light rail and train and should be redeveloped as per the city plan for housing and commercial for
residents… this could be part of the commercial property but should not be the sole business on said property

On Sep 19, 2024, at 4:54 PM, Lee, Jason
<
[email protected]> wrote:

Dear Buena Vista Neighborhood Association,

A Development Permit application (File
No. H24-046) was submitted to the City of San
José’s Planning Division on August 9, 2024
for
1301 West San Carlos Street for the
demolition of a commercial building and the
removal of twenty trees for the construction
of a one-story quick-service restaurant (Chick-
fil-A) with no drive-through
. I am the Planning
Project Manager reviewing this application.

For additional project information, please e-
mail me or visit
SJPermits.

You are receiving this e-mail as the designated
contact for the
Buena Vista Neighborhood
Association. The purpose of this e-mail is to
inform your association about development
proposals early in the Planning application
review process. You may receive future e-mails
regarding this project’s public meetings.
6/4/25, 12:25 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 5/6

This message is from outside the City email system. Do
not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

If you would like to update the designated
contact(s) for the association(s), please e-
mail GeneralPlanStaff@sanjoseca.gov.

Please let me know if you have any questions.

Thank you,
Jason

---
Jason Lee, Planner II
[email protected] | 408.535.3887

City of San José
Planning, Building, & Code Enforcement
200 E. Santa Clara Street, 3F Tower
San José, California 95113-1905
www.sanjoseca.gov/planning

6/4/25, 12:25 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 6/6 Outlook
RE: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal From Lee, Jason <[email protected]>
Date Thu 2024-12-19 17:52
To 'J'Carlin' ; Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>;
Dear Carlin,

Thank you for your e-mail, and your opposition to the project is noted.

We acknowledge the description taken from the Character Area definition of the project site (page 20, pdf page 26 of the West San Carlos Urban Village Plan); however, the allowable land use is controlled by the Land Use Designation portion of the document. The site has a land use designation of Urban Village within the Mixed-Use Residential Character Area of the Urban Village Plan (page 26, pdf page 32). This designation is a commercial designation which also supports residential development only on parcels meeting a minimum size of 0.5 acres.

While the site is over 0.5 acres once combined, the proposed project still meets the designation in that it is a commercial use. There is no requirement for residential use on the project site.

Staff also acknowledges concerns regarding the form of and parking area provided by the project, but we note that many of the policies of the Urban Village Plan “encourage” certain things, and are not specific requirements.

For instance, Policy LU-1.1 encourages new commercial development at an FAR of 0.3 or greater (page 33, pdf page 39); while the project does not have a 0.3 FAR, staff also cannot find the project contrary to the Urban Village Plan because there is no specific FAR requirement for the project. Examples of requirements within the UV Plan are Policy LU-2.3 and Policy LU-2.6, which specifically prohibit surface parking in front of buildings and drive- through uses, respectively.

Staff does recognize Goal UD-6 and subsequent policies (page 57, pdf page 63), but these are goals and action items for the City to implement across the Urban Village. The City believes it has generally accomplished this through the elimination of parking minimums and permit requirements for sharing parking, and cannot apply these policies to individual projects.

Regarding the proposed parking lot, the relevant requirements in the Urban Design Concept (page 66, pdf page 72) are to encourage parking reductions (since defunct) and explore alternative parking solutions, both of which are non-objective policies, and to locate surface parking to the rear of developments, which this proposal does.

There is no parking maximum. Generally, staff finds that this project will very likely be able to resolve all conflicts with the policies and elements of the Urban Design Concept.

In short, staff must review the project as submitted, which includes the demolition of the existing commercial building and the construction of a one-story building with a parking lot, and review the project for conformance with City ordinances and plans (and state and federal laws, as necessary). While a larger mixed-use project would be allowed here, and would perhaps be desirable, that is ultimately not the project proposed and is not the 6/4/25, 12:28 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 1/3

[External Email. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. Learn more] project being reviewed. If a proposed project is consistent with and can meet the Site Development Permit findings, then staff must recommend approval. It will ultimately be up to the decision-making body to approve or deny the project.

Staff believes the project as submitted generally conforms with the land use designation and applicable objective standards of the General and Urban Village plans in promoting commercial development at the site. Staff has encouraged the applicant to increase floor area, avoid demolition of the existing building, and decrease the amount of parking, but staff cannot force an applicant to make these changes (or recommend denial of the project) unless they contravene objective policies or the zoning code. I’ll note that even if staff finds that a project does contravene Urban Village or General Plan policies, an applicant can request that staff continue reviewing the project and take it to a decision maker (Director’s Hearing in this case) for a final decision on the project.

In conclusion, while the concerns about this project are heard and understood, staff has not found the project to contravene the Urban Village Plan. Even if the proposed project is not the most intensive use allowed at the site, staff ultimately must review the project as submitted and recommend approval or disapproval based on whether or not the project meets the findings to approve a Site Development Permit.

Please note that we expect to hold a community meeting on this project early in 2025 on a date to be determined.

Thank you,
Jason

---
Jason Lee, Planner II
[email protected] | 408.535.3887

City of San José
Planning, Building, & Code Enforcement
200 E. Santa Clara Street, 3F Tower
San José, California 95113-1905
www.sanjoseca.gov/planning

From: J'Carlin
Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2024 4:06 PM
To: Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Lee, Jason <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>; Subject: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal

To the San José Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement Department, Mayor Mahan, Councilmember Davis, and Councilmember-elect Mulcahy, I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed Chick-fil-A at 1301 W San Carlos Street. This project is at odds with San José’s vision for West San Carlos and what I want to see in this neighborhood. The West San Carlos Urban Village Plan describes the site of the proposed development as an area with “higher-density mixed-use and residential development drawing energy from nearby Downtown San José 6/4/25, 12:28 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 2/3

This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. and the Diridon Station. Development is proposed to range between three and seven stories with residential uses above a mix of active groundfloor retail.” A single-story, 5,139-square-foot fast-food restaurant does not align with this description. It actively works against the atmosphere an urban village is supposed to foster by encouraging customers to travel by car. This location is right along VTA’s 523/23 bus line and just a few minutes away from light rail by foot. Additionally, construction of the larger parking lot detailed in the proposal would require demolishing two existing local businesses. This new restaurant should not need a parking lot larger than the one that supported the previous fast-food establishment that occupied the corner of this site. As is currently proposed, a standalone Chick-fil-A and a large parking lot are not acceptable uses of the extremely limited land where higher- density, mixed-use development is allowed and needed in San José. Please stand by the principles and plans we have created to guide our city and region into a better, more sustainable future. Please tell Chick-fil-A to majorly re-work its San Carlos St proposal or locate elsewhere.

Carlin Black
District 1, San Jose

6/4/25, 12:28 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 3/3 Outlook
RE: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal From Lee, Jason <[email protected]>
Date Thu 2024-12-19 17:52
To 'Nick Carter' ; Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; Dear Nick,
Thank you for your e-mail, and your opposition to the project is noted.

We acknowledge the description taken from the Character Area definition of the project site (page 20, pdf page 26 of the West San Carlos Urban Village Plan); however, the allowable land use is controlled by the Land Use Designation portion of the document. The site has a land use designation of Urban Village within the Mixed-Use Residential Character Area of the Urban Village Plan (page 26, pdf page 32). This designation is a commercial designation which also supports residential development only on parcels meeting a minimum size of 0.5 acres. While the site is over 0.5 acres once combined, the proposed project still meets the designation in that it is a commercial use. There is no requirement for residential use on the project site.

Staff also acknowledges concerns regarding the form of and parking area provided by the project, but we note that many of the policies of the Urban Village Plan “encourage” certain things, and are not specific requirements. For instance, Policy LU-1.1 encourages new commercial development at an FAR of

0.3 or greater (page 33, pdf page 39); while the project does not have a 0.3 FAR, staff also cannot find the project contrary to the Urban Village Plan because there is no specific FAR requirement for the project.

Examples of requirements within the UV Plan are Policy LU-2.3 and Policy LU-2.6, which specifically prohibit surface parking in front of buildings and drive-through uses, respectively.

Staff does recognize Goal UD-6 and subsequent policies (page 57, pdf page 63), but these are goals and action items for the City to implement across the Urban Village. The City believes it has generally accomplished this through the elimination of parking minimums and permit requirements for sharing parking, and cannot apply these policies to individual projects.

Regarding the proposed parking lot, the relevant requirements in the Urban Design Concept (page 66, pdf page 72) are to encourage parking reductions (since defunct) and explore alternative parking solutions, both of which are non-objective policies, and to locate surface parking to the rear of developments, which this proposal does. There is no parking maximum. Generally, staff finds that this project will very likely be able to resolve all conflicts with the policies and elements of the Urban Design 6/4/25, 12:27 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 1/3

Concept.

In short, staff must review the project as submitted, which includes the demolition of the existing commercial building and the construction of a one-story building with a parking lot, and review the project for conformance with City ordinances and plans (and state and federal laws, as necessary). While a larger mixed-use project would be allowed here, and would perhaps be desirable, that is ultimately not the project proposed and is not the project being reviewed. If a proposed project is consistent with and can meet the Site Development Permit findings, then staff must recommend approval. It will ultimately be up to the decision-making body to approve or deny the project.

Staff believes the project as submitted generally conforms with the land use designation and applicable objective standards of the General and Urban Village plans in promoting commercial development at the site. Staff has encouraged the applicant to increase floor area, avoid demolition of the existing building, and decrease the amount of parking, but staff cannot force an applicant to make these changes (or recommend denial of the project) unless they contravene objective policies or the zoning code. I’ll note that even if staff finds that a project does contravene Urban Village or General Plan policies, an applicant can request that staff continue reviewing the project and take it to a decision maker (Director’s Hearing in this case) for a final decision on the project.

In conclusion, while the concerns about this project are heard and understood, staff has not found the project to contravene the Urban Village Plan. Even if the proposed project is not the most intensive use allowed at the site, staff ultimately must review the project as submitted and recommend approval or disapproval based on whether or not the project meets the findings to approve a Site Development Permit.

Please note that we expect to hold a community meeting on this project early in 2025 on a date to be determined.

Thank you,
Jason
---
Jason Lee, Planner II
[email protected] | 408.535.3887
City of San José
Planning, Building, & Code Enforcement
200 E. Santa Clara Street, 3F Tower
San José, California 95113-1905
www.sanjoseca.gov/planning
-----Original Message-----
From: Nick Carter <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2024 7:47 AM
To: Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Lee, Jason <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>;
6/4/25, 12:27 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 2/3

Subject: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal [External Email. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. Learn more<https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification>]
[You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ]
To the San José Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement Department, Mayor Mahan, Councilmember Davis, and Councilmember-elect Mulcahy,
I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed Chick-fil-A at 1301 W San Carlos Street. This project is at odds with San José’s vision for West San Carlos and what I want to see in this neighborhood.

The West San Carlos Urban Village Plan describes the site of the proposed development as an area with “higher-density mixed-use and residential development drawing energy from nearby Downtown San José and the Diridon Station. Development is proposed to range between three and seven stories with residential uses above a mix of active groundfloor retail.” A single-story, 5,139-square-foot fast-food restaurant does not align with this description. It actively works against the atmosphere an urban village is supposed to foster by encouraging customers to travel by car. This location is right along VTA’s 523/23 bus line and just a few minutes away from light rail by foot.

Additionally, construction of the larger parking lot detailed in the proposal would require demolishing two existing local businesses. This new restaurant should not need a parking lot larger than the one that supported the previous fast-food establishment that occupied the corner of this site.

As is currently proposed, a standalone Chick-fil-A and a large parking lot are not acceptable uses of the extremely limited land where higher-density, mixed-use development is allowed and needed in San José.

Please stand by the principles and plans we have created to guide our city and region into a better, more sustainable future. Please tell Chick-fil-A to majorly re-work its San Carlos St proposal or locate elsewhere.

Nick Carter
This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
6/4/25, 12:27 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 3/3

Outlook
RE: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal From Lee, Jason <[email protected]>
Date Thu 2024-12-19 17:55
To 'deb codiroli' ; Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>; [email protected] Dear Deb,

Thank you for your e-mail, and your opposition to the project is noted.

We acknowledge the description taken from the Character Area definition of the project site (page 20, pdf page 26 of the West San Carlos Urban Village Plan); however, the allowable land use is controlled by the Land Use Designation portion of the document. The site has a land use designation of Urban Village within the Mixed-Use Residential Character Area of the Urban Village Plan (page 26, pdf page 32). This designation is a commercial designation which also supports residential development only on parcels meeting a minimum size of 0.5 acres.

While the site is over 0.5 acres once combined, the proposed project still meets the designation in that it is a commercial use. There is no requirement for residential use on the project site.

Staff also acknowledges concerns regarding the form of and parking area provided by the project, but we note that many of the policies of the Urban Village Plan “encourage” certain things, and are not specific requirements.

For instance, Policy LU-1.1 encourages new commercial development at an FAR of 0.3 or greater (page 33, pdf page 39); while the project does not have a 0.3 FAR, staff also cannot find the project contrary to the Urban Village Plan because there is no specific FAR requirement for the project. Examples of requirements within the UV Plan are Policy LU-2.3 and Policy LU-2.6, which specifically prohibit surface parking in front of buildings and drive- through uses, respectively.

Staff does recognize Goal UD-6 and subsequent policies (page 57, pdf page 63), but these are goals and action items for the City to implement across the Urban Village. The City believes it has generally accomplished this through the elimination of parking minimums and permit requirements for sharing parking, and cannot apply these policies to individual projects.

Regarding the proposed parking lot, the relevant requirements in the Urban Design Concept (page 66, pdf page 72) are to encourage parking reductions (since defunct) and explore alternative parking solutions, both of which are non-objective policies, and to locate surface parking to the rear of developments, which this proposal does.

There is no parking maximum. Generally, staff finds that this project will very likely be able to resolve all conflicts with the policies and elements of the Urban Design Concept.

In short, staff must review the project as submitted, which includes the demolition of the existing commercial building and the construction of a one-story building with a parking lot, and review the project for conformance with City ordinances and plans (and state and federal laws, as necessary). While a larger mixed-use project would be allowed here, and would perhaps be desirable, that is ultimately not the project proposed and is not the 6/4/25, 12:29 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 1/3

[External Email. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. Learn more] project being reviewed. If a proposed project is consistent with and can meet the Site Development Permit findings, then staff must recommend approval. It will ultimately be up to the decision-making body to approve or deny the project.

Staff believes the project as submitted generally conforms with the land use designation and applicable objective standards of the General and Urban Village plans in promoting commercial development at the site. Staff has encouraged the applicant to increase floor area, avoid demolition of the existing building, and decrease the amount of parking, but staff cannot force an applicant to make these changes (or recommend denial of the project) unless they contravene objective policies or the zoning code. I’ll note that even if staff finds that a project does contravene Urban Village or General Plan policies, an applicant can request that staff continue reviewing the project and take it to a decision maker (Director’s Hearing in this case) for a final decision on the project.

In conclusion, while the concerns about this project are heard and understood, staff has not found the project to contravene the Urban Village Plan. Even if the proposed project is not the most intensive use allowed at the site, staff ultimately must review the project as submitted and recommend approval or disapproval based on whether or not the project meets the findings to approve a Site Development Permit.

Please note that we expect to hold a community meeting on this project early in 2025 on a date to be determined.

Thank you,
Jason

---
Jason Lee, Planner II
[email protected] | 408.535.3887

City of San José
Planning, Building, & Code Enforcement
200 E. Santa Clara Street, 3F Tower
San José, California 95113-1905
www.sanjoseca.gov/planning

From: deb codirol
Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2024 8:07 AM
To: Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Lee, Jason <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>; [email protected];
Subject: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal

Some people who received this message don't often get email from Learn why this is important To the San José Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement Department, Mayor Mahan, Councilmember Davis, and Councilmember-elect Mulcahy,
I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed Chick-fil-A at 1301 W San Carlos Street. This project is at 6/4/25, 12:29 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 2/3

This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. odds with San José’s vision for West San Carlos and what I want to see in this neighborhood.

The West San Carlos Urban Village Plan describes the site of the proposed development as an area with “higher- density mixed-use and residential development drawing energy from nearby Downtown San José and the Diridon Station. Development is proposed to range between three and seven stories with residential uses above a mix of active groundfloor retail.”
A single-story, 5,139-square-foot fast-food restaurant does not align with this description. It actively works against the atmosphere an urban village is supposed to foster by encouraging customers to travel by car. This location is right along VTA’s 523/23 bus line and just a few minutes away from light rail by foot.

Additionally, construction of the larger parking lot detailed in the proposal would require demolishing two existing local businesses. This new restaurant should not need a parking lot larger than the one that supported the previous fast-food establishment that occupied the corner of this site.

As is currently proposed, a standalone Chick-fil-A and a large parking lot are not acceptable uses of the extremely limited land where higher-density, mixed-use development is allowed and needed in San José.

Please stand by the principles and plans we have created to guide our city and region into a better, more sustainable future. Please tell Chick-fil-A to majorly re-work its San Carlos St proposal or locate elsewhere.

Thank you,
Deb Codiroli

6/4/25, 12:29 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 3/3 Outlook
RE: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal From Lee, Jason <[email protected]>
Date Thu 2024-12-19 17:53
To Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>;
Dear Mr. Diridon,
Thank you for your e-mail, and your opposition to the project is noted.

We acknowledge the description taken from the Character Area definition of the project site (page 20, pdf page 26 of the West San Carlos Urban Village Plan); however, the allowable land use is controlled by the Land Use Designation portion of the document. The site has a land use designation of Urban Village within the Mixed-Use Residential Character Area of the Urban Village Plan (page 26, pdf page 32). This designation is a commercial designation which also supports residential development only on parcels meeting a minimum size of 0.5 acres. While the site is over 0.5 acres once combined, the proposed project still meets the designation in that it is a commercial use. There is no requirement for residential use on the project site.

Staff also acknowledges concerns regarding the form of and parking area provided by the project, but we note that many of the policies of the Urban Village Plan “encourage” certain things, and are not specific requirements. For instance, Policy LU-1.1 encourages new commercial development at an FAR of

0.3 or greater (page 33, pdf page 39); while the project does not have a 0.3 FAR, staff also cannot find the project contrary to the Urban Village Plan because there is no specific FAR requirement for the project.

Examples of requirements within the UV Plan are Policy LU-2.3 and Policy LU-2.6, which specifically prohibit surface parking in front of buildings and drive-through uses, respectively.

Staff does recognize Goal UD-6 and subsequent policies (page 57, pdf page 63), but these are goals and action items for the City to implement across the Urban Village. The City believes it has generally accomplished this through the elimination of parking minimums and permit requirements for sharing parking, and cannot apply these policies to individual projects.

Regarding the proposed parking lot, the relevant requirements in the Urban Design Concept (page 66, pdf page 72) are to encourage parking reductions (since defunct) and explore alternative parking solutions, both of which are non-objective policies, and to locate surface parking to the rear of developments, which this proposal does. There is no parking maximum. Generally, staff finds that this project will very likely be able to resolve all conflicts with the policies and elements of the Urban Design 6/4/25, 12:28 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 1/4

Concept.

In short, staff must review the project as submitted, which includes the demolition of the existing commercial building and the construction of a one-story building with a parking lot, and review the project for conformance with City ordinances and plans (and state and federal laws, as necessary). While a larger mixed-use project would be allowed here, and would perhaps be desirable, that is ultimately not the project proposed and is not the project being reviewed. If a proposed project is consistent with and can meet the Site Development Permit findings, then staff must recommend approval. It will ultimately be up to the decision-making body to approve or deny the project.

Staff believes the project as submitted generally conforms with the land use designation and applicable objective standards of the General and Urban Village plans in promoting commercial development at the site. Staff has encouraged the applicant to increase floor area, avoid demolition of the existing building, and decrease the amount of parking, but staff cannot force an applicant to make these changes (or recommend denial of the project) unless they contravene objective policies or the zoning code. I’ll note that even if staff finds that a project does contravene Urban Village or General Plan policies, an applicant can request that staff continue reviewing the project and take it to a decision maker (Director’s Hearing in this case) for a final decision on the project.

In conclusion, while the concerns about this project are heard and understood, staff has not found the project to contravene the Urban Village Plan. Even if the proposed project is not the most intensive use allowed at the site, staff ultimately must review the project as submitted and recommend approval or disapproval based on whether or not the project meets the findings to approve a Site Development Permit.

Please note that we expect to hold a community meeting on this project early in 2025 on a date to be determined.

Thank you,
Jason
---
Jason Lee, Planner II
[email protected] | 408.535.3887
City of San José
Planning, Building, & Code Enforcement
200 E. Santa Clara Street, 3F Tower
San José, California 95113-1905
www.sanjoseca.gov/planning
-----Original Message-----
From: Rod Diridon
Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2024 9:13 AM
To: Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Lee, Jason <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>;
6/4/25, 12:28 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 2/4

Subject: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal [External Email. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. Learn more<https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification>]
[Some people who received this message don't often get email from Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ] To the San José Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement Department, Mayor Mahan, Councilmember Davis, and Councilmember-elect Mulcahy,
I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed Chick-fil-A at 1301 W San Carlos Street. This project is at odds with San José’s vision for West San Carlos and what I want to see in this neighborhood.

The West San Carlos Urban Village Plan describes the site of the proposed development as an area with “higher-density mixed-use and residential development drawing energy from nearby Downtown San José and the Diridon Station. Development is proposed to range between three and seven stories with residential uses above a mix of active groundfloor retail.” A single-story, 5,139-square-foot fast-food restaurant does not align with this description. It actively works against the atmosphere an urban village is supposed to foster by encouraging customers to travel by car. This location is right along VTA’s 523/23 bus line and just a few minutes away from light rail by foot.

Additionally, construction of the larger parking lot detailed in the proposal would require demolishing two existing local businesses. This new restaurant should not need a parking lot larger than the one that supported the previous fast-food establishment that occupied the corner of this site.

As is currently proposed, a standalone Chick-fil-A and a large parking lot are not acceptable uses of the extremely limited land where higher-density, mixed-use development is allowed and needed in San José.

Please stand by the principles and plans we have created to guide our city and region into a better, more sustainable future. Please tell Chick-fil-A to majorly re-work its San Carlos St proposal or locate elsewhere.

Rod Diridon, sr.

Sent from my iPad
This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
6/4/25, 12:28 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 3/4

6/4/25, 12:28 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 4/4 Outlook
RE: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal From Lee, Jason <[email protected]>
Date Thu 2024-12-19 17:52
To 'Leslie Fong' Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>;
Dear Leslie,

Thank you for your e-mail, and your opposition to the project is noted.

We acknowledge the description taken from the Character Area definition of the project site (page 20, pdf page 26 of the West San Carlos Urban Village Plan); however, the allowable land use is controlled by the Land Use Designation portion of the document. The site has a land use designation of Urban Village within the Mixed-Use Residential Character Area of the Urban Village Plan (page 26, pdf page 32). This designation is a commercial designation which also supports residential development only on parcels meeting a minimum size of 0.5 acres.

While the site is over 0.5 acres once combined, the proposed project still meets the designation in that it is a commercial use. There is no requirement for residential use on the project site.

Staff also acknowledges concerns regarding the form of and parking area provided by the project, but we note that many of the policies of the Urban Village Plan “encourage” certain things, and are not specific requirements.

For instance, Policy LU-1.1 encourages new commercial development at an FAR of 0.3 or greater (page 33, pdf page 39); while the project does not have a 0.3 FAR, staff also cannot find the project contrary to the Urban Village Plan because there is no specific FAR requirement for the project. Examples of requirements within the UV Plan are Policy LU-2.3 and Policy LU-2.6, which specifically prohibit surface parking in front of buildings and drive- through uses, respectively.

Staff does recognize Goal UD-6 and subsequent policies (page 57, pdf page 63), but these are goals and action items for the City to implement across the Urban Village. The City believes it has generally accomplished this through the elimination of parking minimums and permit requirements for sharing parking, and cannot apply these policies to individual projects.

Regarding the proposed parking lot, the relevant requirements in the Urban Design Concept (page 66, pdf page 72) are to encourage parking reductions (since defunct) and explore alternative parking solutions, both of which are non-objective policies, and to locate surface parking to the rear of developments, which this proposal does.

There is no parking maximum. Generally, staff finds that this project will very likely be able to resolve all conflicts with the policies and elements of the Urban Design Concept.

In short, staff must review the project as submitted, which includes the demolition of the existing commercial building and the construction of a one-story building with a parking lot, and review the project for conformance with City ordinances and plans (and state and federal laws, as necessary). While a larger mixed-use project would be allowed here, and would perhaps be desirable, that is ultimately not the project proposed and is not the 6/4/25, 12:28 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 1/3

[External Email. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. Learn more] project being reviewed. If a proposed project is consistent with and can meet the Site Development Permit findings, then staff must recommend approval. It will ultimately be up to the decision-making body to approve or deny the project.

Staff believes the project as submitted generally conforms with the land use designation and applicable objective standards of the General and Urban Village plans in promoting commercial development at the site. Staff has encouraged the applicant to increase floor area, avoid demolition of the existing building, and decrease the amount of parking, but staff cannot force an applicant to make these changes (or recommend denial of the project) unless they contravene objective policies or the zoning code. I’ll note that even if staff finds that a project does contravene Urban Village or General Plan policies, an applicant can request that staff continue reviewing the project and take it to a decision maker (Director’s Hearing in this case) for a final decision on the project.

In conclusion, while the concerns about this project are heard and understood, staff has not found the project to contravene the Urban Village Plan. Even if the proposed project is not the most intensive use allowed at the site, staff ultimately must review the project as submitted and recommend approval or disapproval based on whether or not the project meets the findings to approve a Site Development Permit.

Please note that we expect to hold a community meeting on this project early in 2025 on a date to be determined.

Thank you,
Jason

---
Jason Lee, Planner II
[email protected] | 408.535.3887

City of San José
Planning, Building, & Code Enforcement
200 E. Santa Clara Street, 3F Tower
San José, California 95113-1905
www.sanjoseca.gov/planning

From: Leslie Fong
Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2024 10:11 AM
To: Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Lee, Jason <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>; Subject: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal

Some people who received this message don't often get email from Learn why this is important To the San José Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement Department, Mayor Mahan, Councilmember Davis, and Councilmember-elect Mulcahy,
I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed Chick-fil-A at 1301 W San Carlos Street. This project is at 6/4/25, 12:28 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 2/3

This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. odds with San José’s vision for West San Carlos and what I want to see in this neighborhood.

The West San Carlos Urban Village Plan describes the site of the proposed development as an area with “higher- density mixed-use and residential development drawing energy from nearby Downtown San José and the Diridon Station. Development is proposed to range between three and seven stories with residential uses above a mix of active ground floor retail.”
A single-story, 5,139-square-foot fast-food restaurant does not align with this description. It actively works against the atmosphere an urban village is supposed to foster by encouraging customers to travel by car. This location is right along VTA’s 523/23 bus line and just a few minutes away from light rail by foot.

Additionally, construction of the larger parking lot detailed in the proposal would require demolishing two existing local businesses. This new restaurant should not need a parking lot larger than the one that supported the previous fast-food establishment that occupied the corner of this site.

As is currently proposed, a standalone Chick-fil-A and a large parking lot are not acceptable uses of the extremely limited land where higher-density, mixed-use development is allowed and needed in San José.

Please stand by the principles and plans we have created to guide our city and region into a better, more sustainable future. Please tell Chick-fil-A to majorly re-work its San Carlos St proposal or locate elsewhere.

6/4/25, 12:28 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 3/3 Outlook
RE: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal From Lee, Jason <[email protected]>
Date Thu 2024-12-19 17:52
To 'Kathryn Hedges' ; Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>;
Dear Kathryn,

Thank you for your e-mail, and your opposition to the project is noted.

We acknowledge the description taken from the Character Area definition of the project site (page 20, pdf page 26 of the West San Carlos Urban Village Plan); however, the allowable land use is controlled by the Land Use Designation portion of the document. The site has a land use designation of Urban Village within the Mixed-Use Residential Character Area of the Urban Village Plan (page 26, pdf page 32). This designation is a commercial designation which also supports residential development only on parcels meeting a minimum size of 0.5 acres.

While the site is over 0.5 acres once combined, the proposed project still meets the designation in that it is a commercial use. There is no requirement for residential use on the project site.

Staff also acknowledges concerns regarding the form of and parking area provided by the project, but we note that many of the policies of the Urban Village Plan “encourage” certain things, and are not specific requirements.

For instance, Policy LU-1.1 encourages new commercial development at an FAR of 0.3 or greater (page 33, pdf page 39); while the project does not have a 0.3 FAR, staff also cannot find the project contrary to the Urban Village Plan because there is no specific FAR requirement for the project. Examples of requirements within the UV Plan are Policy LU-2.3 and Policy LU-2.6, which specifically prohibit surface parking in front of buildings and drive- through uses, respectively.

Staff does recognize Goal UD-6 and subsequent policies (page 57, pdf page 63), but these are goals and action items for the City to implement across the Urban Village. The City believes it has generally accomplished this through the elimination of parking minimums and permit requirements for sharing parking, and cannot apply these policies to individual projects.

Regarding the proposed parking lot, the relevant requirements in the Urban Design Concept (page 66, pdf page 72) are to encourage parking reductions (since defunct) and explore alternative parking solutions, both of which are non-objective policies, and to locate surface parking to the rear of developments, which this proposal does.

There is no parking maximum. Generally, staff finds that this project will very likely be able to resolve all conflicts with the policies and elements of the Urban Design Concept.

In short, staff must review the project as submitted, which includes the demolition of the existing commercial building and the construction of a one-story building with a parking lot, and review the project for conformance with City ordinances and plans (and state and federal laws, as necessary). While a larger mixed-use project would be allowed here, and would perhaps be desirable, that is ultimately not the project proposed and is not the 6/4/25, 12:27 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 1/3

[External Email. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. Learn more] project being reviewed. If a proposed project is consistent with and can meet the Site Development Permit findings, then staff must recommend approval. It will ultimately be up to the decision-making body to approve or deny the project.

Staff believes the project as submitted generally conforms with the land use designation and applicable objective standards of the General and Urban Village plans in promoting commercial development at the site. Staff has encouraged the applicant to increase floor area, avoid demolition of the existing building, and decrease the amount of parking, but staff cannot force an applicant to make these changes (or recommend denial of the project) unless they contravene objective policies or the zoning code. I’ll note that even if staff finds that a project does contravene Urban Village or General Plan policies, an applicant can request that staff continue reviewing the project and take it to a decision maker (Director’s Hearing in this case) for a final decision on the project.

In conclusion, while the concerns about this project are heard and understood, staff has not found the project to contravene the Urban Village Plan. Even if the proposed project is not the most intensive use allowed at the site, staff ultimately must review the project as submitted and recommend approval or disapproval based on whether or not the project meets the findings to approve a Site Development Permit.

Please note that we expect to hold a community meeting on this project early in 2025 on a date to be determined.

Thank you,
Jason

---
Jason Lee, Planner II
[email protected] | 408.535.3887

City of San José
Planning, Building, & Code Enforcement
200 E. Santa Clara Street, 3F Tower
San José, California 95113-1905
www.sanjoseca.gov/planning

From: Kathryn Hedges
Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2024 10:38 PM
To: Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Lee, Jason <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>; Subject: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal

Some people who received this message don't often get email from Learn why this is important To the San José Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement Department, Mayor Mahan, Councilmember Davis, and Councilmember-elect Mulcahy:
6/4/25, 12:27 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 2/3

This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed Chick-fil-A restaurant at 1301 W San Carlos Street. This project is at odds with San José’s vision for West San Carlos and what I want to see in this neighborhood. Although I live Downtown, I ride to Midtown frequently on the VTA #23/523 buses to shop on W San Carlos and onward to Stevens Creek.

The West San Carlos Urban Village Plan describes the site of the proposed development as an area with “higher- density mixed-use and residential development drawing energy from nearby Downtown San José and the Diridon Station. Development is proposed to range between three and seven stories with residential uses above a mix of active ground floor retail.”

Chick-fil-A has locations in other cities in ground floor retail spaces, and there are plenty of mixed-use multi-story multi-family buildings where they could negotiate with the owners. The Breakfast Club at Midtown seems to be very busy in their ground floor retail location at W San Carlos and Meridian; they always have lines down the block during peak hours when I pass by on the bus or shop at Safeway. I'm sure there are other ground floor spaces available in the area that will be ready for occupancy before a completely new project would be--especially if an exemption from the General Plan would be involved.

This morning I attended a meeting for the Stevens Creek Corridor future mobility plans, and the consultants' report clearly showed that people in the area want this neighborhood to be pedestrian friendly, and having this much area occupied by a fast food restaurant and its parking lot (and traffic entering/exiting the lot) are unfriendly to pedestrian traffic.

A single-story, 5,139-square-foot fast-food restaurant does not align with this description. It actively works against the atmosphere an urban village is supposed to foster by encouraging customers to travel by car. This location is right along the VTA #523/23 bus line and just a few minutes away from light rail by foot.

Additionally, construction of the larger parking lot detailed in the proposal would require demolishing two existing local businesses. This new restaurant should not need a parking lot larger than the one that supported the previous fast-food establishment that occupied the corner of this site.

As is currently proposed, a standalone Chick-fil-A and a large parking lot are not acceptable uses of the extremely limited land where higher-density, mixed-use development is allowed and needed in San José.

Please stand by the principles and plans we have created to guide our city and region into a better, more sustainable future. Please tell Chick-fil-A to majorly re-work its San Carlos St proposal or locate elsewhere. If they are not interested in developing a multi-story multi-family building in this prime housing location, they can work with other developers who are seeking ground floor retail tenants.

Sincerely,

Kathryn Hedges

6/4/25, 12:27 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 3/3

Outlook
RE: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal From Lee, Jason <[email protected]>
Date Thu 2024-12-19 17:53
To Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>; [email protected] Dear Lisa,

Thank you for your e-mail, and your opposition to the project is noted.

We acknowledge the description taken from the Character Area definition of the project site (page 20, pdf page 26 of the West San Carlos Urban Village Plan); however, the allowable land use is controlled by the Land Use Designation portion of the document. The site has a land use designation of Urban Village within the Mixed-Use Residential Character Area of the Urban Village Plan (page 26, pdf page 32). This designation is a commercial designation which also supports residential development only on parcels meeting a minimum size of 0.5 acres.

While the site is over 0.5 acres once combined, the proposed project still meets the designation in that it is a commercial use. There is no requirement for residential use on the project site.

Staff also acknowledges concerns regarding the form of and parking area provided by the project, but we note that many of the policies of the Urban Village Plan “encourage” certain things, and are not specific requirements.

For instance, Policy LU-1.1 encourages new commercial development at an FAR of 0.3 or greater (page 33, pdf page 39); while the project does not have a 0.3 FAR, staff also cannot find the project contrary to the Urban Village Plan because there is no specific FAR requirement for the project. Examples of requirements within the UV Plan are Policy LU-2.3 and Policy LU-2.6, which specifically prohibit surface parking in front of buildings and drive- through uses, respectively.

Staff does recognize Goal UD-6 and subsequent policies (page 57, pdf page 63), but these are goals and action items for the City to implement across the Urban Village. The City believes it has generally accomplished this through the elimination of parking minimums and permit requirements for sharing parking, and cannot apply these policies to individual projects.

Regarding the proposed parking lot, the relevant requirements in the Urban Design Concept (page 66, pdf page 72) are to encourage parking reductions (since defunct) and explore alternative parking solutions, both of which are non-objective policies, and to locate surface parking to the rear of developments, which this proposal does.

There is no parking maximum. Generally, staff finds that this project will very likely be able to resolve all conflicts with the policies and elements of the Urban Design Concept.

In short, staff must review the project as submitted, which includes the demolition of the existing commercial building and the construction of a one-story building with a parking lot, and review the project for conformance with City ordinances and plans (and state and federal laws, as necessary). While a larger mixed-use project would be allowed here, and would perhaps be desirable, that is ultimately not the project proposed and is not the 6/4/25, 12:29 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 1/3

[External Email. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. Learn more] project being reviewed. If a proposed project is consistent with and can meet the Site Development Permit findings, then staff must recommend approval. It will ultimately be up to the decision-making body to approve or deny the project.

Staff believes the project as submitted generally conforms with the land use designation and applicable objective standards of the General and Urban Village plans in promoting commercial development at the site. Staff has encouraged the applicant to increase floor area, avoid demolition of the existing building, and decrease the amount of parking, but staff cannot force an applicant to make these changes (or recommend denial of the project) unless they contravene objective policies or the zoning code. I’ll note that even if staff finds that a project does contravene Urban Village or General Plan policies, an applicant can request that staff continue reviewing the project and take it to a decision maker (Director’s Hearing in this case) for a final decision on the project.

In conclusion, while the concerns about this project are heard and understood, staff has not found the project to contravene the Urban Village Plan. Even if the proposed project is not the most intensive use allowed at the site, staff ultimately must review the project as submitted and recommend approval or disapproval based on whether or not the project meets the findings to approve a Site Development Permit.

Please note that we expect to hold a community meeting on this project early in 2025 on a date to be determined.

Thank you,
Jason

---
Jason Lee, Planner II
[email protected] | 408.535.3887

City of San José
Planning, Building, & Code Enforcement
200 E. Santa Clara Street, 3F Tower
San José, California 95113-1905
www.sanjoseca.gov/planning

From: lisahs100
Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2024 7:57 AM
To: Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Lee, Jason <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>; Subject: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal

You don't often get email from Learn why this is important To the San José Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement Department, Mayor Mahan, Councilmember Davis, and Councilmember-elect Mulcahy,
I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed Chick-fil-A at 1301 W San Carlos Street. This project is at 6/4/25, 12:29 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 2/3

This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. odds with San José’s vision for West San Carlos and what I want to see in this neighborhood.

The West San Carlos Urban Village Plan describes the site of the proposed development as an area with “higher- density mixed-use and residential development drawing energy from nearby Downtown San José and the Diridon Station. Development is proposed to range between three and seven stories with residential uses above a mix of active groundfloor retail.”
A single-story, 5,139-square-foot fast-food restaurant does not align with this description. It actively works against the atmosphere an urban village is supposed to foster by encouraging customers to travel by car. This location is right along VTA’s 523/23 bus line and just a few minutes away from light rail by foot.

Additionally, construction of the larger parking lot detailed in the proposal would require demolishing two existing local businesses. This new restaurant should not need a parking lot larger than the one that supported the previous fast-food establishment that occupied the corner of this site.

As is currently proposed, a standalone Chick-fil-A and a large parking lot are not acceptable uses of the extremely limited land where higher-density, mixed-use development is allowed and needed in San José.

Please stand by the principles and plans we have created to guide our city and region into a better, more sustainable future. Please tell Chick-fil-A to majorly re-work its San Carlos St proposal or locate elsewhere.

Lisa Hettler-Smith

Sent from my Galaxy

6/4/25, 12:29 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 3/3

Outlook
RE: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal From Lee, Jason <[email protected]>
Date Thu 2024-12-19 17:53
To ' ; Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>;
Dear Michael,

Thank you for your e-mail, and your opposition to the project is noted.

We acknowledge the description taken from the Character Area definition of the project site (page 20, pdf page 26 of the West San Carlos Urban Village Plan); however, the allowable land use is controlled by the Land Use Designation portion of the document. The site has a land use designation of Urban Village within the Mixed-Use Residential Character Area of the Urban Village Plan (page 26, pdf page 32). This designation is a commercial designation which also supports residential development only on parcels meeting a minimum size of 0.5 acres.

While the site is over 0.5 acres once combined, the proposed project still meets the designation in that it is a commercial use. There is no requirement for residential use on the project site.

Staff also acknowledges concerns regarding the form of and parking area provided by the project, but we note that many of the policies of the Urban Village Plan “encourage” certain things, and are not specific requirements.

For instance, Policy LU-1.1 encourages new commercial development at an FAR of 0.3 or greater (page 33, pdf page 39); while the project does not have a 0.3 FAR, staff also cannot find the project contrary to the Urban Village Plan because there is no specific FAR requirement for the project. Examples of requirements within the UV Plan are Policy LU-2.3 and Policy LU-2.6, which specifically prohibit surface parking in front of buildings and drive- through uses, respectively.

Staff does recognize Goal UD-6 and subsequent policies (page 57, pdf page 63), but these are goals and action items for the City to implement across the Urban Village. The City believes it has generally accomplished this through the elimination of parking minimums and permit requirements for sharing parking, and cannot apply these policies to individual projects.

Regarding the proposed parking lot, the relevant requirements in the Urban Design Concept (page 66, pdf page 72) are to encourage parking reductions (since defunct) and explore alternative parking solutions, both of which are non-objective policies, and to locate surface parking to the rear of developments, which this proposal does.

There is no parking maximum. Generally, staff finds that this project will very likely be able to resolve all conflicts with the policies and elements of the Urban Design Concept.

In short, staff must review the project as submitted, which includes the demolition of the existing commercial building and the construction of a one-story building with a parking lot, and review the project for conformance with City ordinances and plans (and state and federal laws, as necessary). While a larger mixed-use project would be allowed here, and would perhaps be desirable, that is ultimately not the project proposed and is not the 6/4/25, 12:28 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 1/3

[External Email. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. Learn more] project being reviewed. If a proposed project is consistent with and can meet the Site Development Permit findings, then staff must recommend approval. It will ultimately be up to the decision-making body to approve or deny the project.

Staff believes the project as submitted generally conforms with the land use designation and applicable objective standards of the General and Urban Village plans in promoting commercial development at the site. Staff has encouraged the applicant to increase floor area, avoid demolition of the existing building, and decrease the amount of parking, but staff cannot force an applicant to make these changes (or recommend denial of the project) unless they contravene objective policies or the zoning code. I’ll note that even if staff finds that a project does contravene Urban Village or General Plan policies, an applicant can request that staff continue reviewing the project and take it to a decision maker (Director’s Hearing in this case) for a final decision on the project.

In conclusion, while the concerns about this project are heard and understood, staff has not found the project to contravene the Urban Village Plan. Even if the proposed project is not the most intensive use allowed at the site, staff ultimately must review the project as submitted and recommend approval or disapproval based on whether or not the project meets the findings to approve a Site Development Permit.

Please note that we expect to hold a community meeting on this project early in 2025 on a date to be determined.

Thank you,
Jason

---
Jason Lee, Planner II
[email protected] | 408.535.3887

City of San José
Planning, Building, & Code Enforcement
200 E. Santa Clara Street, 3F Tower
San José, California 95113-1905
www.sanjoseca.gov/planning

From: Michael Kevane
Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2024 9:33 AM
To: Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Lee, Jason <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>; Subject: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal

Some people who received this message don't often get email from . Learn why this is important To the San José Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement Department, Mayor Mahan, Councilmember Davis, and Councilmember-elect Mulcahy,
6/4/25, 12:28 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 2/3

This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed Chick-fil-A at 1301 W San Carlos Street. This project is at odds with San José’s vision for West San Carlos and what I want to see in this neighborhood.

The West San Carlos Urban Village Plan describes the site of the proposed development as an area with “higher- density mixed-use and residential development drawing energy from nearby Downtown San José and the Diridon Station. Development is proposed to range between three and seven stories with residential uses above a mix of active groundfloor retail.”
A single-story, 5,139-square-foot fast-food restaurant does not align with this description. It actively works against the atmosphere an urban village is supposed to foster by encouraging customers to travel by car. This location is right along VTA’s 523/23 bus line and just a few minutes away from light rail by foot.

Additionally, construction of the larger parking lot detailed in the proposal would require demolishing two existing local businesses. This new restaurant should not need a parking lot larger than the one that supported the previous fast-food establishment that occupied the corner of this site.

As is currently proposed, a standalone Chick-fil-A and a large parking lot are not acceptable uses of the extremely limited land where higher-density, mixed-use development is allowed and needed in San José.

Please stand by the principles and plans we have created to guide our city and region into a better, more sustainable future. Please tell Chick-fil-A to majorly re-work its San Carlos St proposal or locate elsewhere. --
Michael Kevane
Dept. of Economics
Santa Clara University
Friends of African Village Libraries
www.favl.org

6/4/25, 12:28 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 3/3

Outlook
RE: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal From Lee, Jason <[email protected]>
Date Thu 2024-12-19 17:55
To Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>;
Dear Lita,

Thank you for your e-mail, and your opposition to the project is noted.

I’ll first note that the current owners of the parcel have been in contact with the business owners currently on Race Street regarding their future; however, I’ll note that I’m not privy to these conversations. If people on this e- mail are unable to give a response to this point at this time, this could be brought up at the future community meeting.

We acknowledge the description taken from the Character Area definition of the project site (page 20, pdf page 26 of the West San Carlos Urban Village Plan); however, the allowable land use is controlled by the Land Use Designation portion of the document. The site has a land use designation of Urban Village within the Mixed-Use Residential Character Area of the Urban Village Plan (page 26, pdf page 32). This designation is a commercial designation which also supports residential development only on parcels meeting a minimum size of 0.5 acres.

While the site is over 0.5 acres once combined, the proposed project still meets the designation in that it is a commercial use. There is no requirement for residential use on the project site.

Staff also acknowledges concerns regarding the form of and parking area provided by the project, but we note that many of the policies of the Urban Village Plan “encourage” certain things, and are not specific requirements.

For instance, Policy LU-1.1 encourages new commercial development at an FAR of 0.3 or greater (page 33, pdf page 39); while the project does not have a 0.3 FAR, staff also cannot find the project contrary to the Urban Village Plan because there is no specific FAR requirement for the project. Examples of requirements within the UV Plan are Policy LU-2.3 and Policy LU-2.6, which specifically prohibit surface parking in front of buildings and drive- through uses, respectively.

Staff does recognize Goal UD-6 and subsequent policies (page 57, pdf page 63), but these are goals and action items for the City to implement across the Urban Village. The City believes it has generally accomplished this through the elimination of parking minimums and permit requirements for sharing parking, and cannot apply these policies to individual projects.

Regarding the proposed parking lot, the relevant requirements in the Urban Design Concept (page 66, pdf page 72) are to encourage parking reductions (since defunct) and explore alternative parking solutions, both of which are non-objective policies, and to locate surface parking to the rear of developments, which this proposal does.

There is no parking maximum. Generally, staff finds that this project will very likely be able to resolve all conflicts with the policies and elements of the Urban Design Concept. 6/4/25, 12:29 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 1/3

[External Email. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. Learn more]

In short, staff must review the project as submitted, which includes the demolition of the existing commercial building and the construction of a one-story building with a parking lot, and review the project for conformance with City ordinances and plans (and state and federal laws, as necessary). While a larger mixed-use project would be allowed here, and would perhaps be desirable, that is ultimately not the project proposed and is not the project being reviewed. If a proposed project is consistent with and can meet the Site Development Permit findings, then staff must recommend approval. It will ultimately be up to the decision-making body to approve or deny the project.

Staff believes the project as submitted generally conforms with the land use designation and applicable objective standards of the General and Urban Village plans in promoting commercial development at the site. Staff has encouraged the applicant to increase floor area, avoid demolition of the existing building, and decrease the amount of parking, but staff cannot force an applicant to make these changes (or recommend denial of the project) unless they contravene objective policies or the zoning code. I’ll note that even if staff finds that a project does contravene Urban Village or General Plan policies, an applicant can request that staff continue reviewing the project and take it to a decision maker (Director’s Hearing in this case) for a final decision on the project.

In conclusion, while the concerns about this project are heard and understood, staff has not found the project to contravene the Urban Village Plan. Even if the proposed project is not the most intensive use allowed at the site, staff ultimately must review the project as submitted and recommend approval or disapproval based on whether or not the project meets the findings to approve a Site Development Permit.

Please note that we expect to hold a community meeting on this project early in 2025 on a date to be determined.

Thank you,
Jason

---
Jason Lee, Planner II
[email protected] | 408.535.3887

City of San José
Planning, Building, & Code Enforcement
200 E. Santa Clara Street, 3F Tower
San José, California 95113-1905
www.sanjoseca.gov/planning

From: L A Kurth <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2024 7:22 AM
To: Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Lee, Jason <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>; Subject: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal

6/4/25, 12:29 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 2/3

This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

Some people who received this message don't often get email from . Learn why this is important To the San José Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement Department, Mayor Mahan, Councilmember Davis, and Councilmember-elect Mulcahy,
My name is Lita Kurth and i live not far from this propsed project.

I'm very concerned about displacing small, especially Latino businesses, which has already been done on san Carlos with nothing to replace them. I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed Chick-fil-A at 1301 W San Carlos Street. This project is at odds with San José’s vision for West San Carlos and what I want to see in this neighborhood.

The West San Carlos Urban Village Plan describes the site of the proposed development as an area with “higher- density mixed-use and residential development drawing energy from nearby Downtown San José and the Diridon Station. Development is proposed to range between three and seven stories with residential uses above a mix of active groundfloor retail.”
A single-story, 5,139-square-foot fast-food restaurant does not align with this description. It actively works against the atmosphere an urban village is supposed to foster by encouraging customers to travel by car. This location is right along VTA’s 523/23 bus line and just a few minutes away from light rail by foot.

Additionally, construction of the larger parking lot detailed in the proposal would require demolishing two existing local businesses. This new restaurant should not need a parking lot larger than the one that supported the previous fast-food establishment that occupied the corner of this site.

As is currently proposed, a standalone Chick-fil-A and a large parking lot are not acceptable uses of the extremely limited land where higher-density, mixed-use development is allowed and needed in San José.

Please stand by the principles and plans we have created to guide our city and region into a better, more sustainable future. Please tell Chick-fil-A to majorly re-work its San Carlos St proposal or locate elsewhere.

6/4/25, 12:29 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 3/3

Outlook
RE: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal From Lee, Jason <[email protected]>
Date Thu 2024-12-19 17:53
To 'Anita Lusebrink' ; Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>;
Dear Anita,

Thank you for your e-mail, and your opposition to the project is noted.

We acknowledge the description taken from the Character Area definition of the project site (page 20, pdf page 26 of the West San Carlos Urban Village Plan); however, the allowable land use is controlled by the Land Use Designation portion of the document. The site has a land use designation of Urban Village within the Mixed-Use Residential Character Area of the Urban Village Plan (page 26, pdf page 32). This designation is a commercial designation which also supports residential development only on parcels meeting a minimum size of 0.5 acres.

While the site is over 0.5 acres once combined, the proposed project still meets the designation in that it is a commercial use. There is no requirement for residential use on the project site.

Staff also acknowledges concerns regarding the form of and parking area provided by the project, but we note that many of the policies of the Urban Village Plan “encourage” certain things, and are not specific requirements.

For instance, Policy LU-1.1 encourages new commercial development at an FAR of 0.3 or greater (page 33, pdf page 39); while the project does not have a 0.3 FAR, staff also cannot find the project contrary to the Urban Village Plan because there is no specific FAR requirement for the project. Examples of requirements within the UV Plan are Policy LU-2.3 and Policy LU-2.6, which specifically prohibit surface parking in front of buildings and drive- through uses, respectively.

Staff does recognize Goal UD-6 and subsequent policies (page 57, pdf page 63), but these are goals and action items for the City to implement across the Urban Village. The City believes it has generally accomplished this through the elimination of parking minimums and permit requirements for sharing parking, and cannot apply these policies to individual projects.

Regarding the proposed parking lot, the relevant requirements in the Urban Design Concept (page 66, pdf page 72) are to encourage parking reductions (since defunct) and explore alternative parking solutions, both of which are non-objective policies, and to locate surface parking to the rear of developments, which this proposal does.

There is no parking maximum. Generally, staff finds that this project will very likely be able to resolve all conflicts with the policies and elements of the Urban Design Concept.

In short, staff must review the project as submitted, which includes the demolition of the existing commercial building and the construction of a one-story building with a parking lot, and review the project for conformance with City ordinances and plans (and state and federal laws, as necessary). While a larger mixed-use project would be allowed here, and would perhaps be desirable, that is ultimately not the project proposed and is not the 6/4/25, 12:29 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 1/3

[External Email. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. Learn more] project being reviewed. If a proposed project is consistent with and can meet the Site Development Permit findings, then staff must recommend approval. It will ultimately be up to the decision-making body to approve or deny the project.

Staff believes the project as submitted generally conforms with the land use designation and applicable objective standards of the General and Urban Village plans in promoting commercial development at the site. Staff has encouraged the applicant to increase floor area, avoid demolition of the existing building, and decrease the amount of parking, but staff cannot force an applicant to make these changes (or recommend denial of the project) unless they contravene objective policies or the zoning code. I’ll note that even if staff finds that a project does contravene Urban Village or General Plan policies, an applicant can request that staff continue reviewing the project and take it to a decision maker (Director’s Hearing in this case) for a final decision on the project.

In conclusion, while the concerns about this project are heard and understood, staff has not found the project to contravene the Urban Village Plan. Even if the proposed project is not the most intensive use allowed at the site, staff ultimately must review the project as submitted and recommend approval or disapproval based on whether or not the project meets the findings to approve a Site Development Permit.

Please note that we expect to hold a community meeting on this project early in 2025 on a date to be determined.

Thank you,
Jason

---
Jason Lee, Planner II
[email protected] | 408.535.3887

City of San José
Planning, Building, & Code Enforcement
200 E. Santa Clara Street, 3F Tower
San José, California 95113-1905
www.sanjoseca.gov/planning

From: Anita Lusebrink
Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2024 6:31 AM
To: Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Lee, Jason <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>; Subject: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal

Some people who received this message don't often get email from . Learn why this is important To the San José Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement Department, Mayor Mahan, Councilmember Davis, and Councilmember-elect Mulcahy,

6/4/25, 12:29 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 2/3

This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed Chick-fil-A at 1301 W San Carlos Street. This project is at odds with San José’s vision for West San Carlos and what I want to see in this neighborhood.

The West San Carlos Urban Village Plan describes the site of the proposed development as an area with “higher- density mixed-use and residential development drawing energy from nearby Downtown San José and the Diridon Station. Development is proposed to range between three and seven stories with residential uses above a mix of active groundfloor retail.” A single-story, 5,139-square-foot fast-food restaurant does not align with this description.

It actively works against the atmosphere an urban village is supposed to foster by encouraging customers to travel by car.

This location is right along VTA’s 523/23 bus line and just a few minutes away from light rail by foot. Additionally, construction of the larger parking lot detailed in the proposal would require demolishing two existing local businesses. This new restaurant should not need a parking lot larger than the one that supported the previous fast- food establishment that occupied the corner of this site.

As is currently proposed, a standalone Chick-fil-A and a large parking lot are not acceptable uses of the extremely limited land where higher-density, mixed-use development is allowed and needed in San José. Please stand by the principles and plans we have created to guide our city and region into a better, more sustainable future. Please tell Chick-fil-A to majorly re-work its San Carlos St proposal or locate elsewhere.

Anita Lusebrink
Santa Clara County resident for over 55 years

6/4/25, 12:29 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 3/3 Outlook
RE: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal From Lee, Jason <[email protected]>
Date Thu 2024-12-19 17:52
To 'Robert Wood' ; Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>; [email protected] Dear Robert,

Thank you for your e-mail, and your opposition to the project is noted.

We acknowledge the description taken from the Character Area definition of the project site (page 20, pdf page 26 of the West San Carlos Urban Village Plan); however, the allowable land use is controlled by the Land Use Designation portion of the document. The site has a land use designation of Urban Village within the Mixed-Use Residential Character Area of the Urban Village Plan (page 26, pdf page 32). This designation is a commercial designation which also supports residential development only on parcels meeting a minimum size of 0.5 acres.

While the site is over 0.5 acres once combined, the proposed project still meets the designation in that it is a commercial use. There is no requirement for residential use on the project site.

Staff also acknowledges concerns regarding the form of and parking area provided by the project, but we note that many of the policies of the Urban Village Plan “encourage” certain things, and are not specific requirements.

For instance, Policy LU-1.1 encourages new commercial development at an FAR of 0.3 or greater (page 33, pdf page 39); while the project does not have a 0.3 FAR, staff also cannot find the project contrary to the Urban Village Plan because there is no specific FAR requirement for the project. Examples of requirements within the UV Plan are Policy LU-2.3 and Policy LU-2.6, which specifically prohibit surface parking in front of buildings and drive- through uses, respectively.

Staff does recognize Goal UD-6 and subsequent policies (page 57, pdf page 63), but these are goals and action items for the City to implement across the Urban Village. The City believes it has generally accomplished this through the elimination of parking minimums and permit requirements for sharing parking, and cannot apply these policies to individual projects.

Regarding the proposed parking lot, the relevant requirements in the Urban Design Concept (page 66, pdf page 72) are to encourage parking reductions (since defunct) and explore alternative parking solutions, both of which are non-objective policies, and to locate surface parking to the rear of developments, which this proposal does.

There is no parking maximum. Generally, staff finds that this project will very likely be able to resolve all conflicts with the policies and elements of the Urban Design Concept.

In short, staff must review the project as submitted, which includes the demolition of the existing commercial building and the construction of a one-story building with a parking lot, and review the project for conformance with City ordinances and plans (and state and federal laws, as necessary). While a larger mixed-use project would be allowed here, and would perhaps be desirable, that is ultimately not the project proposed and is not the 6/4/25, 12:28 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 1/3

[External Email. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. Learn more] project being reviewed. If a proposed project is consistent with and can meet the Site Development Permit findings, then staff must recommend approval. It will ultimately be up to the decision-making body to approve or deny the project.

Staff believes the project as submitted generally conforms with the land use designation and applicable objective standards of the General and Urban Village plans in promoting commercial development at the site. Staff has encouraged the applicant to increase floor area, avoid demolition of the existing building, and decrease the amount of parking, but staff cannot force an applicant to make these changes (or recommend denial of the project) unless they contravene objective policies or the zoning code. I’ll note that even if staff finds that a project does contravene Urban Village or General Plan policies, an applicant can request that staff continue reviewing the project and take it to a decision maker (Director’s Hearing in this case) for a final decision on the project.

In conclusion, while the concerns about this project are heard and understood, staff has not found the project to contravene the Urban Village Plan. Even if the proposed project is not the most intensive use allowed at the site, staff ultimately must review the project as submitted and recommend approval or disapproval based on whether or not the project meets the findings to approve a Site Development Permit.

Please note that we expect to hold a community meeting on this project early in 2025 on a date to be determined.

Thank you,
Jason

---
Jason Lee, Planner II
[email protected] | 408.535.3887

City of San José
Planning, Building, & Code Enforcement
200 E. Santa Clara Street, 3F Tower
San José, California 95113-1905
www.sanjoseca.gov/planning

From: Robert Wood
Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2024 11:42 AM
To: Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Lee, Jason <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>; Subject: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal

You don't often get email from Learn why this is important To the San José Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement Department, Mayor Mahan, Councilmember Davis, and Councilmember-elect Mulcahy,
I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed Chick-fil-A at 1301 W San Carlos Street. This project is at 6/4/25, 12:28 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 2/3

This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. odds with San José’s vision for West San Carlos and what I want to see in this neighborhood.

The West San Carlos Urban Village Plan describes the site of the proposed development as an area with “higher- density mixed-use and residential development drawing energy from nearby Downtown San José and the Diridon Station. Development is proposed to range between three and seven stories with residential uses above a mix of active groundfloor retail.”
A single-story, 5,139-square-foot fast-food restaurant does not align with this description. It actively works against the atmosphere an urban village is supposed to foster by encouraging customers to travel by car. This location is right along VTA’s 523/23 bus line and just a few minutes away from light rail by foot.

Additionally, construction of the larger parking lot detailed in the proposal would require demolishing two existing local businesses. This new restaurant should not need a parking lot larger than the one that supported the previous fast-food establishment that occupied the corner of this site.

As is currently proposed, a standalone Chick-fil-A and a large parking lot are not acceptable uses of the extremely limited land where higher-density, mixed-use development is allowed and needed in San José.

Please stand by the principles and plans we have created to guide our city and region into a better, more sustainable future. Please tell Chick-fil-A to majorly re-work its San Carlos St proposal or locate elsewhere.

6/4/25, 12:28 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 3/3 Outlook
RE: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal From Lee, Jason <[email protected]>
Date Thu 2024-12-19 17:58
To Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>;
Dear Kaitlan,

Thank you for your e-mail, and your opposition to the project is noted. Staff acknowledges the initial comment, but we must note that we are beholden to review all projects agnostic of the applicant, taking into account the required permit findings (covering land use and environmental matters) only, to form a recommendation on the project.

We acknowledge the description taken from the Character Area definition of the project site (page 20, pdf page 26 of the West San Carlos Urban Village Plan); however, the allowable land use is controlled by the Land Use Designation portion of the document. The site has a land use designation of Urban Village within the Mixed-Use Residential Character Area of the Urban Village Plan (page 26, pdf page 32). This designation is a commercial designation which also supports residential development only on parcels meeting a minimum size of 0.5 acres.

While the site is over 0.5 acres once combined, the proposed project still meets the designation in that it is a commercial use. There is no requirement for residential use on the project site.

Staff also acknowledges concerns regarding the form of and parking area provided by the project, but we note that many of the policies of the Urban Village Plan “encourage” certain things, and are not specific requirements.

For instance, Policy LU-1.1 encourages new commercial development at an FAR of 0.3 or greater (page 33, pdf page 39); while the project does not have a 0.3 FAR, staff also cannot find the project contrary to the Urban Village Plan because there is no specific FAR requirement for the project. Examples of requirements within the UV Plan are Policy LU-2.3 and Policy LU-2.6, which specifically prohibit surface parking in front of buildings and drive- through uses, respectively.

Staff does recognize Goal UD-6 and subsequent policies (page 57, pdf page 63), but these are goals and action items for the City to implement across the Urban Village. The City believes it has generally accomplished this through the elimination of parking minimums and permit requirements for sharing parking, and cannot apply these policies to individual projects.

Regarding the proposed parking lot, the relevant requirements in the Urban Design Concept (page 66, pdf page 72) are to encourage parking reductions (since defunct) and explore alternative parking solutions, both of which are non-objective policies, and to locate surface parking to the rear of developments, which this proposal does.

There is no parking maximum. Generally, staff finds that this project will very likely be able to resolve all conflicts with the policies and elements of the Urban Design Concept.

6/4/25, 12:30 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 1/3

[External Email. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. Learn more] In short, staff must review the project as submitted, which includes the demolition of the existing commercial building and the construction of a one-story building with a parking lot, and review the project for conformance with City ordinances and plans (and state and federal laws, as necessary). While a larger mixed-use project would be allowed here, and would perhaps be desirable, that is ultimately not the project proposed and is not the project being reviewed. If a proposed project is consistent with and can meet the Site Development Permit findings, then staff must recommend approval. It will ultimately be up to the decision-making body to approve or deny the project.

Staff believes the project as submitted generally conforms with the land use designation and applicable objective standards of the General and Urban Village plans in promoting commercial development at the site. Staff has encouraged the applicant to increase floor area, avoid demolition of the existing building, and decrease the amount of parking, but staff cannot force an applicant to make these changes (or recommend denial of the project) unless they contravene objective policies or the zoning code. I’ll note that even if staff finds that a project does contravene Urban Village or General Plan policies, an applicant can request that staff continue reviewing the project and take it to a decision maker (Director’s Hearing in this case) for a final decision on the project.

In conclusion, while the concerns about this project are heard and understood, staff has not found the project to contravene the Urban Village Plan. Even if the proposed project is not the most intensive use allowed at the site, staff ultimately must review the project as submitted and recommend approval or disapproval based on whether or not the project meets the findings to approve a Site Development Permit.

Please note that we expect to hold a community meeting on this project early in 2025 on a date to be determined.

Thank you,
Jason

---
Jason Lee, Planner II
[email protected] | 408.535.3887

City of San José
Planning, Building, & Code Enforcement
200 E. Santa Clara Street, 3F Tower
San José, California 95113-1905
www.sanjoseca.gov/planning

From: Kaitlan Zizzo
Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2024 11:21 AM
To: Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Lee, Jason <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>; Subject: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal

6/4/25, 12:30 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 2/3

This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

Some people who received this message don't often get email from Learn why this is important To the San José Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement Department, Mayor Mahan, Councilmember Davis, and Councilmember-elect Mulcahy,

Chick-fil-A is blatantly opposed to LGBTQ+ rights. That is not how I would describe the City of San Jose.

I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed Chick-fil-A at 1301 W San Carlos Street. This project is at odds with San José’s vision for West San Carlos and what I want to see in this neighborhood.

The West San Carlos Urban Village Plan describes the site of the proposed development as an area with “higher- density mixed-use and residential development drawing energy from nearby Downtown San José and the Diridon Station. Development is proposed to range between three and seven stories with residential uses above a mix of active ground floor retail.”

A single-story, 5,139-square-foot fast-food restaurant does not align with this description. It actively works against the atmosphere an urban village is supposed to foster by encouraging customers to travel by car. This location is right along VTA’s 523/23 bus line and just a few minutes away from light rail by foot.

Additionally, construction of the larger parking lot detailed in the proposal would require demolishing two existing local businesses. This new restaurant should not need a parking lot larger than the one that supported the previous fast-food establishment that occupied the corner of this site.

As is currently proposed, a standalone Chick-fil-A and a large parking lot are not acceptable uses of the extremely limited land where higher-density, mixed-use development is allowed and needed in San José.

Please stand by the principles and plans we have created to guide our city and region into a better, more sustainable future. Please tell Chick-fil-A to majorly re-work its San Carlos St proposal or locate elsewhere.

Kaitlan Zizzo

6/4/25, 12:30 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 3/3

Outlook
RE: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal From Lee, Jason <[email protected]>
Date Tue 2024-12-31 10:53
To 'Annmarie Bustamante' <[email protected]>; Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>;
Dear Annemarie,

Thank you for your e-mail, and your opposition to the project is noted.

We acknowledge the description taken from the Character Area definition of the project site (page 20, pdf page 26 of the West San Carlos Urban Village Plan); however, the allowable land use is controlled by the Land Use Designation portion of the document. The site has a land use designation of Urban Village within the Mixed-Use Residential Character Area of the Urban Village Plan (page 26, pdf page 32). This designation is a commercial designation which also supports residential development only on parcels meeting a minimum size of 0.5 acres.

While the site is over 0.5 acres once combined, the proposed project still meets the designation in that it is a commercial use. There is no requirement for residential use on the project site.

Staff also acknowledges concerns regarding the form of and parking area provided by the project, but we note that many of the policies of the Urban Village Plan “encourage” certain things, and are not specific requirements.

For instance, Policy LU-1.1 encourages new commercial development at an FAR of 0.3 or greater (page 33, pdf page 39); while the project does not have a 0.3 FAR, staff also cannot find the project contrary to the Urban Village Plan because there is no specific FAR requirement for the project. Examples of requirements within the UV Plan are Policy LU-2.3 and Policy LU-2.6, which specifically prohibit surface parking in front of buildings and drive- through uses, respectively.

Staff does recognize Goal UD-6 and subsequent policies (page 57, pdf page 63), but these are goals and action items for the City to implement across the Urban Village. The City believes it has generally accomplished this through the elimination of parking minimums and permit requirements for sharing parking, and cannot apply these policies to individual projects.

Regarding the proposed parking lot, the relevant requirements in the Urban Design Concept (page 66, pdf page 72) are to encourage parking reductions (since defunct) and explore alternative parking solutions, both of which are non-objective policies, and to locate surface parking to the rear of developments, which this proposal does.

There is no parking maximum. Generally, staff finds that this project will very likely be able to resolve all conflicts with the policies and elements of the Urban Design Concept.

In short, staff must review the project as submitted, which includes the demolition of the existing commercial building and the construction of a one-story building with a parking lot, and review the project for conformance with City ordinances and plans (and state and federal laws, as necessary). While a larger mixed-use project would be allowed here, and would perhaps be desirable, that is ultimately not the project proposed and is not the 6/4/25, 12:30 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 1/3

[External Email. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. Learn more] project being reviewed. If a proposed project is consistent with and can meet the Site Development Permit findings, then staff must recommend approval. It will ultimately be up to the decision-making body to approve or deny the project.

Staff believes the project as submitted generally conforms with the land use designation and applicable objective standards of the General and Urban Village plans in promoting commercial development at the site. Staff has encouraged the applicant to increase floor area, avoid demolition of the existing building, and decrease the amount of parking, but staff cannot force an applicant to make these changes (or recommend denial of the project) unless they contravene objective policies or the zoning code. I’ll note that even if staff finds that a project does contravene Urban Village or General Plan policies, an applicant can request that staff continue reviewing the project and take it to a decision maker (Director’s Hearing in this case) for a final decision on the project.

In conclusion, while the concerns about this project are heard and understood, staff has not found the project to contravene the Urban Village Plan. Even if the proposed project is not the most intensive use allowed at the site, staff ultimately must review the project as submitted and recommend approval or disapproval based on whether or not the project meets the findings to approve a Site Development Permit.

Please note that we expect to hold a community meeting on this project early in 2025 on a date to be determined.

Thank you,
Jason

---
Jason Lee, Planner II
[email protected] | 408.535.3887

City of San José
Planning, Building, & Code Enforcement
200 E. Santa Clara Street, 3F Tower
San José, California 95113-1905
www.sanjoseca.gov/planning

From: Annmarie Bustamante
Sent: Sunday, December 29, 2024 15:34
To: Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Lee, Jason <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>; Subject: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal

Some people who received this message don't often get email from . Learn why this is important To the San José Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement Department, Mayor Mahan, Councilmember Davis, and Councilmember-elect Mulcahy,
6/4/25, 12:30 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 2/3

This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed Chick-fil-A at 1301 W San Carlos Street. This project is at odds with San José’s vision for West San Carlos and what I want to see in this neighborhood.

The West San Carlos Urban Village Plan describes the site of the proposed development as an area with “higher- density mixed-use and residential development drawing energy from nearby Downtown San José and the Diridon Station. Development is proposed to range between three and seven stories with residential uses above a mix of active groundfloor retail.”
A single-story, 5,139-square-foot fast-food restaurant does not align with this description. It actively works against the atmosphere an urban village is supposed to foster by encouraging customers to travel by car. This location is right along VTA’s 523/23 bus line and just a few minutes away from light rail by foot.

Additionally, construction of the larger parking lot detailed in the proposal would require demolishing two existing local businesses. This new restaurant should not need a parking lot larger than the one that supported the previous fast-food establishment that occupied the corner of this site.

As is currently proposed, a standalone Chick-fil-A and a large parking lot are not acceptable uses of the extremely limited land where higher-density, mixed-use development is allowed and needed in San José.

Please stand by the principles and plans we have created to guide our city and region into a better, more sustainable future. Please tell Chick-fil-A to majorly re-work its San Carlos St proposal or locate elsewhere.

Thank you,
Annmarie Bustamante

6/4/25, 12:30 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 3/3 Outlook
RE: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal From Lee, Jason <[email protected]>
Date Tue 2024-12-31 10:52
To 'gdb39' <[email protected]>; Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>
Hello,

Thank you for your e-mail, and your opposition to the project is noted.

We acknowledge the description taken from the Character Area definition of the project site (page 20, pdf page 26 of the West San Carlos Urban Village Plan); however, the allowable land use is controlled by the Land Use Designation portion of the document. The site has a land use designation of Urban Village within the Mixed-Use Residential Character Area of the Urban Village Plan (page 26, pdf page 32). This designation is a commercial designation which also supports residential development only on parcels meeting a minimum size of 0.5 acres.

While the site is over 0.5 acres once combined, the proposed project still meets the designation in that it is a commercial use. There is no requirement for residential use on the project site.

Staff also acknowledges concerns regarding the form of and parking area provided by the project, but we note that many of the policies of the Urban Village Plan “encourage” certain things, and are not specific requirements.

For instance, Policy LU-1.1 encourages new commercial development at an FAR of 0.3 or greater (page 33, pdf page 39); while the project does not have a 0.3 FAR, staff also cannot find the project contrary to the Urban Village Plan because there is no specific FAR requirement for the project. Examples of requirements within the UV Plan are Policy LU-2.3 and Policy LU-2.6, which specifically prohibit surface parking in front of buildings and drive- through uses, respectively.

Staff does recognize Goal UD-6 and subsequent policies (page 57, pdf page 63), but these are goals and action items for the City to implement across the Urban Village. The City believes it has generally accomplished this through the elimination of parking minimums and permit requirements for sharing parking, and cannot apply these policies to individual projects.

Regarding the proposed parking lot, the relevant requirements in the Urban Design Concept (page 66, pdf page 72) are to encourage parking reductions (since defunct) and explore alternative parking solutions, both of which are non-objective policies, and to locate surface parking to the rear of developments, which this proposal does.

There is no parking maximum. Generally, staff finds that this project will very likely be able to resolve all conflicts with the policies and elements of the Urban Design Concept.

In short, staff must review the project as submitted, which includes the demolition of the existing commercial building and the construction of a one-story building with a parking lot, and review the project for conformance with City ordinances and plans (and state and federal laws, as necessary). While a larger mixed-use project would be allowed here, and would perhaps be desirable, that is ultimately not the project proposed and is not the 6/4/25, 12:30 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 1/3

[External Email. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. Learn more] project being reviewed. If a proposed project is consistent with and can meet the Site Development Permit findings, then staff must recommend approval. It will ultimately be up to the decision-making body to approve or deny the project.

Staff believes the project as submitted generally conforms with the land use designation and applicable objective standards of the General and Urban Village plans in promoting commercial development at the site. Staff has encouraged the applicant to increase floor area, avoid demolition of the existing building, and decrease the amount of parking, but staff cannot force an applicant to make these changes (or recommend denial of the project) unless they contravene objective policies or the zoning code. I’ll note that even if staff finds that a project does contravene Urban Village or General Plan policies, an applicant can request that staff continue reviewing the project and take it to a decision maker (Director’s Hearing in this case) for a final decision on the project.

In conclusion, while the concerns about this project are heard and understood, staff has not found the project to contravene the Urban Village Plan. Even if the proposed project is not the most intensive use allowed at the site, staff ultimately must review the project as submitted and recommend approval or disapproval based on whether or not the project meets the findings to approve a Site Development Permit.

Please note that we expect to hold a community meeting on this project early in 2025 on a date to be determined.

Thank you,
Jason

---
Jason Lee, Planner II
[email protected] | 408.535.3887

City of San José
Planning, Building, & Code Enforcement
200 E. Santa Clara Street, 3F Tower
San José, California 95113-1905
www.sanjoseca.gov/planning

From: gdb39
Sent: Monday, December 30, 2024 21:17
To: Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Lee, Jason <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>; Subject: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal

You don't often get email from Learn why this is important To the San José Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement Department, Mayor Mahan, Councilmember Davis, and Councilmember-elect Mulcahy,
6/4/25, 12:30 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 2/3

This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed Chick-fil-A at 1301 W San Carlos Street. This project is at odds with San José’s vision for West San Carlos and what I want to see in this neighborhood.

The West San Carlos Urban Village Plan describes the site of the proposed development as an area with “higher- density mixed-use and residential development drawing energy from nearby Downtown San José and the Diridon Station. Development is proposed to range between three and seven stories with residential uses above a mix of active groundfloor retail.”
A single-story, 5,139-square-foot fast-food restaurant does not align with this description. It actively works against the atmosphere an urban village is supposed to foster by encouraging customers to travel by car. This location is right along VTA’s 523/23 bus line and just a few minutes away from light rail by foot.

Additionally, construction of the larger parking lot detailed in the proposal would require demolishing two existing local businesses. This new restaurant should not need a parking lot larger than the one that supported the previous fast-food establishment that occupied the corner of this site.

As is currently proposed, a standalone Chick-fil-A and a large parking lot are not acceptable uses of the extremely limited land where higher-density, mixed-use development is allowed and needed in San José.

Please stand by the principles and plans we have created to guide our city and region into a better, more sustainable future. Please tell Chick-fil-A to majorly re-work its San Carlos St proposal or locate elsewhere.

6/4/25, 12:30 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 3/3 Outlook
RE: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal From Lee, Jason <[email protected]>
Date Mon 2025-01-06 15:54
To Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>; [email protected] Dear Kelvin,

Thank you for your e-mail, and your opposition to the project is noted.

We acknowledge the description taken from the Character Area definition of the project site (page 20, pdf page 26 of the West San Carlos Urban Village Plan); however, the allowable land use is controlled by the Land Use Designation portion of the document. The site has a land use designation of Urban Village within the Mixed-Use Residential Character Area of the Urban Village Plan (page 26, pdf page 32). This designation is a commercial designation which also supports residential development only on parcels meeting a minimum size of 0.5 acres.

While the site is over 0.5 acres once combined, the proposed project still meets the designation in that it is a commercial use. There is no requirement for residential use on the project site.

Staff also acknowledges concerns regarding the form of and parking area provided by the project, but we note that many of the policies of the Urban Village Plan “encourage” certain things, and are not specific requirements.

For instance, Policy LU-1.1 encourages new commercial development at an FAR of 0.3 or greater (page 33, pdf page 39); while the project does not have a 0.3 FAR, staff also cannot find the project contrary to the Urban Village Plan because there is no specific FAR requirement for the project. Examples of requirements within the UV Plan are Policy LU-2.3 and Policy LU-2.6, which specifically prohibit surface parking in front of buildings and drive- through uses, respectively.

Staff does recognize Goal UD-6 and subsequent policies (page 57, pdf page 63), but these are goals and action items for the City to implement across the Urban Village. The City believes it has generally accomplished this through the elimination of parking minimums and permit requirements for sharing parking, and cannot apply these policies to individual projects.

Regarding the proposed parking lot, the relevant requirements in the Urban Design Concept (page 66, pdf page 72) are to encourage parking reductions (since defunct) and explore alternative parking solutions, both of which are non-objective policies, and to locate surface parking to the rear of developments, which this proposal does.

There is no parking maximum. Generally, staff finds that this project will very likely be able to resolve all conflicts with the policies and elements of the Urban Design Concept.

In short, staff must review the project as submitted, which includes the demolition of the existing commercial building and the construction of a one-story building with a parking lot, and review the project for conformance with City ordinances and plans (and state and federal laws, as necessary). While a larger mixed-use project would be allowed here, and would perhaps be desirable, that is ultimately not the project proposed and is not the 6/4/25, 12:31 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 1/3

[External Email. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. Learn more] project being reviewed. If a proposed project is consistent with and can meet the Site Development Permit findings, then staff must recommend approval. It will ultimately be up to the decision-making body to approve or deny the project.

Staff believes the project as submitted generally conforms with the land use designation and applicable objective standards of the General and Urban Village plans in promoting commercial development at the site. Staff has encouraged the applicant to increase floor area, avoid demolition of the existing building, and decrease the amount of parking, but staff cannot force an applicant to make these changes (or recommend denial of the project) unless they contravene objective policies or the zoning code. I’ll note that even if staff finds that a project does contravene Urban Village or General Plan policies, an applicant can request that staff continue reviewing the project and take it to a decision maker (Director’s Hearing in this case) for a final decision on the project.

In conclusion, while the concerns about this project are heard and understood, staff has not found the project to contravene the Urban Village Plan. Even if the proposed project is not the most intensive use allowed at the site, staff ultimately must review the project as submitted and recommend approval or disapproval based on whether or not the project meets the findings to approve a Site Development Permit.

Please note that we expect to hold a community meeting on this project early in 2025 on a date to be determined.

Thank you,
Jason

---
Jason Lee, Planner II
[email protected] | 408.535.3887

City of San José
Planning, Building, & Code Enforcement
200 E. Santa Clara Street, 3F Tower
San José, California 95113-1905
www.sanjoseca.gov/planning

From: Kelvin Y
Sent: Monday, January 6, 2025 15:35
To: Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Lee, Jason <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>; Subject: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal

Some people who received this message don't often get email from . Learn why this is important To the San José Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement Department, Mayor Mahan, Councilmember Davis, and Councilmember-elect Mulcahy,
I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed Chick-fil-A at 1301 W San Carlos Street. This project is at 6/4/25, 12:31 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 2/3

This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. odds with San José’s vision for West San Carlos and what I want to see in this neighborhood.

The West San Carlos Urban Village Plan describes the site of the proposed development as an area with “higher- density mixed-use and residential development drawing energy from nearby Downtown San José and the Diridon Station. Development is proposed to range between three and seven stories with residential uses above a mix of active groundfloor retail.”
A single-story, 5,139-square-foot fast-food restaurant does not align with this description. It actively works against the atmosphere an urban village is supposed to foster by encouraging customers to travel by car. This location is right along VTA’s 523/23 bus line and just a few minutes away from light rail by foot.

Additionally, construction of the larger parking lot detailed in the proposal would require demolishing two existing local businesses. This new restaurant should not need a parking lot larger than the one that supported the previous fast-food establishment that occupied the corner of this site.

As is currently proposed, a standalone Chick-fil-A and a large parking lot are not acceptable uses of the extremely limited land where higher-density, mixed-use development is allowed and needed in San José.

Please stand by the principles and plans we have created to guide our city and region into a better, more sustainable future. Please tell Chick-fil-A to majorly re-work its San Carlos St proposal or locate elsewhere.

6/4/25, 12:31 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 3/3 Outlook
RE: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal From Lee, Jason <[email protected]>
Date Fri 2025-01-24 17:23
To 'Jake E' <[email protected]>; Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>
Dear Jake,

Thank you for your e-mail, and your opposition to the project is noted.

We acknowledge the description taken from the Character Area definition of the project site (page 20, pdf page 26 of the West San Carlos Urban Village Plan); however, the allowable land use is controlled by the Land Use Designation portion of the document. The site has a land use designation of Urban Village within the Mixed-Use Residential Character Area of the Urban Village Plan (page 26, pdf page 32). This designation is a commercial designation which also supports residential development only on parcels meeting a minimum size of 0.5 acres.

While the site is over 0.5 acres once combined, the proposed project still meets the designation in that it is a commercial use. There is no requirement for residential use on the project site.

Staff also acknowledges concerns regarding the form of and parking area provided by the project, but we note that many of the policies of the Urban Village Plan “encourage” certain things, and are not specific requirements.

For instance, Policy LU-1.1 encourages new commercial development at an FAR of 0.3 or greater (page 33, pdf page 39); while the project does not have a 0.3 FAR, staff also cannot find the project contrary to the Urban Village Plan because there is no specific FAR requirement for the project. Examples of requirements within the UV Plan are Policy LU-2.3 and Policy LU-2.6, which specifically prohibit surface parking in front of buildings and drive- through uses, respectively.

Staff does recognize Goal UD-6 and subsequent policies (page 57, pdf page 63), but these are goals and action items for the City to implement across the Urban Village. The City believes it has generally accomplished this through the elimination of parking minimums and permit requirements for sharing parking, and cannot apply these policies to individual projects.

Regarding the proposed parking lot, the relevant requirements in the Urban Design Concept (page 66, pdf page 72) are to encourage parking reductions (since defunct) and explore alternative parking solutions, both of which are non-objective policies, and to locate surface parking to the rear of developments, which this proposal does.

There is no parking maximum. Generally, staff finds that this project will very likely be able to resolve all conflicts with the policies and elements of the Urban Design Concept.

In short, staff must review the project as submitted, which includes the demolition of the existing commercial building and the construction of a one-story building with a parking lot, and review the project for conformance with City ordinances and plans (and state and federal laws, as necessary). While a larger mixed-use project would be allowed here, and would perhaps be desirable, that is ultimately not the project proposed and is not the 6/4/25, 12:32 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 1/3

[External Email. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. Learn more] project being reviewed. If a proposed project is consistent with and can meet the Site Development Permit findings, then staff must recommend approval. It will ultimately be up to the decision-making body to approve or deny the project.

Staff believes the project as submitted generally conforms with the land use designation and applicable objective standards of the General and Urban Village plans in promoting commercial development at the site. Staff has encouraged the applicant to increase floor area, avoid demolition of the existing building, and decrease the amount of parking, but staff cannot force an applicant to make these changes (or recommend denial of the project) unless they contravene objective policies or the zoning code. I’ll note that even if staff finds that a project does contravene Urban Village or General Plan policies, an applicant can request that staff continue reviewing the project and take it to a decision maker (Director’s Hearing in this case) for a final decision on the project.

In conclusion, while the concerns about this project are heard and understood, staff has not found the project to contravene the Urban Village Plan. Even if the proposed project is not the most intensive use allowed at the site, staff ultimately must review the project as submitted and recommend approval or disapproval based on whether or not the project meets the findings to approve a Site Development Permit.

Please note that we expect to hold a community meeting on this project in the first quarter of 2025 on a date to be determined.

Thank you,
Jason

---
Jason Lee, Planner II
[email protected] | 408.535.3887

City of San José
Planning, Building, & Code Enforcement
200 E. Santa Clara Street, 3F Tower
San José, California 95113-1905
www.sanjoseca.gov/planning

From: Jake E
Sent: Friday, January 24, 2025 13:14
To: Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Lee, Jason <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>; Subject: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal

Some people who received this message don't often get email from Learn why this is important To the San José Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement Department, Mayor Mahan, Councilmember Davis, and Councilmember-elect Mulcahy,
I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed Chick-fil-A at 1301 W San Carlos Street. This project is at 6/4/25, 12:32 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 2/3

This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. odds with San José’s vision for West San Carlos and what I want to see in this neighborhood.

The West San Carlos Urban Village Plan describes the site of the proposed development as an area with “higher- density mixed-use and residential development drawing energy from nearby Downtown San José and the Diridon Station. Development is proposed to range between three and seven stories with residential uses above a mix of active groundfloor retail.”
A single-story, 5,139-square-foot fast-food restaurant does not align with this description. It actively works against the atmosphere an urban village is supposed to foster by encouraging customers to travel by car. This location is right along VTA’s 523/23 bus line and just a few minutes away from light rail by foot.

Additionally, construction of the larger parking lot detailed in the proposal would require demolishing two existing local businesses. This new restaurant should not need a parking lot larger than the one that supported the previous fast-food establishment that occupied the corner of this site.

As is currently proposed, a standalone Chick-fil-A and a large parking lot are not acceptable uses of the extremely limited land where higher-density, mixed-use development is allowed and needed in San José.

Please stand by the principles and plans we have created to guide our city and region into a better, more sustainable future. Please tell Chick-fil-A to majorly re-work its San Carlos St proposal or locate elsewhere.

Thank you for your attention and assistance in resolving this issue.

Jacob Ellens II

6/4/25, 12:32 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 3/3

Outlook
RE: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal From Lee, Jason <[email protected]>
Date Mon 2025-01-27 10:26
To ; Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>;
Hello,
Thank you for your e-mail, and your opposition to the project is noted.

We acknowledge the description taken from the Character Area definition of the project site (page 20, pdf page 26 of the West San Carlos Urban Village Plan); however, the allowable land use is controlled by the Land Use Designation portion of the document. The site has a land use designation of Urban Village within the Mixed-Use Residential Character Area of the Urban Village Plan (page 26, pdf page 32). This designation is a commercial designation which also supports residential development only on parcels meeting a minimum size of 0.5 acres. While the site is over 0.5 acres once combined, the proposed project still meets the designation in that it is a commercial use. There is no requirement for residential use on the project site.

Staff also acknowledges concerns regarding the form of and parking area provided by the project, but we note that many of the policies of the Urban Village Plan “encourage” certain things, and are not specific requirements. For instance, Policy LU-1.1 encourages new commercial development at an FAR of

0.3 or greater (page 33, pdf page 39); while the project does not have a 0.3 FAR, staff also cannot find the project contrary to the Urban Village Plan because there is no specific FAR requirement for the project.

Examples of requirements within the UV Plan are Policy LU-2.3 and Policy LU-2.6, which specifically prohibit surface parking in front of buildings and drive-through uses, respectively.

Staff does recognize Goal UD-6 and subsequent policies (page 57, pdf page 63), but these are goals and action items for the City to implement across the Urban Village. The City believes it has generally accomplished this through the elimination of parking minimums and permit requirements for sharing parking, and cannot apply these policies to individual projects.

Regarding the proposed parking lot, the relevant requirements in the Urban Design Concept (page 66, pdf page 72) are to encourage parking reductions (since defunct) and explore alternative parking solutions, both of which are non-objective policies, and to locate surface parking to the rear of developments, which this proposal does. There is no parking maximum. Generally, staff finds that this project will very likely be able to resolve all conflicts with the policies and elements of the Urban Design 6/4/25, 12:33 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 1/3

Concept.

In short, staff must review the project as submitted, which includes the demolition of the existing commercial building and the construction of a one-story building with a parking lot, and review the project for conformance with City ordinances and plans (and state and federal laws, as necessary). While a larger mixed-use project would be allowed here, and would perhaps be desirable, that is ultimately not the project proposed and is not the project being reviewed. If a proposed project is consistent with and can meet the Site Development Permit findings, then staff must recommend approval. It will ultimately be up to the decision-making body to approve or deny the project.

Staff believes the project as submitted generally conforms with the land use designation and applicable objective standards of the General and Urban Village plans in promoting commercial development at the site. Staff has encouraged the applicant to increase floor area, avoid demolition of the existing building, and decrease the amount of parking, but staff cannot force an applicant to make these changes (or recommend denial of the project) unless they contravene objective policies or the zoning code. I’ll note that even if staff finds that a project does contravene Urban Village or General Plan policies, an applicant can request that staff continue reviewing the project and take it to a decision maker (Director’s Hearing in this case) for a final decision on the project.

In conclusion, while the concerns about this project are heard and understood, staff has not found the project to contravene the Urban Village Plan. Even if the proposed project is not the most intensive use allowed at the site, staff ultimately must review the project as submitted and recommend approval or disapproval based on whether or not the project meets the findings to approve a Site Development Permit.

Please note that we expect to hold a community meeting on this project in the first quarter of 2025 on a date to be determined, and I have put you on the list to be notified when that is scheduled.

Thank you,
Jason
---
Jason Lee, Planner II
[email protected] | 408.535.3887

City of San José
Planning, Building, & Code Enforcement
200 E. Santa Clara Street, 3F Tower
San José, California 95113-1905
www.sanjoseca.gov/planning
-----Original Message-----
From: Argyle Cat
Sent: Sunday, January 26, 2025 11:16
To: Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Lee, Jason <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>;
6/4/25, 12:33 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 2/3

Subject: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal [External Email. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. Learn more<https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification>]
[Some people who received this message don't often get email from Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ] To the San José Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement Department, Mayor Mahan, Councilmember Davis, and Councilmember-elect Mulcahy,
I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed Chick-fil-A at 1301 W San Carlos Street. This project is at odds with San José’s vision for West San Carlos and what I want to see in this neighborhood.

The West San Carlos Urban Village Plan describes the site of the proposed development as an area with “higher-density mixed-use and residential development drawing energy from nearby Downtown San José and the Diridon Station. Development is proposed to range between three and seven stories with residential uses above a mix of active groundfloor retail.” A single-story, 5,139-square-foot fast-food restaurant does not align with this description. It actively works against the atmosphere an urban village is supposed to foster by encouraging customers to travel by car. This location is right along VTA’s 523/23 bus line and just a few minutes away from light rail by foot.

Additionally, construction of the larger parking lot detailed in the proposal would require demolishing two existing local businesses. This new restaurant should not need a parking lot larger than the one that supported the previous fast-food establishment that occupied the corner of this site.

As is currently proposed, a standalone Chick-fil-A and a large parking lot are not acceptable uses of the extremely limited land where higher-density, mixed-use development is allowed and needed in San José.

Please stand by the principles and plans we have created to guide our city and region into a better, more sustainable future. Please tell Chick-fil-A to majorly re-work its San Carlos St proposal or locate elsewhere.

Sent from my iPhone
This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
6/4/25, 12:33 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 3/3

Outlook
RE: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal From Lee, Jason <[email protected]>
Date Mon 2025-01-27 10:26
To ' Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>;
Dear Mary,

Thank you for your e-mail, and your opposition to the project is noted.

We acknowledge the description taken from the Character Area definition of the project site (page 20, pdf page 26 of the West San Carlos Urban Village Plan); however, the allowable land use is controlled by the Land Use Designation portion of the document. The site has a land use designation of Urban Village within the Mixed-Use Residential Character Area of the Urban Village Plan (page 26, pdf page 32). This designation is a commercial designation which also supports residential development only on parcels meeting a minimum size of 0.5 acres.

While the site is over 0.5 acres once combined, the proposed project still meets the designation in that it is a commercial use. There is no requirement for residential use on the project site.

Staff also acknowledges concerns regarding the form of and parking area provided by the project, but we note that many of the policies of the Urban Village Plan “encourage” certain things, and are not specific requirements.

For instance, Policy LU-1.1 encourages new commercial development at an FAR of 0.3 or greater (page 33, pdf page 39); while the project does not have a 0.3 FAR, staff also cannot find the project contrary to the Urban Village Plan because there is no specific FAR requirement for the project. Examples of requirements within the UV Plan are Policy LU-2.3 and Policy LU-2.6, which specifically prohibit surface parking in front of buildings and drive- through uses, respectively.

Staff does recognize Goal UD-6 and subsequent policies (page 57, pdf page 63), but these are goals and action items for the City to implement across the Urban Village. The City believes it has generally accomplished this through the elimination of parking minimums and permit requirements for sharing parking, and cannot apply these policies to individual projects.

Regarding the proposed parking lot, the relevant requirements in the Urban Design Concept (page 66, pdf page 72) are to encourage parking reductions (since defunct) and explore alternative parking solutions, both of which are non-objective policies, and to locate surface parking to the rear of developments, which this proposal does.

There is no parking maximum. Generally, staff finds that this project will very likely be able to resolve all conflicts with the policies and elements of the Urban Design Concept.

In short, staff must review the project as submitted, which includes the demolition of the existing commercial building and the construction of a one-story building with a parking lot, and review the project for conformance with City ordinances and plans (and state and federal laws, as necessary). While a larger mixed-use project would be allowed here, and would perhaps be desirable, that is ultimately not the project proposed and is not the 6/4/25, 12:33 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 1/3

[External Email. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. Learn more] project being reviewed. If a proposed project is consistent with and can meet the Site Development Permit findings, then staff must recommend approval. It will ultimately be up to the decision-making body to approve or deny the project.

Staff believes the project as submitted generally conforms with the land use designation and applicable objective standards of the General and Urban Village plans in promoting commercial development at the site. Staff has encouraged the applicant to increase floor area, avoid demolition of the existing building, and decrease the amount of parking, but staff cannot force an applicant to make these changes (or recommend denial of the project) unless they contravene objective policies or the zoning code. I’ll note that even if staff finds that a project does contravene Urban Village or General Plan policies, an applicant can request that staff continue reviewing the project and take it to a decision maker (Director’s Hearing in this case) for a final decision on the project.

In conclusion, while the concerns about this project are heard and understood, staff has not found the project to contravene the Urban Village Plan. Even if the proposed project is not the most intensive use allowed at the site, staff ultimately must review the project as submitted and recommend approval or disapproval based on whether or not the project meets the findings to approve a Site Development Permit.

Please note that we expect to hold a community meeting on this project in the first quarter of 2025 on a date to be determined, and I have put you on the list to be notified when that is scheduled.

Thank you,
Jason

---
Jason Lee, Planner II
[email protected] | 408.535.3887

City of San José
Planning, Building, & Code Enforcement
200 E. Santa Clara Street, 3F Tower
San José, California 95113-1905
www.sanjoseca.gov/planning

From: Mary Faustina
Sent: Saturday, January 25, 2025 12:30
To: Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Lee, Jason <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>; Subject: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal

You don't often get email from Learn why this is important To the San José Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement Department, Mayor Mahan, Councilmember Davis, and Councilmember-elect Mulcahy,
I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed Chick-fil-A at 1301 W San Carlos Street. This project is at 6/4/25, 12:33 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 2/3

This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. odds with San José’s vision for West San Carlos and what I want to see in this neighborhood.

The West San Carlos Urban Village Plan describes the site of the proposed development as an area with “higher- density mixed-use and residential development drawing energy from nearby Downtown San José and the Diridon Station. Development is proposed to range between three and seven stories with residential uses above a mix of active groundfloor retail.”
A single-story, 5,139-square-foot fast-food restaurant does not align with this description. It actively works against the atmosphere an urban village is supposed to foster by encouraging customers to travel by car. This location is right along VTA’s 523/23 bus line and just a few minutes away from light rail by foot.

Additionally, construction of the larger parking lot detailed in the proposal would require demolishing two existing local businesses. This new restaurant should not need a parking lot larger than the one that supported the previous fast-food establishment that occupied the corner of this site.

As is currently proposed, a standalone Chick-fil-A and a large parking lot are not acceptable uses of the extremely limited land where higher-density, mixed-use development is allowed and needed in San José.

Please stand by the principles and plans we have created to guide our city and region into a better, more sustainable future. Please tell Chick-fil-A to majorly re-work its San Carlos St proposal or locate elsewhere.

Mary Lou Faustina

6/4/25, 12:33 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 3/3 Outlook
RE: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal From Lee, Jason <[email protected]>
Date Thu 2025-01-30 16:01
To 'Sebastian Kirsch' ; Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>;
Dear Sebastian,

Thank you for your e-mail, and your opposition to the project is noted.

First, I’ll just generally state that should the Chick-fil-A be approved and built, it will be conditioned to provide wider sidewalks on both San Carlos and on Race, including improvements to the intersection to further the pedestrian environment. At this point, staff continues to work with the applicant on the project, especially the San Carlos frontage, including adding interest to the proposed façade through a mural, and maintain walkable street- side entrances.

For the remainder of the letter:

We acknowledge the description taken from the Character Area definition of the project site (page 20, pdf page 26 of the West San Carlos Urban Village Plan); however, the allowable land use is controlled by the Land Use Designation portion of the document. The site has a land use designation of Urban Village within the Mixed-Use Residential Character Area of the Urban Village Plan (page 26, pdf page 32). This designation is a commercial designation which also supports residential development only on parcels meeting a minimum size of 0.5 acres.

While the site is over 0.5 acres once combined, the proposed project still meets the designation in that it is a commercial use. There is no requirement for residential use on the project site.

Staff also acknowledges concerns regarding the form of and parking area provided by the project, but we note that many of the policies of the Urban Village Plan “encourage” certain things, and are not specific requirements.

For instance, Policy LU-1.1 encourages new commercial development at an FAR of 0.3 or greater (page 33, pdf page 39); while the project does not have a 0.3 FAR, staff also cannot find the project contrary to the Urban Village Plan because there is no specific FAR requirement for the project. Examples of requirements within the UV Plan are Policy LU-2.3 and Policy LU-2.6, which specifically prohibit surface parking in front of buildings and drive- through uses, respectively.

Staff does recognize Goal UD-6 and subsequent policies (page 57, pdf page 63), but these are goals and action items for the City to implement across the Urban Village. The City believes it has generally accomplished this through the elimination of parking minimums and permit requirements for sharing parking, and cannot apply these policies to individual projects.

Regarding the proposed parking lot, the relevant requirements in the Urban Design Concept (page 66, pdf page 72) are to encourage parking reductions (since defunct) and explore alternative parking solutions, both of which 6/4/25, 12:34 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 1/3

are non-objective policies, and to locate surface parking to the rear of developments, which this proposal does.

There is no parking maximum. Generally, staff finds that this project will very likely be able to resolve all conflicts with the policies and elements of the Urban Design Concept.

In short, staff must review the project as submitted, which includes the demolition of the existing commercial building and the construction of a one-story building with a parking lot, and review the project for conformance with City ordinances and plans (and state and federal laws, as necessary). While a larger mixed-use project would be allowed here, and would perhaps be desirable, that is ultimately not the project proposed and is not the project being reviewed. If a proposed project is consistent with and can meet the Site Development Permit findings, then staff must recommend approval. It will ultimately be up to the decision-making body to approve or deny the project.

Staff believes the project as submitted generally conforms with the land use designation and applicable objective standards of the General and Urban Village plans in promoting commercial development at the site. Staff has encouraged the applicant to increase floor area, avoid demolition of the existing building, and decrease the amount of parking, but staff cannot force an applicant to make these changes (or recommend denial of the project) unless they contravene objective policies or the zoning code. I’ll note that even if staff finds that a project does contravene Urban Village or General Plan policies, an applicant can request that staff continue reviewing the project and take it to a decision maker (Director’s Hearing in this case) for a final decision on the project.

In conclusion, while the concerns about this project are heard and understood, staff has not found the project to contravene the Urban Village Plan. Even if the proposed project is not the most intensive use allowed at the site, staff ultimately must review the project as submitted and recommend approval or disapproval based on whether or not the project meets the findings to approve a Site Development Permit.

Please note that we expect to hold a community meeting on this project in the first quarter of 2025 on a date to be determined, and I have put you on the list to be notified when that is scheduled.

Thank you,
Jason

---
Jason Lee, Planner II
[email protected] | 408.535.3887

City of San José
Planning, Building, & Code Enforcement
200 E. Santa Clara Street, 3F Tower
San José, California 95113-1905
www.sanjoseca.gov/planning

From: Sebastian Kirsch
Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2025 3:07 PM
To: Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Lee, Jason <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>; Subject: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal

6/4/25, 12:34 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 2/3

[External Email. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. Learn more] This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

You don't often get email from Learn why this is important To the San José Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement Department, Mayor Mahan, Councilmember Davis, and Councilmember-elect Mulcahy,
I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed Chick-fil-A at 1301 W San Carlos Street. This project is at odds with San José’s vision for West San Carlos and what I want to see in my neighborhood.

I am a resident and homeowner in the St Leo's neighborhood. I love living in close proximity to both the Alameda and West San Carlos. This is a very walkable neighborhood with a lot of amenities: several supermarkets, some of my favorite restaurants and bakeries, several gyms, a bookstore, a comic book shop, a boba tea shop, and my physician are all within easy walking distance. I hope that the recent high density housing developments on Race St and elsewhere in the vicinity will bring more demand for retail and restaurants. To cement the neighborhood's character as an urban center, we need businesses that cater to the needs of its residents - businesses that are designed for walking traffic, and preserve the diverse nature of the neighborhood.

The West San Carlos Urban Village Plan describes the site of the proposed development as an area with “higher- density mixed-use and residential development drawing energy from nearby Downtown San José and the Diridon Station. Development is proposed to range between three and seven stories with residential uses above a mix of active groundfloor retail.”
A single-story, 5,139-square-foot fast-food restaurant does not align with this description. It actively works against the atmosphere an urban village is supposed to foster by encouraging customers to travel by car. This location is right along VTA’s 523/23 bus line and just a few minutes away from light rail by foot.

Additionally, construction of the larger parking lot detailed in the proposal would require demolishing two existing local businesses. This new restaurant should not need a parking lot larger than the one that supported the previous fast-food establishment that occupied the corner of this site.

As is currently proposed, a standalone Chick-fil-A and a large parking lot are not acceptable uses of the extremely limited land where higher-density, mixed-use development is allowed and needed in San José.

Please stand by the principles and plans we have created to guide our city and region into a better, more sustainable future. Please tell Chick-fil-A to majorly re-work its San Carlos St proposal or locate elsewhere.

Thank you!

Sebastian Kirsch

6/4/25, 12:34 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 3/3

Outlook
RE: opposition to chick-fil-a on race & san carlos
From Lee, Jason <[email protected]>
Date Mon 2025-01-27 09:48
To 'Robey' Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>;
Hi Robey,

Thank you very much for your e-mail. I’m not sure this is a particularly secret project given the length of the list of people who have contacted me, but I’m coordinating with D6 to hold a community meeting on this soon, and will send you an e-mail when this is set.

First, I’d like to clarify that this is a private project on private property, and under state law, Planning staff must consider the project when, where, and how it is submitted, and we must review the project and make our recommendation in that way, including the demolition of the existing structure and the construction of a one- storey building and a parking lot, and eventually take the project to hearing when it’s ready. The City does not own the land here; a private owner is willing to sell or lease the site to Chick-fil-A for the construction and operation of the restaurant. In theory, this is a site development permit, meaning that Planning ultimately is approving the building and not the use, since there is no drive-through. Obviously, Chick-fil-A is applying for it and it’s clearly designed to operate as a Chick-fil-A, but in theory, once the structure is built, any permitted uses in the UV district would be able to move into the building without a further Planning permit. The City is not allowed to not process an application, and is not allowed to sit on the application to wait for a different application on the site.

Regarding the project itself, should the project be approved, they will be improving the sidewalk on both the San Carlos and Race sides in order to improve walkability along the area, and there is also a mural proposed on the San Carlos side to enhance visual interest of the building. Regarding density, there is no project-specific required density for commercial projects in the UV zone, so staff’s general consideration is if we have followed the policies in considering, emphasizing, etc. as per the UV Plan policies in forming a recommendation. In reviewing the project and the UV Plan, staff generally has not found that the project contradicts the UV Plan in a manner that would allow us to recommend denial of the project; most specifically, this is a commercial project in a commercial designation and zone, and there are no requirements for residential, minimum FAR, maximum parking ratio, etc.

Thanks,
Jason

---
Jason Lee, Planner II
[email protected] | 408.535.3887

City of San José
6/4/25, 12:32 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 1/2

[External Email. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. Learn more] This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

Planning, Building, & Code Enforcement
200 E. Santa Clara Street, 3F Tower
San José, California 95113-1905
www.sanjoseca.gov/planning

From: Robey
Sent: Sunday, January 26, 2025 10:43
To: Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Lee, Jason <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>; Subject: opposition to chick-fil-a on race & san carlos

Some people who received this message don't often get email from Learn why this is important I recently heard about the semi-secret plans to permit a Chick-fil-a on the site at Race & San Carlos, and I would like to register my strenuous objections.
- Race St and San Carlos are part of the "new urban" downtown corridors. Construction along either of them should focus on density and walkability, integrating into our neighborhoods. A single-story fast food joint with a vast parking lot is none of that.
- Eduardo's taqueria is a thriving local business. Why bulldoze it? (Seriously, try one of their tacos -- they're good!) - Consider other businesses along Race St: Pier 402 and Art Boutiki. Both are walkable, neighborhood-friendly businesses that create "anchors" for other foot & bike traffic, creating opportunities for new business and tax revenue. A drive-in fast food chain does not.
- The _brand new_ housing complex one block away will have plenty of ground-floor retail space if Chick-fil-a wants to open a store front. They don't need an acre of prime real estate along San Carlos, and we shouldn't give it to them.

Others have pointed out that everything about the proposed project conflicts with San Jose's own urban village plan, but I'll emphasize that anyway. It's a good plan! Don't lose hope! Thanks for your time. I hope we can approve an appropriate land use here instead.

6/4/25, 12:32 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 2/2

Outlook
RE: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal From Lee, Jason <[email protected]>
Date Mon 2025-01-27 10:25
To 'Marie Sobieski' ; Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>;
Hi Marie,

Thank you for your e-mail and I do understand your concerns. However, staff is beholden to review all projects agnostic of the applicant, taking into account only the required permit findings (land use and environmental matters) only to form a recommendation on the project. I’ll note especially that this is a Site Development Permit since there is no drive-through component proposed. A Site Development Permit only permits the construction of the building and on the site, as a restaurant of any sort is allowed to move into that building without further Planning permits as a permitted use. Obviously, Chick-fil-A is the applicant and it’s clearly designed to operate as a Chick-fil-A, but in theory, once the structure is built, any permitted uses in the UV district would be able to move into the building without a further Planning permit.

Regarding congestion, Public Works has requested a Local Transportation Analysis and there will be further review once that is done and submitted to the City, including potential mitigations.

For the remainder of the letter:

We acknowledge the description taken from the Character Area definition of the project site (page 20, pdf page 26 of the West San Carlos Urban Village Plan); however, the allowable land use is controlled by the Land Use Designation portion of the document. The site has a land use designation of Urban Village within the Mixed-Use Residential Character Area of the Urban Village Plan (page 26, pdf page 32). This designation is a commercial designation which also supports residential development only on parcels meeting a minimum size of 0.5 acres.

While the site is over 0.5 acres once combined, the proposed project still meets the designation in that it is a commercial use. There is no requirement for residential use on the project site.

Staff also acknowledges concerns regarding the form of and parking area provided by the project, but we note that many of the policies of the Urban Village Plan “encourage” certain things, and are not specific requirements.

For instance, Policy LU-1.1 encourages new commercial development at an FAR of 0.3 or greater (page 33, pdf page 39); while the project does not have a 0.3 FAR, staff also cannot find the project contrary to the Urban Village Plan because there is no specific FAR requirement for the project. Examples of requirements within the UV Plan are Policy LU-2.3 and Policy LU-2.6, which specifically prohibit surface parking in front of buildings and drive- through uses, respectively.

Staff does recognize Goal UD-6 and subsequent policies (page 57, pdf page 63), but these are goals and action items for the City to implement across the Urban Village. The City believes it has generally accomplished this 6/4/25, 12:33 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 1/3

through the elimination of parking minimums and permit requirements for sharing parking, and cannot apply these policies to individual projects.

Regarding the proposed parking lot, the relevant requirements in the Urban Design Concept (page 66, pdf page 72) are to encourage parking reductions (since defunct) and explore alternative parking solutions, both of which are non-objective policies, and to locate surface parking to the rear of developments, which this proposal does.

There is no parking maximum. Generally, staff finds that this project will very likely be able to resolve all conflicts with the policies and elements of the Urban Design Concept.

In short, staff must review the project as submitted, which includes the demolition of the existing commercial building and the construction of a one-story building with a parking lot, and review the project for conformance with City ordinances and plans (and state and federal laws, as necessary). While a larger mixed-use project would be allowed here, and would perhaps be desirable, that is ultimately not the project proposed and is not the project being reviewed. If a proposed project is consistent with and can meet the Site Development Permit findings, then staff must recommend approval. It will ultimately be up to the decision-making body to approve or deny the project.

Staff believes the project as submitted generally conforms with the land use designation and applicable objective standards of the General and Urban Village plans in promoting commercial development at the site. Staff has encouraged the applicant to increase floor area, avoid demolition of the existing building, and decrease the amount of parking, but staff cannot force an applicant to make these changes (or recommend denial of the project) unless they contravene objective policies or the zoning code. I’ll note that even if staff finds that a project does contravene Urban Village or General Plan policies, an applicant can request that staff continue reviewing the project and take it to a decision maker (Director’s Hearing in this case) for a final decision on the project.

In conclusion, while the concerns about this project are heard and understood, staff has not found the project to contravene the Urban Village Plan. Even if the proposed project is not the most intensive use allowed at the site, staff ultimately must review the project as submitted and recommend approval or disapproval based on whether or not the project meets the findings to approve a Site Development Permit.

Please note that we expect to hold a community meeting on this project in the first quarter of 2025 on a date to be determined, and I have put you on the list to be notified when that is scheduled.

Thanks,
Jason

---
Jason Lee, Planner II
[email protected] | 408.535.3887

City of San José
Planning, Building, & Code Enforcement
200 E. Santa Clara Street, 3F Tower
San José, California 95113-1905
www.sanjoseca.gov/planning

From: Marie Sobieski
Sent: Saturday, January 25, 2025 20:28
To: Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Lee, Jason <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>; 6/4/25, 12:33 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 2/3

[External Email. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. Learn more] This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

Subject: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal

Some people who received this message don't often get email from . Learn why this is important PLEASE DON'T ALLOW MORE HOMOPHOBIC CHICKEN IN SAN JOSE!

I oppose the proposed Chick-fil-A at 1301 W San Carlos Street. Please do not let it go forward.

It's bad enough we have it at the airport and other places, but please stop making concessions for this chain restaurant that stands against the rights and protections we cherish as a community, especially so near the Billy DeFrank Center, bastion of LGBTQ+ protections and space of security. Especially when it does not fit into the concept planned for this space, which has finally seen some progress in development.

I walk by this location every day. I don't want to have to stare at it knowing every dollar they make on the community will eventually trickle in part to pushing their horrid values. I don't want the long lines and congestion this will bring to an already busy intersection.

The West San Carlos Urban Village Plan describes the site of the proposed development as an area with “higher- density mixed-use and residential development drawing energy from nearby Downtown San José and the Diridon Station. Development is proposed to range between three and seven stories with residential uses above a mix of active groundfloor retail.”
A single-story, 5,139-square-foot fast-food restaurant does not align with this description. It actively works against the atmosphere an urban village is supposed to foster by encouraging customers to travel by car. This location is right along VTA’s 523/23 bus line and just a few minutes away from light rail by foot.

Additionally, construction of the larger parking lot detailed in the proposal would require demolishing two existing local businesses. This new restaurant should not need a parking lot larger than the one that supported the previous fast-food establishment that occupied the corner of this site.

As is currently proposed, a standalone Chick-fil-A and a large parking lot are not acceptable uses of the extremely limited land where higher-density, mixed-use development is allowed and needed in San José.

Please stand by the principles and plans we have created to guide our city and region into a better, more sustainable future. Please tell Chick-fil-A to majorly re-work its San Carlos St proposal or locate elsewhere.

Please do not allow this to come into our community.

Marie Sobieski

6/4/25, 12:33 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 3/3

Outlook
RE: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal From Lee, Jason <[email protected]>
Date Mon 2025-01-27 10:26
To 'Laurel Uenaka' Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>;
Dear Laurel,
Thank you for your e-mail, and your opposition to the project is noted.

We acknowledge the description taken from the Character Area definition of the project site (page 20, pdf page 26 of the West San Carlos Urban Village Plan); however, the allowable land use is controlled by the Land Use Designation portion of the document. The site has a land use designation of Urban Village within the Mixed-Use Residential Character Area of the Urban Village Plan (page 26, pdf page 32). This designation is a commercial designation which also supports residential development only on parcels meeting a minimum size of 0.5 acres. While the site is over 0.5 acres once combined, the proposed project still meets the designation in that it is a commercial use. There is no requirement for residential use on the project site.

Staff also acknowledges concerns regarding the form of and parking area provided by the project, but we note that many of the policies of the Urban Village Plan “encourage” certain things, and are not specific requirements. For instance, Policy LU-1.1 encourages new commercial development at an FAR of

0.3 or greater (page 33, pdf page 39); while the project does not have a 0.3 FAR, staff also cannot find the project contrary to the Urban Village Plan because there is no specific FAR requirement for the project.

Examples of requirements within the UV Plan are Policy LU-2.3 and Policy LU-2.6, which specifically prohibit surface parking in front of buildings and drive-through uses, respectively.

Staff does recognize Goal UD-6 and subsequent policies (page 57, pdf page 63), but these are goals and action items for the City to implement across the Urban Village. The City believes it has generally accomplished this through the elimination of parking minimums and permit requirements for sharing parking, and cannot apply these policies to individual projects.

Regarding the proposed parking lot, the relevant requirements in the Urban Design Concept (page 66, pdf page 72) are to encourage parking reductions (since defunct) and explore alternative parking solutions, both of which are non-objective policies, and to locate surface parking to the rear of developments, which this proposal does. There is no parking maximum. Generally, staff finds that this project will very likely be able to resolve all conflicts with the policies and elements of the Urban Design 6/4/25, 12:33 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 1/3

Concept.

In short, staff must review the project as submitted, which includes the demolition of the existing commercial building and the construction of a one-story building with a parking lot, and review the project for conformance with City ordinances and plans (and state and federal laws, as necessary). While a larger mixed-use project would be allowed here, and would perhaps be desirable, that is ultimately not the project proposed and is not the project being reviewed. If a proposed project is consistent with and can meet the Site Development Permit findings, then staff must recommend approval. It will ultimately be up to the decision-making body to approve or deny the project.

Staff believes the project as submitted generally conforms with the land use designation and applicable objective standards of the General and Urban Village plans in promoting commercial development at the site. Staff has encouraged the applicant to increase floor area, avoid demolition of the existing building, and decrease the amount of parking, but staff cannot force an applicant to make these changes (or recommend denial of the project) unless they contravene objective policies or the zoning code. I’ll note that even if staff finds that a project does contravene Urban Village or General Plan policies, an applicant can request that staff continue reviewing the project and take it to a decision maker (Director’s Hearing in this case) for a final decision on the project.

In conclusion, while the concerns about this project are heard and understood, staff has not found the project to contravene the Urban Village Plan. Even if the proposed project is not the most intensive use allowed at the site, staff ultimately must review the project as submitted and recommend approval or disapproval based on whether or not the project meets the findings to approve a Site Development Permit.

Please note that we expect to hold a community meeting on this project in the first quarter of 2025 on a date to be determined, and I have put you on the list to be notified when that is scheduled.

Thank you,
Jason
---
Jason Lee, Planner II
[email protected] | 408.535.3887

City of San José
Planning, Building, & Code Enforcement
200 E. Santa Clara Street, 3F Tower
San José, California 95113-1905
www.sanjoseca.gov/planning
-----Original Message-----
From: Laurel Uenaka
Sent: Friday, January 24, 2025 21:38
To: Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Lee, Jason <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>;
6/4/25, 12:33 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 2/3

Subject: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal [External Email. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. Learn more<https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification>]
[Some people who received this message don't often get email from . Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ] To the San José Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement Department, Mayor Mahan, Councilmember Davis, and Councilmember-elect Mulcahy,
I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed Chick-fil-A at 1301 W San Carlos Street. This project is at odds with San José’s vision for West San Carlos and what I want to see in this neighborhood.

The West San Carlos Urban Village Plan describes the site of the proposed development as an area with “higher-density mixed-use and residential development drawing energy from nearby Downtown San José and the Diridon Station. Development is proposed to range between three and seven stories with residential uses above a mix of active groundfloor retail.” A single-story, 5,139-square-foot fast-food restaurant does not align with this description. It actively works against the atmosphere an urban village is supposed to foster by encouraging customers to travel by car. This location is right along VTA’s 523/23 bus line and just a few minutes away from light rail by foot.

Additionally, construction of the larger parking lot detailed in the proposal would require demolishing two existing local businesses. This new restaurant should not need a parking lot larger than the one that supported the previous fast-food establishment that occupied the corner of this site.

As is currently proposed, a standalone Chick-fil-A and a large parking lot are not acceptable uses of the extremely limited land where higher-density, mixed-use development is allowed and needed in San José.

Please stand by the principles and plans we have created to guide our city and region into a better, more sustainable future. Please tell Chick-fil-A to locate elsewhere.

Laurel Larraux
Resident and homeowner in the Midtown neighborhood
This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
6/4/25, 12:33 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 3/3

Outlook
RE: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal From Lee, Jason <[email protected]>
Date Mon 2025-01-27 10:26
To 'geoffrey wong' Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>;
Dear Geoffrey,

Thank you for your e-mail, and your opposition to the project is noted.

We acknowledge the description taken from the Character Area definition of the project site (page 20, pdf page 26 of the West San Carlos Urban Village Plan); however, the allowable land use is controlled by the Land Use Designation portion of the document. The site has a land use designation of Urban Village within the Mixed-Use Residential Character Area of the Urban Village Plan (page 26, pdf page 32). This designation is a commercial designation which also supports residential development only on parcels meeting a minimum size of 0.5 acres.

While the site is over 0.5 acres once combined, the proposed project still meets the designation in that it is a commercial use. There is no requirement for residential use on the project site.

Staff also acknowledges concerns regarding the form of and parking area provided by the project, but we note that many of the policies of the Urban Village Plan “encourage” certain things, and are not specific requirements.

For instance, Policy LU-1.1 encourages new commercial development at an FAR of 0.3 or greater (page 33, pdf page 39); while the project does not have a 0.3 FAR, staff also cannot find the project contrary to the Urban Village Plan because there is no specific FAR requirement for the project. Examples of requirements within the UV Plan are Policy LU-2.3 and Policy LU-2.6, which specifically prohibit surface parking in front of buildings and drive- through uses, respectively.

Staff does recognize Goal UD-6 and subsequent policies (page 57, pdf page 63), but these are goals and action items for the City to implement across the Urban Village. The City believes it has generally accomplished this through the elimination of parking minimums and permit requirements for sharing parking, and cannot apply these policies to individual projects.

Regarding the proposed parking lot, the relevant requirements in the Urban Design Concept (page 66, pdf page 72) are to encourage parking reductions (since defunct) and explore alternative parking solutions, both of which are non-objective policies, and to locate surface parking to the rear of developments, which this proposal does.

There is no parking maximum. Generally, staff finds that this project will very likely be able to resolve all conflicts with the policies and elements of the Urban Design Concept.

In short, staff must review the project as submitted, which includes the demolition of the existing commercial building and the construction of a one-story building with a parking lot, and review the project for conformance with City ordinances and plans (and state and federal laws, as necessary). While a larger mixed-use project would be allowed here, and would perhaps be desirable, that is ultimately not the project proposed and is not the 6/4/25, 12:33 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 1/3

[External Email. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. Learn more] project being reviewed. If a proposed project is consistent with and can meet the Site Development Permit findings, then staff must recommend approval. It will ultimately be up to the decision-making body to approve or deny the project.

Staff believes the project as submitted generally conforms with the land use designation and applicable objective standards of the General and Urban Village plans in promoting commercial development at the site. Staff has encouraged the applicant to increase floor area, avoid demolition of the existing building, and decrease the amount of parking, but staff cannot force an applicant to make these changes (or recommend denial of the project) unless they contravene objective policies or the zoning code. I’ll note that even if staff finds that a project does contravene Urban Village or General Plan policies, an applicant can request that staff continue reviewing the project and take it to a decision maker (Director’s Hearing in this case) for a final decision on the project.

In conclusion, while the concerns about this project are heard and understood, staff has not found the project to contravene the Urban Village Plan. Even if the proposed project is not the most intensive use allowed at the site, staff ultimately must review the project as submitted and recommend approval or disapproval based on whether or not the project meets the findings to approve a Site Development Permit.

Please note that we expect to hold a community meeting on this project in the first quarter of 2025 on a date to be determined, and I have put you on the list to be notified when that is scheduled.

Thank you,
Jason

---
Jason Lee, Planner II
[email protected] | 408.535.3887

City of San José
Planning, Building, & Code Enforcement
200 E. Santa Clara Street, 3F Tower
San José, California 95113-1905
www.sanjoseca.gov/planning

From: geoffrey wong
Sent: Monday, January 27, 2025 01:35
To: Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Lee, Jason <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>; Subject: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal

Some people who received this message don't often get email from Learn why this is important To the San José Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement Department, Mayor Mahan, Councilmember Davis, and Councilmember-elect Mulcahy,
I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed Chick-fil-A at 1301 W San Carlos Street. This project is at 6/4/25, 12:33 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 2/3

This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. odds with San José’s vision for West San Carlos and what I want to see in this neighborhood.

The West San Carlos Urban Village Plan describes the site of the proposed development as an area with “higher- density mixed-use and residential development drawing energy from nearby Downtown San José and the Diridon Station. Development is proposed to range between three and seven stories with residential uses above a mix of active groundfloor retail.”
A single-story, 5,139-square-foot fast-food restaurant does not align with this description. It actively works against the atmosphere an urban village is supposed to foster by encouraging customers to travel by car. This location is right along VTA’s 523/23 bus line and just a few minutes away from light rail by foot.

Additionally, construction of the larger parking lot detailed in the proposal would require demolishing two existing local businesses. This new restaurant should not need a parking lot larger than the one that supported the previous fast-food establishment that occupied the corner of this site.

As is currently proposed, a standalone Chick-fil-A and a large parking lot are not acceptable uses of the extremely limited land where higher-density, mixed-use development is allowed and needed in San José.

Please stand by the principles and plans we have created to guide our city and region into a better, more sustainable future. Please tell Chick-fil-A to majorly re-work its San Carlos St proposal or locate elsewhere.

6/4/25, 12:33 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 3/3 Outlook
RE: Concerns About Proposed Chick-fil-A at W. San Carlos & Race St.

From Lee, Jason <[email protected]>
Date Fri 2025-02-07 18:00
To 'Eric Ries' ; Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>;
Hi Eric,

Thank you for your e-mail.

Regarding the project in general, staff must review private development projects when, where, and how they are submitted, and review and process the project pursuant to state law. In short, the proposal before the City is for a single-story building and a parking lot, including demolition of the existing building and removal of trees, and staff must review the project as proposed for conformance with City ordinances and plans. While a larger mixed-use project would be allowed at the site, and would perhaps be desirable, staff must review (and eventually bring to hearing) whatever project is proposed by a private party.

Regarding the proposal within an urban village, this project is a commercial project within a commercial designation and commercial zone. There is no requirement for residential use on the project site in the UV plan or General Plan, nor is there a required minimum FAR (LU-1.1 encourages new commercial development at an FAR of

0.3 or greater, which staff has continued to encourage). Having said that, staff does not find that the project’s FAR or its parking lot mean that the project is contrary to the Urban Village Plan, as there are not specific requirements for a minimum parking lot, or a parking maximum.

Regarding car-centric development: the project site remains highly accessible via transit, including from other transit-rich areas of the City. Staff has and continues to encourage the applicant to reduce the amount of parking on the site pursuant to the Urban Village Plan. Additionally, should the project be able to succeed through local pedestrian and transit traffic only, the owners of the site could decide to sell off or otherwise redevelop the parking lot if they deem that to be a better use.

Regarding design and streetscape concerns, should the project be approved, staff has worked with the applicant to include a mural on the San Carlos Street side to avoid a blank wall (this will be a project condition); the remainder of the building will have windows to the street along San Carlos. Additionally, there will be an outdoor patio on the Race side of the street corner to allow for additional pedestrian interest. Also, the project will be conditioned to expand the sidewalk on both the Race and San Carlos sides of the project. The proposed two- driveway setup is likely required for service vehicle access, which is grounds for a design exception.

Staff continues to process this application as it has been requested at this site. If a proposed project is consistent with and can meet the Site Development Permit findings, staff will recommend approval of the project. It will ultimately be up to the decision-making body to approve or deny the project.

6/4/25, 12:34 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 1/3

[External Email. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. Learn more] At present, while the concerns about this project are heard and understood, staff has not found the project to contravene the Urban Village Plan, and in any event, must process the application to a hearing. Even if the project is not the most intensive use allowed at the site, staff ultimately must review the project as submitted and recommend approval or disapproval on whether or not the project meets the findings to approve a Site Development Permit.

Please note that we expect to hold a community meeting on this project in March (on a date yet to be finalized), and I have put you on the list to be notified when that is scheduled.

Thanks,
Jason

---
Jason Lee, Planner II
[email protected] | 408.535.3887

City of San José
Planning, Building, & Code Enforcement
200 E. Santa Clara Street, 3F Tower
San José, California 95113-1905
www.sanjoseca.gov/planning

From: Eric Ries
Sent: Friday, February 7, 2025 08:57
To: Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Lee, Jason <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>; Subject: Concerns About Proposed Chick-fil-A at W. San Carlos & Race St.

You don't often get email from Learn why this is important Dear City of San José Planning Staff and Elected Leaders, I am writing on behalf of community members who share concerns regarding the proposed Chick-fil-A at 1301 W. San Carlos Street. While we welcome new businesses that energize our neighborhoods, this single-story, car-centric proposal does not align with the vision set forth in the West San Carlos Urban Village Plan. We respectfully request that the City of San José only consider a Chick-fil-A at this site if it is part of a multi-story, mixed-use project that includes housing—or encourage the developer to locate elsewhere.

Below are the key points:

1. Displacement of Local Businesses
The existing commercial building on Race Street houses a taqueria and hair salon, both of which 6/4/25, 12:34 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 2/3

This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. would be demolished and replaced by a 65-stall parking lot. Approximately two-thirds of the site would be devoted to car parking, displacing small, locally owned businesses.

2. Urban Village Vision
The West San Carlos Urban Village Plan, adopted in 2018, envisions a walkable, transit-oriented corridor with mixed-use buildings (3–7 stories) featuring active ground-floor retail and residential uses above. A single-story fast-food restaurant with extensive surface parking directly conflicts with these goals.

3. Car-Centric Development
Despite the site’s proximity to VTA’s fast and frequent 523/23 lines, as well as its short walk to light rail, this proposal would increase car traffic, pollution, and congestion. Limiting parking and encouraging higher-density, mixed-use projects better align with Urban Village policies (Policy UD-6.3 and Policy LU-3.1) to reduce car dependency.

4. Design & Streetscape Concerns
The proposal places active dining areas away from the street and includes large blank walls facing San Carlos Street—an uninviting setup that does not foster a vibrant pedestrian environment. It also exceeds driveway allowances specified in the Citywide Design Standards.

5. Neighborhood & Community Feedback
The Buena Vista Neighborhood Association and District 6 Neighborhood Leadership Group, along with Catalyze SV, oppose this single-story, car-oriented concept. We urge the City to uphold the Urban Village Plan’s vision by encouraging a multi-story, mixed-use development that includes much-needed housing.

6. Alternative Locations
If Chick-fil-A wishes to serve this area, there are numerous vacant, ground-floor retail spaces across San José where such a restaurant could locate without undermining the City’s long-term planning goals. We would be happy to suggest potential locations less than half a mile away, such as the former Starbucks site at 1338 The Alameda.

Thank you for your consideration of our concerns. We believe San José can grow in a way that supports small businesses, promotes transit, and creates vibrant, walkable urban corridors. We urge you to require any new proposal on this site to align with these principles—or support Chick-fil-A’s efforts to identify a more suitable location.

Sincerely,
Eric Ries

6/4/25, 12:34 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 3/3

Outlook
RE: Objection to application No. H24-046 – 1301 West San Carlos Street From Lee, Jason <[email protected]>
Date Fri 2025-02-14 12:13
To 'Lames'
Cc Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Atienza, Manuel <[email protected]>; Maguire, Jennifer <[email protected]>; Hughey, Rosalynn <[email protected]>; Michael Mulcahy <[email protected]>; Mulcahy, Michael <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Chris Roth <[email protected]>; Roth, Chris <[email protected]> Dear Mr. Ames,

Thank you for your thoughtful and thorough letter on this project, and thank you for your patience in allowing staff to formulate a response. Staff has discussed this project and your letter with Planning management, and staff from other departments, and below is the response to your letter.

First, staff would like to commend D6NLG analysis and your organization’s involvement in the project, and the shared concern about the well-being of the Urban Village Plan area, your neighborhood, and the City. We understand and have studied many of the concerns raised regarding the project, and we understand that the project does not meet some of the aspirational goals of the West San Carlos Urban Village plan. Despite this, staff believes that the project is on balance consistent with the Urban Village plan, as the project does meet the vision of the plan, and the goals of the Urban Village plan do not preclude lower-intensity development on the site, especially commercial development on a site with a commercial designation and zone.

In general, the West San Carlos Urban Village Plan intends to create a pedestrian-oriented, mixed-use corridor, and is envisioned as an accessible, well-connected neighborhood and vibrant business district. While higher- density uses are allowed, lower-density uses are not precluded in the Urban Village. Even in higher-density neighborhoods in San José, and around the region, state, and world, there are buildings of various densities and sizes which make up the urban fabric. Lower-density uses can still fit within the urban fabric, and contribute to the streetscape, walkability, and street-level vibrancy of districts; within the City, staff points to the eastern portion of The Alameda where a mix of densities, including lower-density projects, do not prevent a vibrant streetscape.

Staff has worked with Chick-fil-A to move away from a typical franchise restaurant at this location and add positive features to the building, including a patio at the corner to add street-level vibrancy, and have negotiated for a mural to cover half the building on the West San Carlos side to add pedestrian interest. The applicants have also added some elements of mid-century design through concrete blocks, a breeze-block-type design on the patio, and a flat roof. For physical improvements, the applicants will also be required to create a 20-foot-wide sidewalk on San Carlos and a 15-foot-sidewalk along Race, and add a bulb-out to enhance pedestrian and traffic safety at the San Carlos and Race intersection.

Staff believes that with these changes to the project and the nature of a restaurant (quick-service or otherwise), that the project generally conforms to the vision laid out in the West San Carlos Urban Village Plan. Specifically, the project will improve sidewalks and streets, including major pedestrian improvements through widening sidewalks along both frontages, to allow better access to neighborhood goods and services near this site and beyond. The project also creates a restaurant on the corner which many residents in and around the urban village will be able to walk to, and those in other areas, including downtown, would be able to take transit to. The restaurant would create a private covered outdoor patio, a low-barrier gathering space which can be used by 6/4/25, 12:37 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 1/6

residents and customers, and provide a mural, integrating public art and improving the streetscape. The applicants also plan to work with the Office of Cultural Affairs to have a local artist design the proposed mural.

In general, staff acknowledges the description of the Mixed-Use Residential Character Area in the Urban Village plan (page 21), and that the area is envisioned for higher-density mixed-use and residential development over ground-floor retail. However, the controlling land use for the parcel is the land use designation and zoning, Urban Village, which is described in the Urban Village in the Mixed-Use Residential Character Area (page 26). This designation is explained as a commercial designation, supporting a broad range of commercial development, including retail and office. The land use designation does not require residential uses, but rather the inclusion of pedestrian-oriented, ground-floor commercial uses fronting West San Carlos Street. The project includes an entrance along West San Carlos, and staff has worked with the applicant to include additional pedestrian interest and vibrancy along the street, as explained above. Therefore, staff believes that despite the lower-density nature of the project, it would help contribute to the urban fabric of West San Carlos Street and the plan area. Staff also notes that the “form is more important than use” quotation is from the Mixed-Use Commercial Character Area definition, which does not apply to this site.

Generally speaking, this is likely not the highest and best use of the site, but as it is more likely than not to be a long-term use, staff is not viewing this as an interim use. However, should the area continue to succeed and the land values increase, it becomes more possible that the site is wholly or partially redeveloped to a higher-density or mixed-use project; in any event, a typical restaurant/retail use and parking does not preclude redevelopment of the site, or a portion thereof, in the future. The chance of this happening with a commercial project and (especially) a parking lot is much higher than it would be with, for example, low or medium density residential. In fact, and while not intimating that this will happen at the site, staff has found examples of standalone sites of this restaurant being incorporated into a larger mixed-use project, so this may occur if market conditions are correct.

In any event, staff is not relying on General Plan policy IE-1.11 regarding interim uses in formulating the recommendation for this project, as on balance, the project would be more likely to be long-term if constructed.

For more detailed responses to each of the General and Urban Village Plan policies included in your letter, please see the following appendix; at this time, staff generally believes that although the project may not be strictly in conformance with all policies (and in fact, no project is strictly in conformance with all policies), the project is, on balance, consistent with the General and Urban Village Plans and their policies.

Ultimately, staff must review projects when, where, and how applicants apply for them, and formulate a recommendation on a project’s own merits, not on the merits of past projects or potential future projects on or off the site. In considering this project, we ultimately believe that we can find a commercial project in conformance with the Urban Village designation and zone, and generally in conformance with the policies listed above (and other policies not listed above). We are sympathetic to these concerns and have and will continue to relay these messages to the applicant, including the policies referenced in your letter. Staff will also continue to encourage improvements to the proposed site plan, but ultimately, staff must follow the policies and process the application, and recommend approval if we can find conformance with the General and Urban Village plans, the Municipal Code, the Citywide Design Standards, and City Council policies.

Our team will also continue discussion with our Citywide team on implementation of projects within Urban Villages and in general now and into the future, especially with the context of changing state laws and requirements, as we continue to evaluate this and other future projects in this area and throughout the City.

Thank you,
Jason

---
Jason Lee, Planner II
[email protected] | 408.535.3887

City of San José
6/4/25, 12:37 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 2/6 Planning, Building, & Code Enforcement
200 E. Santa Clara Street, 3F Tower
San José, California 95113-1905
www.sanjoseca.gov/planning

Appendix: Specific Responses to General and Urban Village Plan Policies Policy Staff Response
GP IE-1.11 Per above, staff agrees this is not an interim use. However, we believe the project is generally in conformance with the allowed uses of the UV designation and zoning of the site.

GP IE-2.7 A commercial project by definition provides job opportunities and sales taxes, which helps support city services and infrastructure. A larger project may provide more job opportunities and more sales taxes, but we are obligated to review and process the application on file.

GP IE-6.2 A quick service restaurant can provide jobs for residents of all skill and education levels, including “unskilled” labor to managerial level positions.

WSCUVP LU-1.1 The 0.3 FAR is not met, but the policy says to encourage this. Staff has encouraged the applicant at every turn to meet an FAR of 0.3 across the development, pursuant to the language of the policy. No minimum FAR is indicated in the General Plan, Urban Village Plan, or Zoning code for UV- designated and zoned sites.

WSCUVP LU-3.1 Staff has encouraged this, but the applicant has made it clear that they are not intending to build an intense mixed-use development. A commercial- only use is permitted in a commercial land use designation and zoning.

WSCUVP UD-1.2 Staff from multiple departments have tried our best to maintain a mid- century modern design while meeting various requirements, keeping some texture through concrete blocks and including a breeze-block-type design on the patio, including a flat roof, and reconfiguring the interior to add windows on the street frontages while still meeting interior design requirements. Ultimately, the project will have some frontage-facing windows and will upgrade the streetscape along West San Carlos to make the area more pedestrian-friendly.

WSCUVP UD-6.3 Staff has encouraged the applicant at every turn to reduce the amount of parking, and will continue to do so. However, the applicant has been insistent on the amount of parking and has relayed that the project is not feasible without this amount of parking spaces. Ultimately, City code has eliminated minimum parking requirements, but has not included maximum parking restrictions, so the applicant is able to choose the amount of parking they find appropriate for their project. Staff also notes that should the market or the corridor evolve such that the amount of parking proposed is no longer necessary, the majority of the parking lot could be redeveloped to another commercial or mixed use under the Urban Village Plan.

GP IE-1.5 Staff notes that a quick-service restaurant is an employment use.

GP IE-1.6 This proposal would allow people to take transit to visit or work at the restaurant, including from other transit-rich areas of the City.

GP FS-3.6 Per the above, staff believes the on balance, the project does conform to the Urban Village Plan
GP FS-4.7 Staff notes that as explained above, the project will provide benefits through the creation of new pedestrian facilities (sidewalks) pursuant to the General and Urban Village plans.

GP FS-4.8 Staff notes that the project creates job and commercial opportunities near residential development.
6/4/25, 12:37 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 3/6 GP MS-10.5 Staff interprets this to mean that the project should meet site design guidelines and encourage the use of public transit through transit incentives. The project generally meets site design guidelines, with one deviation (two driveways) required for service vehicle circulation. The project is encouraged to provide transit incentives; however, there is no requirement to do so; staff will require this if it is found that it is required through a Local Transportation Analysis, but this is unlikely.

GP MS-14.1 This project is a job-providing commercial project in a commercial zone.

GP MS-21.4 In short, many of these trees are being removed due to the City’s zoning requirements (10-foot maximum setbacks), in combination with the trees being in close proximity to the building; the City’s requirements for expanding sidewalks along the property lines; and the health of the trees (large decaying wounds, girdling roots, embedded with a chain link fence, etc.). Staff continues to ask for the retention of some of the trees which do not have these issues, although this may not be possible due to the nature of how the trees were originally planted (in small planters).

GP VN-1.6 The project is being asked by the City to provide a 20-foot attached sidewalk along West San Carlos, with tree wells at the back of curb. Some landscaping and water drainage is needed to meet the regional stormwater requirements; however, staff continues to work with the applicant on potentially moving the building and changing the landscaping to increase engagement opportunities with the mural, which will cover much of the non-windowed area along San Carlos.

GP VN-1.11 This project does not include late-night uses, unlike the prior use, and due to the discontinuance of that use, does not inherit the legal non- conforming condition. The project is buffered from surrounding developments in a manner consistent with the Code and Citywide Design Standards.

GP CD-1.12 While the interior design meets the needs of a franchise restaurant, the exterior does not reflect a franchise design (this is like old Pizza Huts, Mimi’s Café, etc.), in that any retail establishment could comfortably move into the physical building with tenant improvements. The project does provide a convenient means of entry from both San Carlos and Race Streets, and we continue to work with the applicant on the pedestrian frontage along San Carlos. Staff believes the project generally meets mid- century modern through the texture, flat roof, and breeze-block-like design at the patio.

GP CD-1.17 The provided parking is not provided on the more active street (West San Carlos). The project meets the Citywide Design Standard screening requirements along Race Street, and to the buildings to the north and east.

GP CD-2.3 Staff is working with the applicant to make major improvements to the frontage and sidewalk along West San Carlos and will require a mural on the building to create additional visual interest. The building corner is accessible along both frontages. VTA has moved the transit stop previously in front of the building to the Walgreens site, and is instructing the applicant to remove the bus pad should the project move forward.

Therefore, there is no transit stop to be integrated into the project design.

GP CD-3.9 Staff has worked with the applicant on this, but the configuration of the lot requires two driveways for service vehicles to meet the required turn radii. A Local Transportation Analysis is under review and may result in other improvements on and around the project site; the project is also being required to expand the sidewalk on Race Street to expand sight 6/4/25, 12:37 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 4/6 distance, while creating a bulbout at the intersection to improve pedestrian safety.

WSCUVP LU-2.6 The project never proposed a drive-through, and this particular company has begun to propose restaurants without drive-throughs in multiple Bay Area cities. In any event, drive-throughs are specifically prohibited in this Urban Village and would not be allowed.

Regarding a financial analysis request: Planning cannot request a financial analysis, since we are ultimately approving the placement of a building on this site (this is a Site Development Permit only). Staff believes that by definition, a commercial/retail project typically complies with IE-2.7, since commercial projects provide jobs and generate revenue through sales taxes. Staff also believes this complies with IE-6.2, since it will allow employment at different skill and educational levels, and that it complies with IE-6.3 since the project is easily accessible, including from lower-income neighborhoods, through multiple modes.

Regarding interim development: Per the above, staff is not viewing this project as an interim development pursuant to IE-1.11, and is not relying on IE-1.11 to determine a recommendation for the project. Ultimately, a private developer has proposed this project at this time at this site, including demolition of the existing building, and staff must review it the project and recommend approval of the development if we believe it meets the City’s permit findings, including plans, policies, and zoning code.

Staff cannot rely on prior or potential future applications, nor speculative unknown future effects, to formulate a recommendation. We must look at the proposal on file and how it complies with relevant plans and policies, including effects on the current neighborhood and current landscape through CEQA and likely or common outcomes of such a project, but staff cannot refuse to recommend approval of a project solely because of unknown future effects. Staff believes that the urban fabric of a neighborhood can take many forms, and a lower- density project, even in a high-density neighborhood, can positively contribute to the streetscape and vibrancy of a place. Additionally, should West San Carlos transform and this restaurant could be supported solely by nearby residents and transit riders, nothing prevents a new housing development to replace much of the proposed parking lot, or integrate the restaurant into a mixed-use building on the site.

Staff also would like to note that the City is not able to hold this property open in the manner that the former Redevelopment Agency was able to operate because this is a private project on private property; the Redevelopment Agency was public and therefore would not infringe on private property rights, and it also had the means to buy out sites and bring them under public ownership if it believed that was best for the City. If someone applies for a project and the decision-makers find that the required findings can be made, then the project should be allowed to be built; the City cannot force a private owner to sell or leave a project site open indefinitely.

Regarding a housing and climate emergency: The project proposal is a commercial use on a commercially- designated and commercially-zoned parcel, and housing is not required at this site. Staff will continue to work with the project proponent to encourage less parking and transit subsidies, but staff does not believe any specific mandates on the project level would require this (unless something comes from a Local Transportation Analysis).

From: Lames
Sent: Friday, December 20, 2024 11:51
To: Lee, Jason <[email protected]>
Cc: Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Atienza, Manuel <[email protected]>; Maguire, Jennifer <[email protected]>; Hughey, Rosalynn <[email protected]>; Michael Mulcahy <[email protected]>; Mulcahy, Michael <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Chris Roth ; Roth, Chris <[email protected]>
Subject: Objection to application No. H24-046 – 1301 West San Carlos Street

6/4/25, 12:37 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 5/6

[External Email. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. Learn more] This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

Jason Lee, Planner
San José Planning, Building and Code Enforcement Department 200 E Santa Clara St., San José, CA 95113

Mr. Lee,
Attached please find a letter from the District 6 Neighborhood Leaders Group (D6NLG) objecting to the proposed project (H24-046) at 1301 West San Carlos St.

Please contact me if I can answer any questions.

Thank you,

~Lawrence Ames, Chair, D6NLG

6/4/25, 12:37 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 6/6

Jason Lee, Planner
San José Planning, Building and Code Enforcement Department 200 E Santa Clara St., San José, CA 95113
via email, December 20, 2024

Subject: Objection to application No. H24-046 – 1301 West San Carlos Street

Dear Jason Lee:

We in the District 6 Neighborhood Leaders Group (D6NLG), a decades -old association of involved community representatives of the numerous District 6 neighborhoods and associations, are dedicated to equitably and sustainably preserving and enhancing the quality of life in San José.

At our December 2, 2024 meeting, after discussing the development proposal for the northwest corner of Race St. and San Carlos St., we voted to write you this letter.

We urge you to deny Development Permit application H24 -046 (related files ER24-195, AT24- 013), because approval would be inconsistent with San Jose’s Envision San Jose General Plan 2024: Building a City of Great Places which calls for intensification of uses, higher residential densities, support of high quality transit -oriented development while reducing automobile dependence.

The proposed project was described in city documents and community meetings as:

H24-046 Site Development permit at 1301 West San Carlos to allow construction of new 5100 sq ft fast food (“quick serve”) restaurant on an approximately 1.09 - gross acre site with 88 parking spaces , combining two parcels, demolition of existing commercial building at 257 Race Street and the removal of 20 ordinance sized trees. Current concept sketches show a on e-story building with franchise architecture placed prominently near the corner with primary entrance oriented to the parking lot and with two driveways to Race Street. The proposed project building is buffered from West San Carlos Street sidewalk by landscaping. At present, no drive -through is proposed.

Our opposition stems primarily from the project’s failure to adhere to the specific goals and policies within the West San Carlos Urban Village Plan and the Envision 2040 General Plan, its detrimental impact on future housing production, its incompatibility with the character of the West San Carlos Urban Village, and the significant concerns it raises about climate unfriendly design.

Specifically, as will be explained below, the project is out of compliance with General Plan policies IE 1.5, IE 1.6, FS 3.6, FS 4.7, FS 4.8, MS10.5, MS 10.6, VN 1.6, VN 1.16, CD 1.12, CD 1.17, CD

2.3, CD 3.9, CD 5.3, MS 10.5, and MS 21.4, as well as with West San Carlos Urban Village Plan policies UD1.2, UD 6.3, LU 1.1, and LU-3.1.

District 6 Neighborhood Leaders Group H24-046 December 20, 2024 2 We also reject any assertion that the project is in meaningful conformance with IE 1.11, IE 2.7, or IE 6.2, as discussed below.

The West San Carlos Urban Village Plan, adopted by City Council in 2018 and amended in 2021 and 2022, envisions “a high-density, mixed-use, pedestrian-focused Urban Village that supports the commercial activity along West San Carlos Street and enhances the quality of life for residents in surrounding communities.” The Plan envisions a transit -friendly community that sup ports sustainable development and enhances and embraces the unique character of the area.

The West San Carlos Street Urban Village neighborhood’s main arterial, West San Carlos Street , is one of the City’s “Grand Boulevards.” Grand Boulevards have great potential to connect City neighborhoods and to contribute to the City’s overall identity through cohesive design. “Because of their importance and location as major transportation routes, and because of the land uses they support, these Grand Boulevards play an important role in shaping the City’s image for its residents, workers, and visitors and have the potential to act as major urban design elements at a citywide scale.” This project site is on the prominent corner of the grand boulevard West San Carlos Street and the major collector Race Street.

The project site is on a transit corridor (West San Carlos St. buses 23, 64B, and Rapid 523), within walking distance of Light Rail (Race St. Station), and within a mile of CalTrain (and future BART and High Speed Rai l) at the Diridon Station. A High Capacity Urban Transit station is planned adjacent to the site. High-density housing is now under construction on Race St. adjacent to the site.

The Midtown San José area, due in part to the historical patchwork of city/county jurisdiction, has experienced many challenges along this corridor with a history of adult book and media stores, check cashing / payday loan shops, massage parlors, and used car lots, and “interim” storage unit uses that have persisted for decades. Multiple mixed use transit oriented development projects have been entitled and await financing. Several TOD projects have been constructed.

The site is designated in the West San Carlos Urban Village Plan as Mixed Use R esidential Character and is has GP designation of UV. Land uses in this plan area include Mixed Use Commercial, Urban Residential, and Urban Village. The maximum height for this prime corner is 85 ft to encourage higher densities. The plan calls for development on this site “to range between three and seven stories with residential or commercial uses above a mix of active ground floor retail.” On page 25 of The West San Carlos Urban Village Plan, it discusses the Urban Village designation in the mixed use commercial character area:

“New development under this designation must meet the Plan’s urban design guidelines and be designed in such a way that promotes walking, transit use, and public interaction.

For this designation, put simply, form is more important than use.”

District 6 Neighborhood Leaders Group H24-046 December 20, 2024 3 The proposed project is in violation of the following policies applicable to the site:

Policies

West San Carlos Urban Village

Proposed project
LU-1.1 Encourage new commercial
development to be built at Floor Area
Ratios of 0.3 or greater.

This project has FAR of about 0.1.

Low FARs create unwalkably large
spaces that are more car-scaled than
people-scaled.

LU-3.1 Strongly encourage mixed uses and
intensities that support High-Intensity
Urban Transit ridership.

The project prioritizes car access by
featuring an expansive parking lot
undermining the vision walkability and
reduction in car dependence.

UD-1.2 Ensure the design of new buildings
and the adjoining public realm build
upon the mid-century character of
existing buildings and signs.

The proposed building does not follow
the form of mid-Century (1940s and
1950s) retail, pedestrian friendly
streetscape. The project proposes
demolishing a mid-Century building.

UD 6.3: Limit the amount of vehicle parking to
incentivize sharing and minimize the
amount of land dedicated exclusively
to parking.

With only 5100 sq ft building on 1.07
acres, nearly 90% is dedicated to parking
lot and vehicular movement.

Policies

General Plan Policies

Proposed project
IE-1.5 Promote intensification of employment
activities on sites in close proximity to
transit facilities
The project is a low intensity
employment use. It eliminates the jobs of
three other businesses. It prevents the
construction of a high intensity TOD
employment site.

IE-1.6 Plan land use to maximize utilization
of transit; promote proximate
development compatible with full
utilization.

This proposed one-story fast food
restaurant with a large parking lot will
provide few users of transit due to the
ease of parking and the low intensity of
use.

FS-3.6 Entitle projects that conform to Urban
Village plan or provide higher job
capacity
This project does not conform to the
Urban Village plan nor does it provide
job capacity comparable to or higher than
a commercial TOD
FS-4.7 Encourage transit-oriented
development as a means to reduce
costs for expansion and maintenance
of our City’s street system, in addition
to other benefits and consistent with
the General Plan Transportation
goals and policies.

This large parking lot project encourages
vehicle use increasing city street
maintenance costs.

District 6 Neighborhood Leaders Group H24-046 December 20, 2024 4 FS-4.8 Emphasize mixed-use development for
most new development, to achieve
service efficiencies from compact
development patterns and to maximize
job development and commercial
opportunities near residential
development.

This is not a mixed-use project. It is not
compact development.

MS-10.5 ..to reduce VMT and traffic
congestion, require new development
within 2000 ft of existing or planned
transit station to encourage public
transit and minimize dependence on
automobile..

The project is adjacent to a planned High
Intensity Transit station and is served by
high frequency bus lines and near LRT.

The large parking lot encourages driving
a car by customers and staff.

MS-14.1 Promote job and housing growth in
areas served by public transit and that
have community amenities within a
20-minute walking distance.

The project provides no housing and
part-time, low paying jobs. It demolishes
the commercial building on Race Street
—eliminating those jobs in the small
businesses.

MS-21.4 Encourage the maintenance of mature
trees, especially natives, on public and
private property as an integral part of
the community forest.

The project removes 20 ordinance size
trees. As the City’s Urban Forest report
highlights, mitigation measures will not
replace their carbon capturing capability
for decades.

VN-1.6 Design new development to contribute
to the positive identity of a
neighborhood and to encourage
pedestrian activity.

Concept diagrams show more windows
are focused on the rear parking lot than
on the West San Carlos frontage.

Landscaping is used as a barrier between
the sidewalk and the walkway next to the
building. The design does not encourage
pedestrian engagement with the
building’s street facing sides.

VN-1.11 Protect residential neighborhoods
from the encroachment of
incompatible activities which may
have negative impact on the
residential living environment.

The project’s large parking lot is adjacent
to a large multi-family project to the
north. The south-facing residences will
bear the burden of reflected heat from the
asphalt and the noise of patrons in the
above-ground parking lot. A prior on-site
restaurant experienced extensive loud
late night activity in the parking lot. UD-

6.1 calls for underground parking to
avoid these impacts. This project avoids
UD-6.1 because it is not TOD.

CD-1.12 Use building design to reflect both the
unique character of a specific site and
the context of surrounding
development and to support
The project’s concept drawings show a
franchise design. The project does not
reflect the mid-Century context of the
West San Carlos Urban Village. The
District 6 Neighborhood Leaders Group H24-046 December 20, 2024 5 pedestrian movement throughout the
building site by providing convenient
means of entry from public streets and
transit facilities where applicable, and
by designing ground level building
frontages to create an attractive
pedestrian environment along building
frontages. Unless it is appropriate to
the site and context, franchise-style
architecture is strongly discouraged.
building is focused on the parking lot and
does not follow design standards for
pedestrian interface.

CD-1.17 Minimize the footprint and visibility of
parking areas. Where parking areas
are necessary, provide aesthetically
pleasing and visually interesting
parking garages with clearly
identified pedestrian entrances and
walkways. Encourage designs that
encapsulate parking facilities behind
active building space or screen parked
vehicles from view from the public
realm. Ensure that garage lighting
does not impact adjacent uses, and to
the extent feasible, avoid impacts of
headlights on adjacent land uses.

The parking lot covers nearly 90% of the
project site. As a surface parking lot, it
cannot be screened from public view for
safety reasons. Pedestrian will experience
a parking lot that runs over 200 feet
along Race Street Lighting and
headlights will impact adjacent residents
in the TOD to the north of the site.

CD-2.3 Enhance pedestrian activity through
design, pedestrian-oriented
streetscape, trees, improvements to
sidewalks, easily accessible building
entrances on street frontages.

Integrate existing or proposed transit
stops into project designs.

The project concept focuses on the
parking lot away from the sidewalks. The
building is visually prominent on the
corner but customer access appears to be
primarily through the parking lot. No
integration with transit stops is apparent
in concept drawings.

CD-3.9 Minimize driveway entrances to
enhance pedestrian safety and
decrease the area of paved surfaces.

Encourage shared vehicular access
points... Minimize negative impacts to
aesthetics and to pedestrian and
bicycle safety.

The project proposal included two
separate driveways on Race Street which
is only two lanes wide and without a
separate bike lane. A 2007 traffic study
of Race Street south of Park showed over
13,000 vehicles. Stacking at the West
San Carlos signal light is observed and
expected to continue. Two driveways
will create two areas of conflict between
pedestrians, bicyclists and vehicles
departing the fast food restaurant.

We wish to highlight the prohibition in this urban village of drive-through services [LU-2.6].

As currently proposed, the project is in conformance with LU-2.6, however we note that the District 6 Neighborhood Leaders Group H24-046 December 20, 2024 6 applicant’s current and recently proposed sites in this and other cities have drive-through service, and we wish to emphasize our opposition to any drive-through service that may be proposed subsequent to this letter.

Where is the financial analysis?

We disagree with any asserted conformance with IE-2.7 (“Encourage business and property development that will provide jobs and generate revenue…”) , IE 6.2 (“Attract diverse mix of businesses…all skill and educational level” ) and IE 6.3 (“Attract jobs accessible to all… particularly residents of low income neighborhoods.”) It is difficult to believe that a fast -food restaurant will serve to materially increase tax revenues or provide meaningful high quality career- building employment in the area . The project plans to cannibalize an existing entrepreneur’s restaurant and two local businesses by demolishing their building . Compared to the value of a future TOD, what is the lost opportunity cost from building this project? Even if there is unmet demand consumer demand for fast food, why not discourage, ever so slightly, auto usage? The GP 2040 calls for a large reduction in automobile trips and mileage. How does providing a car-centric fast food restaurant that encourages car use through easy parking assist that effort? It does not .

One way to encourage pedestrian uses, especially in our Urban Villages is to discourage vehicular uses, including the provision of easy parking for quick stop-and-go fast food restaurants.

Interim development or barrier to TOD development?
We disagree with any assertion that the project is compatible with IE 1.11 (“an interim development that would not limit the site’s ability to be redeveloped in the future” nor is it a “small expansion of an existing use”.) The prior fast-food restaurant closed in 2016, was vandalized and then demolished. An application for a TOD was submitted and withdrawn. This project is not an expansion of an existing use —it is a new use! Construction of this building and parking lot is a major investment and likely will delay redevelopment 10 to 40 years. The city’s characterization of this project as an “interim development” is deeply disrespectful to the existing businesses that would be displaced. These businesses contribute to the economic and social fabric of the area, and their removal for a single, car-centric development disregards their value to the community.

More importantly, we contend that another car-centric use will limit the ability to redevelop other nearby parcels, such as the properties along West San Carlos Street. Prior developers along West San Carlos found it difficult to obtain financing for their mixed use, transit oriented developments.

Existing car-centric uses with large parking lots did not assist them in selling their vision of a vibrant West San Carlos Street Urban Village to potential financiers. Approval of this proposal would be unfriendly to current developers who are now trying to finance entitled housing properties in our area, because doing so would show that the City prefers more of the same car - centric low density development rather than holding true to the Urban Village vi sion. Older shopping centers along West San Carlos such as the shopping center at Leigh, the Walgreens at Meridian and the sizeable 30-year old Safeway shopping center with fast food drive-through are at or near the end of their life cycle and could someday be a residential and commercial mixed use development consistent with our Urban Village dreams, but this new car-centric low density fast food restaurant would be an additional hurdle to those transformations. West San Carlos is sufficiently challenged at the present time.

District 6 Neighborhood Leaders Group H24-046 December 20, 2024 7 It is easier to sell a vision over an empty lot than compete with images of cars stacked up to enter and exit a fast food parking lot. Put another way, sometimes nothing is better than something.

San Jose has a long history of holding properties in anticipation of future opportuni ties. The Redevelopment Agency re -used buildings or kept vacant lots waiting for high intensity development for downtown and the Rincon de los Esteros Plan (North San Jose) . Imagine what these areas would have looked like if fast food restaurants had been sprinkled throughout the area instead of part of mixed use or shopping center developments . Currently, Google is re -using buildings and proposing simple infrastructure changes such as pavement and awnings for their interim “Creekside Socials.” In contrast to this West San Carlos project, none of Google’s low cost, low intensity plans will impede redevelopment when the financial market moves in favor of their redevelopment plans.

Housing and Climate Emergency:

The City of San José has declared a housing emergency. Until every required housing unit in the City’s regional quota are built, it is irresponsible to allow “interim” development that has the potential to significantly delay a prime TOD project. The City of San José declared a climate emergency in 2019 and set a carbon neutral goal by 2030 citing the provisions of the 2040 General Plan as a key component in meeting that goal. In light of these two emergencies why is San José considering this car-centric low intensity fast-food restaurant development application that has the potential of preventing redevelopment for decades?
Missed Opportunities for Alignment:

This project disregards the strategic goals of density, diversity, and connectivity essent ial for the area's transformation into a thriving urban hub.

Instead of a car -centric stand-alone fast-food development, this prominent site should support higher-density, mixed-use projects that align with the West San Carlos Urban Village Plan. With the overwhelming need for housing, development projects within this urban village should include appropriate residential units to increase housing inventory, provide diverse housing options, and support local businesses, all while enhancing walkability and transit connectivity.

We urge the City to deny the Site Development Permit application for File No. H24-046. Instead, we encourage the property owner to explore alternatives that align with the West San Carlos Urban Village Plan’s vision for a vibrant, pedest rian-oriented, and transit -focused community. The success of this vision depends on adhering to the principles that prioritize the needs of the neighborhood and future generations.

Sincerely,

Lawrence Ames, Chair, D6NLG

District 6 Neighborhood Leaders Group H24-046 December 20, 2024 8 cc
Chris Burton, Director, PBCE
John Tu, Division Manager
Alec Atienza, Acting Planner IV

Jennifer Maguire, City Manager
Rosalyn Hughey, Deputy City Manager
Michael Mulcahy, Councilmember, District 6
Chris Roth, Chief of Staff, District 6

Buena Vista Neighborhood Association
Shasta Hanchett Neighborhood Association
St Leo’s Neighborhood Association
District 6, Neighborhood Leaders Group
San Jose All District Leadership Group

Outlook
RE: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal From Lee, Jason <[email protected]>
Date Fri 2025-02-21 14:30
To 'Francine Alvarez' ; Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>;
Dear Francine,

Thank you for your e-mail, and your opposition to the project is noted.

Staff notes the description of the Character Area definition of the project site; however, the allowable land use is controlled by the Land Use Designation portion of the document. This is a commercial project on a commercial- designated and commercial-zoned parcel that does not have a required minimum density. While the description allows for higher-density uses and the project does not meet some of the aspirational goals of the plan, lower- density uses are not precluded in Urban Villages, and can still fit within the urban fabric of a higher-density area by contributing to the streetscape, walkability, and street-level vibrancy of districts.

Staff has worked with the applicant to include elements in the project that would meet the West San Carlos Urban Village Plan goals by encouraging pedestrian access to the site and beyond, including widening both the San Carlos and Race sidewalks on the project site and making pedestrian and traffic safety improvements to the San Carlos and Race intersection. If approved and built, the project will also include a mural on the San Carlos frontage to integrate public art and contribute to the streetscape, and will create an outdoor patio on the corner to enhance pedestrian vibrancy through a low-barrier gathering space. Staff also notes that nothing prevents nearby residents from walking to the site, nor would it prevent residents from other areas, including Downtown, or employees from taking transit to the site.

Regarding the proposed demolition and parking lot, ultimately, a private developer has proposed the project in this manner, and staff must review and formulate a recommendation on the project as proposed. Ultimately, a decision on the project will be made by a decisionmaker, whether it be the Director/Hearing Officer at Director’s Hearing, or Planning Commission or City Council on appeal.

Nevertheless, staff has encouraged the applicant at every turn to reduce the amount of parking and will continue to do so. However, the applicant has been insistent on the amount of parking and has relayed that the project is not feasible without this amount of parking spaces. While the City has eliminated minimum parking requirements, there are no maximum parking requirements, so the applicant is able to choose the amount of parking they find appropriate for their project. Without intimating that this will occur, staff notes that should the area continue to succeed and land values increase, it becomes more possible that the parking lot (or the entire site) is redeveloped to a higher-density or mixed-use project in the future, and that a restaurant/retail use and parking lot is much more likely to be developed than low- or medium-density residential.

6/4/25, 12:41 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 1/3

[External Email. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. Learn more] The City will hold a community meeting for this project, which is now expected in the latter half of March, and I have put you on the list to be notified when that is finalized.

Thank you,
Jason

---
Jason Lee, Planner II
[email protected] | 408.535.3887

City of San José
Planning, Building, & Code Enforcement
200 E. Santa Clara Street, 3F Tower
San José, California 95113-1905
www.sanjoseca.gov/planning

From: Francine Alvarez <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, February 16, 2025 09:05
To: Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Lee, Jason <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>; Subject: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal

Some people who received this message don't often get email from Learn why this is important To the San José Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement Department, Mayor Mahan, Councilmember Davis, and Councilmember-elect Mulcahy,
I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed Chick-fil-A at 1301 W San Carlos Street. This project is at odds with San José’s vision for West San Carlos and what I want to see in this neighborhood.

The West San Carlos Urban Village Plan describes the site of the proposed development as an area with “higher- density mixed-use and residential development drawing energy from nearby Downtown San José and the Diridon Station. Development is proposed to range between three and seven stories with residential uses above a mix of active groundfloor retail.”
A single-story, 5,139-square-foot fast-food restaurant does not align with this description. It actively works against the atmosphere an urban village is supposed to foster by encouraging customers to travel by car. This location is right along VTA’s 523/23 bus line and just a few minutes away from light rail by foot.

Additionally, construction of the larger parking lot detailed in the proposal would require demolishing two existing local businesses. This new restaurant should not need a parking lot larger than the one that supported the previous fast-food establishment that occupied the corner of this site.

As is currently proposed, a standalone Chick-fil-A and a large parking lot are not acceptable uses of the extremely 6/4/25, 12:41 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 2/3

Outlook
RE: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal From Lee, Jason <[email protected]>
Date Fri 2025-02-21 14:40
To Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>;
Hello,

Thank you for your e-mail, and your opposition to the project is noted.

Staff notes the description of the Character Area definition of the project site; however, the allowable land use is controlled by the Land Use Designation portion of the document. This is a commercial project on a commercial- designated and commercial-zoned parcel that does not have a required minimum density. While the description allows for higher-density uses and the project does not meet some of the aspirational goals of the plan, lower- density uses are not precluded in Urban Villages, and can still fit within the urban fabric of a higher-density area by contributing to the streetscape, walkability, and street-level vibrancy of districts.

Staff has worked with the applicant to include elements in the project that would meet the West San Carlos Urban Village Plan goals by encouraging pedestrian access to the site and beyond, including widening both the San Carlos and Race sidewalks on the project site and making pedestrian and traffic safety improvements to the San Carlos and Race intersection. If approved and built, the project will also include a mural on the San Carlos frontage to integrate public art and contribute to the streetscape, and will create an outdoor patio on the corner to enhance pedestrian vibrancy through a low-barrier gathering space. Staff also notes that nothing prevents nearby residents from walking to the site, nor would it prevent residents from other areas, including Downtown, or employees from taking transit to the site.

Regarding the proposed demolition and parking lot, ultimately, a private developer has proposed the project in this manner, and staff must review and formulate a recommendation on the project as proposed. Ultimately, a decision on the project will be made by a decisionmaker, whether it be the Director/Hearing Officer at Director’s Hearing, or Planning Commission or City Council on appeal.

Nevertheless, staff has encouraged the applicant at every turn to reduce the amount of parking and will continue to do so. However, the applicant has been insistent on the amount of parking and has relayed that the project is not feasible without this amount of parking spaces. While the City has eliminated minimum parking requirements, there are no maximum parking requirements, so the applicant is able to choose the amount of parking they find appropriate for their project. Without intimating that this will occur, staff notes that should the area continue to succeed and land values increase, it becomes more possible that the parking lot (or the entire site) is redeveloped to a higher-density or mixed-use project in the future, and that a restaurant/retail use and parking lot is much more likely to be developed than low- or medium-density residential.

6/4/25, 12:46 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 1/3

[External Email. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. Learn more] The City will hold a community meeting for this project, which is now expected in the latter half of March, and I have put you on the list to be notified when that is finalized.

Thank you,
Jason

---
Jason Lee, Planner II
[email protected] | 408.535.3887

City of San José
Planning, Building, & Code Enforcement
200 E. Santa Clara Street, 3F Tower
San José, California 95113-1905
www.sanjoseca.gov/planning

From: V_ALVY
Sent: Sunday, February 16, 2025 13:31
To: Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Lee, Jason <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>; Subject: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal

You don't often get email from Learn why this is important To the San José Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement Department, Mayor Mahan, Councilmember Davis, and Councilmember-elect Mulcahy,
I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed Chick-fil-A at 1301 W San Carlos Street. This project is at odds with San José’s vision for West San Carlos and what I want to see in this neighborhood.

The West San Carlos Urban Village Plan describes the site of the proposed development as an area with “higher- density mixed-use and residential development drawing energy from nearby Downtown San José and the Diridon Station. Development is proposed to range between three and seven stories with residential uses above a mix of active groundfloor retail.”
A single-story, 5,139-square-foot fast-food restaurant does not align with this description. It actively works against the atmosphere an urban village is supposed to foster by encouraging customers to travel by car. This location is right along VTA’s 523/23 bus line and just a few minutes away from light rail by foot.

Additionally, construction of the larger parking lot detailed in the proposal would require demolishing two existing local businesses. This new restaurant should not need a parking lot larger than the one that supported the previous fast-food establishment that occupied the corner of this site.

As is currently proposed, a standalone Chick-fil-A and a large parking lot are not acceptable uses of the extremely 6/4/25, 12:46 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 2/3

This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. limited land where higher-density, mixed-use development is allowed and needed in San José.

Please stand by the principles and plans we have created to guide our city and region into a better, more sustainable future. Please tell Chick-fil-A to majorly re-work its San Carlos St proposal or locate elsewhere.

Sent from my T-Mobile 5G Device

6/4/25, 12:46 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 3/3 This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. limited land where higher-density, mixed-use development is allowed and needed in San José.

Please stand by the principles and plans we have created to guide our city and region into a better, more sustainable future. Please tell Chick-fil-A to majorly re-work its San Carlos St proposal or locate elsewhere.

6/4/25, 12:41 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 3/3 Outlook
RE: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal From Lee, Jason <[email protected]>
Date Fri 2025-02-21 14:32
To 'Josiah Arellano' ; Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>;
Dear Josiah,
Thank you for your e-mail, and your opposition to the project is noted.

Staff notes the description of the Character Area definition of the project site; however, the allowable land use is controlled by the Land Use Designation portion of the document. This is a commercial project on a commercial-designated and commercial-zoned parcel that does not have a required minimum density. While the description allows for higher-density uses and the project does not meet some of the aspirational goals of the plan, lower-density uses are not precluded in Urban Villages, and can still fit within the urban fabric of a higher-density area by contributing to the streetscape, walkability, and street-level vibrancy of districts.

Staff has worked with the applicant to include elements in the project that would meet the West San Carlos Urban Village Plan goals by encouraging pedestrian access to the site and beyond, including widening both the San Carlos and Race sidewalks on the project site and making pedestrian and traffic safety improvements to the San Carlos and Race intersection. If approved and built, the project will also include a mural on the San Carlos frontage to integrate public art and contribute to the streetscape, and will create an outdoor patio on the corner to enhance pedestrian vibrancy through a low-barrier gathering space. Staff also notes that nothing prevents nearby residents from walking to the site, nor would it prevent residents from other areas, including Downtown, or employees from taking transit to the site.

Regarding the proposed demolition and parking lot, ultimately, a private developer has proposed the project in this manner, and staff must review and formulate a recommendation on the project as proposed. Ultimately, a decision on the project will be made by a decisionmaker, whether it be the Director/Hearing Officer at Director’s Hearing, or Planning Commission or City Council on appeal.

Nevertheless, staff has encouraged the applicant at every turn to reduce the amount of parking and will continue to do so. However, the applicant has been insistent on the amount of parking and has relayed that the project is not feasible without this amount of parking spaces. While the City has eliminated minimum parking requirements, there are no maximum parking requirements, so the applicant is able to 6/4/25, 12:42 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 1/3

choose the amount of parking they find appropriate for their project. Without intimating that this will occur, staff notes that should the area continue to succeed and land values increase, it becomes more possible that the parking lot (or the entire site) is redeveloped to a higher-density or mixed-use project in the future, and that a restaurant/retail use and parking lot is much more likely to be developed than low- or medium-density residential.

The City will hold a community meeting for this project, which is now expected in the latter half of March, and I have put you on the list to be notified when that is finalized.

Thank you,
Jason
---
Jason Lee, Planner II
[email protected] | 408.535.3887

City of San José
Planning, Building, & Code Enforcement
200 E. Santa Clara Street, 3F Tower
San José, California 95113-1905
www.sanjoseca.gov/planning
-----Original Message-----
From: Josiah Arellano
Sent: Sunday, February 16, 2025 10:48
To: Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Lee, Jason <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>;
Subject: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal [External Email. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. Learn more<https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification>]
[Some people who received this message don't often get email fr om . Learn
why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ] T
o the San José Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement Department, Mayor Mahan, Councilmember Davis, and Councilmember-elect Mulcahy,
I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed Chick-fil-A at 1301 W San Carlos Street. This project is at odds with San José’s vision for West San Carlos and what I want to see in this neighborhood. 6/4/25, 12:42 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 2/3

The West San Carlos Urban Village Plan describes the site of the proposed development as an area with “higher-density mixed-use and residential development drawing energy from nearby Downtown San José and the Diridon Station. Development is proposed to range between three and seven stories with residential uses above a mix of active groundfloor retail.” A single-story, 5,139-square-foot fast-food restaurant does not align with this description. It actively works against the atmosphere an urban village is supposed to foster by encouraging customers to travel by car. This location is right along VTA’s 523/23 bus line and just a few minutes away from light rail by foot.

Additionally, construction of the larger parking lot detailed in the proposal would require demolishing two existing local businesses. This new restaurant should not need a parking lot larger than the one that supported the previous fast-food establishment that occupied the corner of this site.

As is currently proposed, a standalone Chick-fil-A and a large parking lot are not acceptable uses of the extremely limited land where higher-density, mixed-use development is allowed and needed in San José.

Please stand by the principles and plans we have created to guide our city and region into a better, more sustainable future. Please tell Chick-fil-A to majorly re-work its San Carlos St proposal or locate elsewhere.

This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
6/4/25, 12:42 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 3/3 Outlook
RE: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal From Lee, Jason <[email protected]>
Date Fri 2025-02-21 14:32
To 'Joshua Bacich' ; Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>; [email protected] Dear Joshua,
Thank you for your e-mail, and your opposition to the project is noted.

Staff notes the description of the Character Area definition of the project site; however, the allowable land use is controlled by the Land Use Designation portion of the document. This is a commercial project on a commercial-designated and commercial-zoned parcel that does not have a required minimum density. While the description allows for higher-density uses and the project does not meet some of the aspirational goals of the plan, lower-density uses are not precluded in Urban Villages, and can still fit within the urban fabric of a higher-density area by contributing to the streetscape, walkability, and street-level vibrancy of districts.

Staff has worked with the applicant to include elements in the project that would meet the West San Carlos Urban Village Plan goals by encouraging pedestrian access to the site and beyond, including widening both the San Carlos and Race sidewalks on the project site and making pedestrian and traffic safety improvements to the San Carlos and Race intersection. If approved and built, the project will also include a mural on the San Carlos frontage to integrate public art and contribute to the streetscape, and will create an outdoor patio on the corner to enhance pedestrian vibrancy through a low-barrier gathering space. Staff also notes that nothing prevents nearby residents from walking to the site, nor would it prevent residents from other areas, including Downtown, or employees from taking transit to the site.

Regarding the proposed demolition and parking lot, ultimately, a private developer has proposed the project in this manner, and staff must review and formulate a recommendation on the project as proposed. Ultimately, a decision on the project will be made by a decisionmaker, whether it be the Director/Hearing Officer at Director’s Hearing, or Planning Commission or City Council on appeal.

Nevertheless, staff has encouraged the applicant at every turn to reduce the amount of parking and will continue to do so. However, the applicant has been insistent on the amount of parking and has relayed that the project is not feasible without this amount of parking spaces. While the City has eliminated minimum parking requirements, there are no maximum parking requirements, so the applicant is able to 6/4/25, 12:42 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 1/3

choose the amount of parking they find appropriate for their project. Without intimating that this will occur, staff notes that should the area continue to succeed and land values increase, it becomes more possible that the parking lot (or the entire site) is redeveloped to a higher-density or mixed-use project in the future, and that a restaurant/retail use and parking lot is much more likely to be developed than low- or medium-density residential.

The City will hold a community meeting for this project, which is now expected in the latter half of March, and I have put you on the list to be notified when that is finalized.

Thank you,
Jason
---
Jason Lee, Planner II
[email protected] | 408.535.3887

City of San José
Planning, Building, & Code Enforcement
200 E. Santa Clara Street, 3F Tower
San José, California 95113-1905
www.sanjoseca.gov/planning
-----Original Message-----
From: Joshua Bacich
Sent: Sunday, February 16, 2025 16:50
To: Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Lee, Jason <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>;
Subject: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal [External Email. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. Learn more<https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification>]
[You don't often get email from Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ]
To the San José Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement Department, Mayor Mahan, Councilmember Davis, and Councilmember-elect Mulcahy,
I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed Chick-fil-A at 1301 W San Carlos Street. This project is at odds with San José’s vision for West San Carlos and what I want to see in this neighborhood. 6/4/25, 12:42 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 2/3

The West San Carlos Urban Village Plan describes the site of the proposed development as an area with “higher-density mixed-use and residential development drawing energy from nearby Downtown San José and the Diridon Station. Development is proposed to range between three and seven stories with residential uses above a mix of active groundfloor retail.” A single-story, 5,139-square-foot fast-food restaurant does not align with this description. It actively works against the atmosphere an urban village is supposed to foster by encouraging customers to travel by car. This location is right along VTA’s 523/23 bus line and just a few minutes away from light rail by foot.

Additionally, construction of the larger parking lot detailed in the proposal would require demolishing two existing local businesses. This new restaurant should not need a parking lot larger than the one that supported the previous fast-food establishment that occupied the corner of this site.

As is currently proposed, a standalone Chick-fil-A and a large parking lot are not acceptable uses of the extremely limited land where higher-density, mixed-use development is allowed and needed in San José.

Please stand by the principles and plans we have created to guide our city and region into a better, more sustainable future. Please tell Chick-fil-A to majorly re-work its San Carlos St proposal or locate elsewhere.

This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
6/4/25, 12:42 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 3/3 Outlook
RE: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal From Lee, Jason <[email protected]>
Date Fri 2025-02-21 14:26
To 'Anita Badger' ; Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>;
Dear Anita,
Thank you for your e-mail, and your opposition to the project is noted.

Staff notes the description of the Character Area definition of the project site; however, the allowable land use is controlled by the Land Use Designation portion of the document. This is a commercial project on a commercial-designated and commercial-zoned parcel that does not have a required minimum density. While the description allows for higher-density uses and the project does not meet some of the aspirational goals of the plan, lower-density uses are not precluded in Urban Villages, and can still fit within the urban fabric of a higher-density area by contributing to the streetscape, walkability, and street-level vibrancy of districts.

Staff has worked with the applicant to include elements in the project that would meet the West San Carlos Urban Village Plan goals by encouraging pedestrian access to the site and beyond, including widening both the San Carlos and Race sidewalks on the project site and making pedestrian and traffic safety improvements to the San Carlos and Race intersection. If approved and built, the project will also include a mural on the San Carlos frontage to integrate public art and contribute to the streetscape, and will create an outdoor patio on the corner to enhance pedestrian vibrancy through a low-barrier gathering space. Staff also notes that nothing prevents nearby residents from walking to the site, nor would it prevent residents from other areas, including Downtown, or employees from taking transit to the site.

Regarding the proposed demolition and parking lot, ultimately, a private developer has proposed the project in this manner, and staff must review and formulate a recommendation on the project as proposed. Ultimately, a decision on the project will be made by a decisionmaker, whether it be the Director/Hearing Officer at Director’s Hearing, or Planning Commission or City Council on appeal.

Nevertheless, staff has encouraged the applicant at every turn to reduce the amount of parking and will continue to do so. However, the applicant has been insistent on the amount of parking and has relayed that the project is not feasible without this amount of parking spaces. While the City has eliminated minimum parking requirements, there are no maximum parking requirements, so the applicant is able to 6/4/25, 12:38 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 1/3

choose the amount of parking they find appropriate for their project. Without intimating that this will occur, staff notes that should the area continue to succeed and land values increase, it becomes more possible that the parking lot (or the entire site) is redeveloped to a higher-density or mixed-use project in the future, and that a restaurant/retail use and parking lot is much more likely to be developed than low- or medium-density residential.

The City will hold a community meeting for this project, which is now expected in the latter half of March, and I have put you on the list to be notified when that is finalized.

Thank you,
Jason
---
Jason Lee, Planner II
[email protected] | 408.535.3887

City of San José
Planning, Building, & Code Enforcement
200 E. Santa Clara Street, 3F Tower
San José, California 95113-1905
www.sanjoseca.gov/planning
-----Original Message-----
From: Anita Badger
Sent: Sunday, February 16, 2025 11:26
To: Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Lee, Jason <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>;
Subject: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal [External Email. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. Learn more<https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification>]
[You don't often get email from Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ]
To the San José Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement Department, Mayor Mahan, Councilmember Davis, and Councilmember-elect Mulcahy,
I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed Chick-fil-A at 1301 W San Carlos Street. This project is at odds with San José’s vision for West San Carlos and what I want to see in this neighborhood. 6/4/25, 12:38 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 2/3

The West San Carlos Urban Village Plan describes the site of the proposed development as an area with “higher-density mixed-use and residential development drawing energy from nearby Downtown San José and the Diridon Station. Development is proposed to range between three and seven stories with residential uses above a mix of active groundfloor retail.” A single-story, 5,139-square-foot fast-food restaurant does not align with this description. It actively works against the atmosphere an urban village is supposed to foster by encouraging customers to travel by car. This location is right along VTA’s 523/23 bus line and just a few minutes away from light rail by foot.

Additionally, construction of the larger parking lot detailed in the proposal would require demolishing two existing local businesses. This new restaurant should not need a parking lot larger than the one that supported the previous fast-food establishment that occupied the corner of this site.  Please don’t demolish the existing businesses.  It is bad enough when they have to leave due to their rent being raised to unaffordable levels
As is currently proposed, a standalone Chick-fil-A and a large parking lot are not acceptable uses of the extremely limited land where higher-density, mixed-use development is allowed and needed in San José.

Please stand by the principles and plans we have created to guide our city and region into a better, more sustainable future. Please tell Chick-fil-A to majorly re-work its San Carlos St proposal or locate elsewhere.

Sincerely
Anita Badger
This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
6/4/25, 12:38 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 3/3

Outlook
RE: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal From Lee, Jason <[email protected]>
Date Fri 2025-02-21 14:34
To ; Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>;
Dear Lauren,

Thank you for your e-mail, and your opposition to the project is noted.

Staff notes the description of the Character Area definition of the project site; however, the allowable land use is controlled by the Land Use Designation portion of the document. This is a commercial project on a commercial- designated and commercial-zoned parcel that does not have a required minimum density. While the description allows for higher-density uses and the project does not meet some of the aspirational goals of the plan, lower- density uses are not precluded in Urban Villages, and can still fit within the urban fabric of a higher-density area by contributing to the streetscape, walkability, and street-level vibrancy of districts.

Staff has worked with the applicant to include elements in the project that would meet the West San Carlos Urban Village Plan goals by encouraging pedestrian access to the site and beyond, including widening both the San Carlos and Race sidewalks on the project site and making pedestrian and traffic safety improvements to the San Carlos and Race intersection. If approved and built, the project will also include a mural on the San Carlos frontage to integrate public art and contribute to the streetscape, and will create an outdoor patio on the corner to enhance pedestrian vibrancy through a low-barrier gathering space. Staff also notes that nothing prevents nearby residents from walking to the site, nor would it prevent residents from other areas, including Downtown, or employees from taking transit to the site.

Regarding the proposed demolition and parking lot, ultimately, a private developer has proposed the project in this manner, and staff must review and formulate a recommendation on the project as proposed. Ultimately, a decision on the project will be made by a decisionmaker, whether it be the Director/Hearing Officer at Director’s Hearing, or Planning Commission or City Council on appeal.

Nevertheless, staff has encouraged the applicant at every turn to reduce the amount of parking and will continue to do so. However, the applicant has been insistent on the amount of parking and has relayed that the project is not feasible without this amount of parking spaces. While the City has eliminated minimum parking requirements, there are no maximum parking requirements, so the applicant is able to choose the amount of parking they find appropriate for their project. Without intimating that this will occur, staff notes that should the area continue to succeed and land values increase, it becomes more possible that the parking lot (or the entire site) is redeveloped to a higher-density or mixed-use project in the future, and that a restaurant/retail use and parking lot is much more likely to be developed than low- or medium-density residential.

6/4/25, 12:42 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 1/3

[External Email. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. Learn more] The City will hold a community meeting for this project, which is now expected in the latter half of March, and I have put you on the list to be notified when that is finalized.

Thank you,
Jason

---
Jason Lee, Planner II
[email protected] | 408.535.3887

City of San José
Planning, Building, & Code Enforcement
200 E. Santa Clara Street, 3F Tower
San José, California 95113-1905
www.sanjoseca.gov/planning

From: Lauren B
Sent: Monday, February 17, 2025 22:16
To: Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Lee, Jason <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>; Subject: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal

Some people who received this message don't often get email from Learn why this is important To the San José Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement Department, Mayor Mahan, Councilmember Davis, and Councilmember-elect Mulcahy,
I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed Chick-fil-A at 1301 W San Carlos Street. This project is at odds with San José’s vision for West San Carlos and what I want to see in this neighborhood.

The West San Carlos Urban Village Plan describes the site of the proposed development as an area with “higher- density mixed-use and residential development drawing energy from nearby Downtown San José and the Diridon Station. Development is proposed to range between three and seven stories with residential uses above a mix of active groundfloor retail.”
A single-story, 5,139-square-foot fast-food restaurant does not align with this description. It actively works against the atmosphere an urban village is supposed to foster by encouraging customers to travel by car. This location is right along VTA’s 523/23 bus line and just a few minutes away from light rail by foot.

Additionally, construction of the larger parking lot detailed in the proposal would require demolishing two existing local businesses. This new restaurant should not need a parking lot larger than the one that supported the previous fast-food establishment that occupied the corner of this site.

As is currently proposed, a standalone Chick-fil-A and a large parking lot are not acceptable uses of the extremely 6/4/25, 12:42 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 2/3

This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. limited land where higher-density, mixed-use development is allowed and needed in San José.

Please stand by the principles and plans we have created to guide our city and region into a better, more sustainable future. Please tell Chick-fil-A to majorly re-work its San Carlos St proposal or locate elsewhere.

-Lauren

6/4/25, 12:42 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 3/3 Outlook
RE: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal From Lee, Jason <[email protected]>
Date Fri 2025-02-21 14:26
To Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <
Dear Dirk,

Thank you for your e-mail, and your opposition to the project is noted.

Staff notes the description of the Character Area definition of the project site; however, the allowable land use is controlled by the Land Use Designation portion of the document. This is a commercial project on a commercial- designated and commercial-zoned parcel that does not have a required minimum density. While the description allows for higher-density uses and the project does not meet some of the aspirational goals of the plan, lower- density uses are not precluded in Urban Villages, and can still fit within the urban fabric of a higher-density area by contributing to the streetscape, walkability, and street-level vibrancy of districts.

Staff has worked with the applicant to include elements in the project that would meet the West San Carlos Urban Village Plan goals by encouraging pedestrian access to the site and beyond, including widening both the San Carlos and Race sidewalks on the project site and making pedestrian and traffic safety improvements to the San Carlos and Race intersection. If approved and built, the project will also include a mural on the San Carlos frontage to integrate public art and contribute to the streetscape, and will create an outdoor patio on the corner to enhance pedestrian vibrancy through a low-barrier gathering space. Staff also notes that nothing prevents nearby residents from walking to the site, nor would it prevent residents from other areas, including Downtown, or employees from taking transit to the site.

Regarding the proposed demolition and parking lot, ultimately, a private developer has proposed the project in this manner, and staff must review and formulate a recommendation on the project as proposed. Ultimately, a decision on the project will be made by a decisionmaker, whether it be the Director/Hearing Officer at Director’s Hearing, or Planning Commission or City Council on appeal.

Nevertheless, staff has encouraged the applicant at every turn to reduce the amount of parking and will continue to do so. However, the applicant has been insistent on the amount of parking and has relayed that the project is not feasible without this amount of parking spaces. While the City has eliminated minimum parking requirements, there are no maximum parking requirements, so the applicant is able to choose the amount of parking they find appropriate for their project. Without intimating that this will occur, staff notes that should the area continue to succeed and land values increase, it becomes more possible that the parking lot (or the entire site) is redeveloped to a higher-density or mixed-use project in the future, and that a restaurant/retail use and parking lot is much more likely to be developed than low- or medium-density residential.

6/4/25, 12:38 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 1/3

[External Email. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. Learn more] The City will hold a community meeting for this project, which is now expected in the latter half of March, and I have put you on the list to be notified when that is finalized.

Thank you,
Jason

---
Jason Lee, Planner II
[email protected] | 408.535.3887

City of San José
Planning, Building, & Code Enforcement
200 E. Santa Clara Street, 3F Tower
San José, California 95113-1905
www.sanjoseca.gov/planning

From: blaahh4040
Sent: Sunday, February 16, 2025 10:51
To: Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Lee, Jason <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>; Subject: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal

You don't often get email from Learn why this is important To the San José Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement Department, Mayor Mahan, Councilmember Davis, and Councilmember-elect Mulcahy,
I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed Chick-fil-A at 1301 W San Carlos Street. This project is at odds with San José’s vision for West San Carlos and what I want to see in this neighborhood.

The West San Carlos Urban Village Plan describes the site of the proposed development as an area with “higher- density mixed-use and residential development drawing energy from nearby Downtown San José and the Diridon Station. Development is proposed to range between three and seven stories with residential uses above a mix of active groundfloor retail.”
A single-story, 5,139-square-foot fast-food restaurant does not align with this description. It actively works against the atmosphere an urban village is supposed to foster by encouraging customers to travel by car. This location is right along VTA’s 523/23 bus line and just a few minutes away from light rail by foot.

Additionally, construction of the larger parking lot detailed in the proposal would require demolishing two existing local businesses. This new restaurant should not need a parking lot larger than the one that supported the previous fast-food establishment that occupied the corner of this site.

As is currently proposed, a standalone Chick-fil-A and a large parking lot are not acceptable uses of the extremely 6/4/25, 12:38 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 2/3

This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. limited land where higher-density, mixed-use development is allowed and needed in San José.

Please stand by the principles and plans we have created to guide our city and region into a better, more sustainable future. Please tell Chick-fil-A to majorly re-work its San Carlos St proposal or locate elsewhere.

Regards,

Dirk Burkin

6/4/25, 12:38 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 3/3 Outlook
RE: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal From Lee, Jason <[email protected]>
Date Fri 2025-02-21 14:38
To Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>;
Dear Ryan,

Thank you for your e-mail, and your opposition to the project is noted.

Staff notes the description of the Character Area definition of the project site; however, the allowable land use is controlled by the Land Use Designation portion of the document. This is a commercial project on a commercial- designated and commercial-zoned parcel that does not have a required minimum density. While the description allows for higher-density uses and the project does not meet some of the aspirational goals of the plan, lower- density uses are not precluded in Urban Villages, and can still fit within the urban fabric of a higher-density area by contributing to the streetscape, walkability, and street-level vibrancy of districts.

Staff has worked with the applicant to include elements in the project that would meet the West San Carlos Urban Village Plan goals by encouraging pedestrian access to the site and beyond, including widening both the San Carlos and Race sidewalks on the project site and making pedestrian and traffic safety improvements to the San Carlos and Race intersection. If approved and built, the project will also include a mural on the San Carlos frontage to integrate public art and contribute to the streetscape, and will create an outdoor patio on the corner to enhance pedestrian vibrancy through a low-barrier gathering space. Staff also notes that nothing prevents nearby residents from walking to the site, nor would it prevent residents from other areas, including Downtown, or employees from taking transit to the site.

Regarding the proposed demolition and parking lot, ultimately, a private developer has proposed the project in this manner, and staff must review and formulate a recommendation on the project as proposed. Ultimately, a decision on the project will be made by a decisionmaker, whether it be the Director/Hearing Officer at Director’s Hearing, or Planning Commission or City Council on appeal.

Nevertheless, staff has encouraged the applicant at every turn to reduce the amount of parking and will continue to do so. However, the applicant has been insistent on the amount of parking and has relayed that the project is not feasible without this amount of parking spaces. While the City has eliminated minimum parking requirements, there are no maximum parking requirements, so the applicant is able to choose the amount of parking they find appropriate for their project. Without intimating that this will occur, staff notes that should the area continue to succeed and land values increase, it becomes more possible that the parking lot (or the entire site) is redeveloped to a higher-density or mixed-use project in the future, and that a restaurant/retail use and parking lot is much more likely to be developed than low- or medium-density residential.

6/4/25, 12:45 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 1/3

[External Email. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. Learn more] The City will hold a community meeting for this project, which is now expected in the latter half of March, and I have put you on the list to be notified when that is finalized.

Thank you,
Jason

---
Jason Lee, Planner II
[email protected] | 408.535.3887

City of San José
Planning, Building, & Code Enforcement
200 E. Santa Clara Street, 3F Tower
San José, California 95113-1905
www.sanjoseca.gov/planning

From: Ryan Castillo
Sent: Monday, February 17, 2025 03:26
To: Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Lee, Jason <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>; Subject: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal

Some people who received this message don't often get email from . Learn why this is important To the San José Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement Department, Mayor Mahan, Councilmember Davis, and Councilmember-elect Mulcahy,
I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed Chick-fil-A at 1301 W San Carlos Street. This project is at odds with San José’s vision for West San Carlos and what I want to see in this neighborhood.

The West San Carlos Urban Village Plan describes the site of the proposed development as an area with “higher- density mixed-use and residential development drawing energy from nearby Downtown San José and the Diridon Station. Development is proposed to range between three and seven stories with residential uses above a mix of active groundfloor retail.”
A single-story, 5,139-square-foot fast-food restaurant does not align with this description. It actively works against the atmosphere an urban village is supposed to foster by encouraging customers to travel by car. This location is right along VTA’s 523/23 bus line and just a few minutes away from light rail by foot.

Additionally, construction of the larger parking lot detailed in the proposal would require demolishing two existing local businesses. This new restaurant should not need a parking lot larger than the one that supported the previous fast-food establishment that occupied the corner of this site.

As is currently proposed, a standalone Chick-fil-A and a large parking lot are not acceptable uses of the extremely 6/4/25, 12:45 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 2/3

This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. limited land where higher-density, mixed-use development is allowed and needed in San José.

Please stand by the principles and plans we have created to guide our city and region into a better, more sustainable future. Please tell Chick-fil-A to majorly re-work its San Carlos St proposal or locate elsewhere.

6/4/25, 12:45 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 3/3 Outlook
RE: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal From Lee, Jason <[email protected]>
Date Fri 2025-02-21 14:27
To 'Brittany Devencenzi' ; Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>;
Dear Brittany,
Thank you for your e-mail, and your opposition to the project is noted.

Staff notes the description of the Character Area definition of the project site; however, the allowable land use is controlled by the Land Use Designation portion of the document. This is a commercial project on a commercial-designated and commercial-zoned parcel that does not have a required minimum density. While the description allows for higher-density uses and the project does not meet some of the aspirational goals of the plan, lower-density uses are not precluded in Urban Villages, and can still fit within the urban fabric of a higher-density area by contributing to the streetscape, walkability, and street-level vibrancy of districts.

Staff has worked with the applicant to include elements in the project that would meet the West San Carlos Urban Village Plan goals by encouraging pedestrian access to the site and beyond, including widening both the San Carlos and Race sidewalks on the project site and making pedestrian and traffic safety improvements to the San Carlos and Race intersection. If approved and built, the project will also include a mural on the San Carlos frontage to integrate public art and contribute to the streetscape, and will create an outdoor patio on the corner to enhance pedestrian vibrancy through a low-barrier gathering space. Staff also notes that nothing prevents nearby residents from walking to the site, nor would it prevent residents from other areas, including Downtown, or employees from taking transit to the site.

Regarding the proposed demolition and parking lot, ultimately, a private developer has proposed the project in this manner, and staff must review and formulate a recommendation on the project as proposed. Ultimately, a decision on the project will be made by a decisionmaker, whether it be the Director/Hearing Officer at Director’s Hearing, or Planning Commission or City Council on appeal.

Nevertheless, staff has encouraged the applicant at every turn to reduce the amount of parking and will continue to do so. However, the applicant has been insistent on the amount of parking and has relayed that the project is not feasible without this amount of parking spaces. While the City has eliminated minimum parking requirements, there are no maximum parking requirements, so the applicant is able to 6/4/25, 12:39 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 1/3

choose the amount of parking they find appropriate for their project. Without intimating that this will occur, staff notes that should the area continue to succeed and land values increase, it becomes more possible that the parking lot (or the entire site) is redeveloped to a higher-density or mixed-use project in the future, and that a restaurant/retail use and parking lot is much more likely to be developed than low- or medium-density residential.

The City will hold a community meeting for this project, which is now expected in the latter half of March, and I have put you on the list to be notified when that is finalized.

Thank you,
Jason
---
Jason Lee, Planner II
[email protected] | 408.535.3887

City of San José
Planning, Building, & Code Enforcement
200 E. Santa Clara Street, 3F Tower
San José, California 95113-1905
www.sanjoseca.gov/planning
-----Original Message-----
From: Brittany Devencenzi
Sent: Sunday, February 16, 2025 11:16
To: Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Lee, Jason <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>;
Subject: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal [External Email. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. Learn more<https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification>]
[You don't often get email from Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ]
To the San José Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement Department, Mayor Mahan, Councilmember Davis, and Councilmember-elect Mulcahy,
I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed Chick-fil-A at 1301 W San Carlos Street. This project is at odds with San José’s vision for West San Carlos and what I want to see in this neighborhood. 6/4/25, 12:39 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 2/3

The West San Carlos Urban Village Plan describes the site of the proposed development as an area with “higher-density mixed-use and residential development drawing energy from nearby Downtown San José and the Diridon Station. Development is proposed to range between three and seven stories with residential uses above a mix of active groundfloor retail.” A single-story, 5,139-square-foot fast-food restaurant does not align with this description. It actively works against the atmosphere an urban village is supposed to foster by encouraging customers to travel by car. This location is right along VTA’s 523/23 bus line and just a few minutes away from light rail by foot.

Additionally, construction of the larger parking lot detailed in the proposal would require demolishing two existing local businesses. This new restaurant should not need a parking lot larger than the one that supported the previous fast-food establishment that occupied the corner of this site.

As is currently proposed, a standalone Chick-fil-A and a large parking lot are not acceptable uses of the extremely limited land where higher-density, mixed-use development is allowed and needed in San José.

Please stand by the principles and plans we have created to guide our city and region into a better, more sustainable future. Please tell Chick-fil-A to majorly re-work its San Carlos St proposal or locate elsewhere.

Brittany Devencenzi
Area Sales Manager
Sierra Nevada Brewing Company
This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
6/4/25, 12:39 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 3/3

Outlook
RE: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal From Lee, Jason <[email protected]>
Date Fri 2025-02-21 14:38
To 'Samantha Elias' ; Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>;
Dear Samantha,

Thank you for your e-mail, and your opposition to the project is noted.

Staff notes the description of the Character Area definition of the project site; however, the allowable land use is controlled by the Land Use Designation portion of the document. This is a commercial project on a commercial- designated and commercial-zoned parcel that does not have a required minimum density. While the description allows for higher-density uses and the project does not meet some of the aspirational goals of the plan, lower- density uses are not precluded in Urban Villages, and can still fit within the urban fabric of a higher-density area by contributing to the streetscape, walkability, and street-level vibrancy of districts.

Staff has worked with the applicant to include elements in the project that would meet the West San Carlos Urban Village Plan goals by encouraging pedestrian access to the site and beyond, including widening both the San Carlos and Race sidewalks on the project site and making pedestrian and traffic safety improvements to the San Carlos and Race intersection. If approved and built, the project will also include a mural on the San Carlos frontage to integrate public art and contribute to the streetscape, and will create an outdoor patio on the corner to enhance pedestrian vibrancy through a low-barrier gathering space. Staff also notes that nothing prevents nearby residents from walking to the site, nor would it prevent residents from other areas, including Downtown, or employees from taking transit to the site.

Regarding the proposed demolition and parking lot, ultimately, a private developer has proposed the project in this manner, and staff must review and formulate a recommendation on the project as proposed. Ultimately, a decision on the project will be made by a decisionmaker, whether it be the Director/Hearing Officer at Director’s Hearing, or Planning Commission or City Council on appeal.

Nevertheless, staff has encouraged the applicant at every turn to reduce the amount of parking and will continue to do so. However, the applicant has been insistent on the amount of parking and has relayed that the project is not feasible without this amount of parking spaces. While the City has eliminated minimum parking requirements, there are no maximum parking requirements, so the applicant is able to choose the amount of parking they find appropriate for their project. Without intimating that this will occur, staff notes that should the area continue to succeed and land values increase, it becomes more possible that the parking lot (or the entire site) is redeveloped to a higher-density or mixed-use project in the future, and that a restaurant/retail use and parking lot is much more likely to be developed than low- or medium-density residential.

6/4/25, 12:45 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 1/3

[External Email. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. Learn more] The City will hold a community meeting for this project, which is now expected in the latter half of March, and I have put you on the list to be notified when that is finalized.

Thank you,
Jason

---
Jason Lee, Planner II
[email protected] | 408.535.3887

City of San José
Planning, Building, & Code Enforcement
200 E. Santa Clara Street, 3F Tower
San José, California 95113-1905
www.sanjoseca.gov/planning

From: Samantha Elias
Sent: Monday, February 17, 2025 15:37
To: Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Lee, Jason <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>; Subject: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal

Some people who received this message don't often get email from . Learn why this is important To the San José Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement Department, Mayor Mahan, Councilmember Davis, and Councilmember-elect Mulcahy,
I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed Chick-fil-A at 1301 W San Carlos Street. This project is at odds with San José’s vision for West San Carlos and what I want to see in this neighborhood.

The West San Carlos Urban Village Plan describes the site of the proposed development as an area with “higher- density mixed-use and residential development drawing energy from nearby Downtown San José and the Diridon Station. Development is proposed to range between three and seven stories with residential uses above a mix of active groundfloor retail.”
A single-story, 5,139-square-foot fast-food restaurant does not align with this description. It actively works against the atmosphere an urban village is supposed to foster by encouraging customers to travel by car. This location is right along VTA’s 523/23 bus line and just a few minutes away from light rail by foot.

Additionally, construction of the larger parking lot detailed in the proposal would require demolishing two existing local businesses. This new restaurant should not need a parking lot larger than the one that supported the previous fast-food establishment that occupied the corner of this site.

As is currently proposed, a standalone Chick-fil-A and a large parking lot are not acceptable uses of the extremely 6/4/25, 12:45 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 2/3

This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. limited land where higher-density, mixed-use development is allowed and needed in San José.

Please stand by the principles and plans we have created to guide our city and region into a better, more sustainable future. Please tell Chick-fil-A to majorly re-work its San Carlos St proposal or locate elsewhere.

6/4/25, 12:45 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 3/3 Outlook
RE: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal From Lee, Jason <[email protected]>
Date Fri 2025-02-21 14:31
To 'Jennifer Ernst' Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>;
Dear Jennifer,

Thank you for your e-mail, and your opposition to the project is noted.

Staff notes the description of the Character Area definition of the project site; however, the allowable land use is controlled by the Land Use Designation portion of the document. This is a commercial project on a commercial- designated and commercial-zoned parcel that does not have a required minimum density. While the description allows for higher-density uses and the project does not meet some of the aspirational goals of the plan, lower- density uses are not precluded in Urban Villages, and can still fit within the urban fabric of a higher-density area by contributing to the streetscape, walkability, and street-level vibrancy of districts.

Staff has worked with the applicant to include elements in the project that would meet the West San Carlos Urban Village Plan goals by encouraging pedestrian access to the site and beyond, including widening both the San Carlos and Race sidewalks on the project site and making pedestrian and traffic safety improvements to the San Carlos and Race intersection. If approved and built, the project will also include a mural on the San Carlos frontage to integrate public art and contribute to the streetscape, and will create an outdoor patio on the corner to enhance pedestrian vibrancy through a low-barrier gathering space. Staff also notes that nothing prevents nearby residents from walking to the site, nor would it prevent residents from other areas, including Downtown, or employees from taking transit to the site.

Regarding the proposed demolition and parking lot, ultimately, a private developer has proposed the project in this manner, and staff must review and formulate a recommendation on the project as proposed. Ultimately, a decision on the project will be made by a decisionmaker, whether it be the Director/Hearing Officer at Director’s Hearing, or Planning Commission or City Council on appeal.

Nevertheless, staff has encouraged the applicant at every turn to reduce the amount of parking and will continue to do so. However, the applicant has been insistent on the amount of parking and has relayed that the project is not feasible without this amount of parking spaces. While the City has eliminated minimum parking requirements, there are no maximum parking requirements, so the applicant is able to choose the amount of parking they find appropriate for their project. Without intimating that this will occur, staff notes that should the area continue to succeed and land values increase, it becomes more possible that the parking lot (or the entire site) is redeveloped to a higher-density or mixed-use project in the future, and that a restaurant/retail use and parking lot is much more likely to be developed than low- or medium-density residential.

6/4/25, 12:41 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 1/3

[External Email. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. Learn more] The City will hold a community meeting for this project, which is now expected in the latter half of March, and I have put you on the list to be notified when that is finalized.

Thank you,
Jason

---
Jason Lee, Planner II
[email protected] | 408.535.3887

City of San José
Planning, Building, & Code Enforcement
200 E. Santa Clara Street, 3F Tower
San José, California 95113-1905
www.sanjoseca.gov/planning

From: Jennifer Ernst
Sent: Monday, February 17, 2025 13:50
To: Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Lee, Jason <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>; Subject: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal

Some people who received this message don't often get email from Learn why this is important To the San José Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement Department, Mayor Mahan, Councilmember Davis, and Councilmember-elect Mulcahy,
I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed Chick-fil-A at 1301 W San Carlos Street. This project is at odds with San José’s vision for West San Carlos and what I want to see in this neighborhood.

The West San Carlos Urban Village Plan describes the site of the proposed development as an area with “higher- density mixed-use and residential development drawing energy from nearby Downtown San José and the Diridon Station. Development is proposed to range between three and seven stories with residential uses above a mix of active groundfloor retail.”
A single-story, 5,139-square-foot fast-food restaurant does not align with this description. It actively works against the atmosphere an urban village is supposed to foster by encouraging customers to travel by car. This location is right along VTA’s 523/23 bus line and just a few minutes away from light rail by foot.

Additionally, construction of the larger parking lot detailed in the proposal would require demolishing two existing local businesses. This new restaurant should not need a parking lot larger than the one that supported the previous fast-food establishment that occupied the corner of this site.

As is currently proposed, a standalone Chick-fil-A and a large parking lot are not acceptable uses of the extremely 6/4/25, 12:41 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 2/3

This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. limited land where higher-density, mixed-use development is allowed and needed in San José.

Please stand by the principles and plans we have created to guide our city and region into a better, more sustainable future. Please tell Chick-fil-A to majorly re-work its San Carlos St proposal or locate elsewhere.

6/4/25, 12:41 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 3/3 Outlook
RE: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal From Lee, Jason <[email protected]>
Date Fri 2025-02-21 14:37
To 'Pedro Garcia' ; Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>;
Dear Pedro,
Thank you for your e-mail, and your opposition to the project is noted.

Staff notes the description of the Character Area definition of the project site; however, the allowable land use is controlled by the Land Use Designation portion of the document. This is a commercial project on a commercial-designated and commercial-zoned parcel that does not have a required minimum density. While the description allows for higher-density uses and the project does not meet some of the aspirational goals of the plan, lower-density uses are not precluded in Urban Villages, and can still fit within the urban fabric of a higher-density area by contributing to the streetscape, walkability, and street-level vibrancy of districts.

Staff has worked with the applicant to include elements in the project that would meet the West San Carlos Urban Village Plan goals by encouraging pedestrian access to the site and beyond, including widening both the San Carlos and Race sidewalks on the project site and making pedestrian and traffic safety improvements to the San Carlos and Race intersection. If approved and built, the project will also include a mural on the San Carlos frontage to integrate public art and contribute to the streetscape, and will create an outdoor patio on the corner to enhance pedestrian vibrancy through a low-barrier gathering space. Staff also notes that nothing prevents nearby residents from walking to the site, nor would it prevent residents from other areas, including Downtown, or employees from taking transit to the site.

Regarding the proposed demolition and parking lot, ultimately, a private developer has proposed the project in this manner, and staff must review and formulate a recommendation on the project as proposed. Ultimately, a decision on the project will be made by a decisionmaker, whether it be the Director/Hearing Officer at Director’s Hearing, or Planning Commission or City Council on appeal.

Nevertheless, staff has encouraged the applicant at every turn to reduce the amount of parking and will continue to do so. However, the applicant has been insistent on the amount of parking and has relayed that the project is not feasible without this amount of parking spaces. While the City has eliminated minimum parking requirements, there are no maximum parking requirements, so the applicant is able to 6/4/25, 12:44 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 1/3

choose the amount of parking they find appropriate for their project. Without intimating that this will occur, staff notes that should the area continue to succeed and land values increase, it becomes more possible that the parking lot (or the entire site) is redeveloped to a higher-density or mixed-use project in the future, and that a restaurant/retail use and parking lot is much more likely to be developed than low- or medium-density residential.

The City will hold a community meeting for this project, which is now expected in the latter half of March, and I have put you on the list to be notified when that is finalized.

Thank you,
Jason
---
Jason Lee, Planner II
[email protected] | 408.535.3887

City of San José
Planning, Building, & Code Enforcement
200 E. Santa Clara Street, 3F Tower
San José, California 95113-1905
www.sanjoseca.gov/planning
-----Original Message-----
From: Pedro Garcia
Sent: Wednesday, February 19, 2025 21:23
To: Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Lee, Jason <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>
Subject: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal [External Email. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. Learn more<https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification>]
[You don't often get email from Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ]
To the San José Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement Department, Mayor Mahan, Councilmember Davis, and Councilmember-elect Mulcahy,
I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed Chick-fil-A at 1301 W San Carlos Street. This project is at odds with San José’s vision for West San Carlos and what I want to see in this neighborhood. 6/4/25, 12:44 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 2/3

The West San Carlos Urban Village Plan describes the site of the proposed development as an area with “higher-density mixed-use and residential development drawing energy from nearby Downtown San José and the Diridon Station. Development is proposed to range between three and seven stories with residential uses above a mix of active groundfloor retail.” A single-story, 5,139-square-foot fast-food restaurant does not align with this description. It actively works against the atmosphere an urban village is supposed to foster by encouraging customers to travel by car. This location is right along VTA’s 523/23 bus line and just a few minutes away from light rail by foot.

Additionally, construction of the larger parking lot detailed in the proposal would require demolishing two existing local businesses. This new restaurant should not need a parking lot larger than the one that supported the previous fast-food establishment that occupied the corner of this site.

As is currently proposed, a standalone Chick-fil-A and a large parking lot are not acceptable uses of the extremely limited land where higher-density, mixed-use development is allowed and needed in San José.

Please stand by the principles and plans we have created to guide our city and region into a better, more sustainable future. Please tell Chick-fil-A to majorly re-work its San Carlos St proposal or locate elsewhere.

Pedro García
This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
6/4/25, 12:44 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 3/3 Outlook
RE: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal From Lee, Jason <[email protected]>
Date Fri 2025-02-21 14:36
To 'Mike Gibson' Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>
Dear Mike,

Thank you for your e-mail, and your opposition to the project is noted.

Staff notes the description of the Character Area definition of the project site; however, the allowable land use is controlled by the Land Use Designation portion of the document. This is a commercial project on a commercial- designated and commercial-zoned parcel that does not have a required minimum density. While the description allows for higher-density uses and the project does not meet some of the aspirational goals of the plan, lower- density uses are not precluded in Urban Villages, and can still fit within the urban fabric of a higher-density area by contributing to the streetscape, walkability, and street-level vibrancy of districts.

Staff has worked with the applicant to include elements in the project that would meet the West San Carlos Urban Village Plan goals by encouraging pedestrian access to the site and beyond, including widening both the San Carlos and Race sidewalks on the project site and making pedestrian and traffic safety improvements to the San Carlos and Race intersection. If approved and built, the project will also include a mural on the San Carlos frontage to integrate public art and contribute to the streetscape, and will create an outdoor patio on the corner to enhance pedestrian vibrancy through a low-barrier gathering space. Staff also notes that nothing prevents nearby residents from walking to the site, nor would it prevent residents from other areas, including Downtown, or employees from taking transit to the site.

Regarding the proposed demolition and parking lot, ultimately, a private developer has proposed the project in this manner, and staff must review and formulate a recommendation on the project as proposed. Ultimately, a decision on the project will be made by a decisionmaker, whether it be the Director/Hearing Officer at Director’s Hearing, or Planning Commission or City Council on appeal.

Nevertheless, staff has encouraged the applicant at every turn to reduce the amount of parking and will continue to do so. However, the applicant has been insistent on the amount of parking and has relayed that the project is not feasible without this amount of parking spaces. While the City has eliminated minimum parking requirements, there are no maximum parking requirements, so the applicant is able to choose the amount of parking they find appropriate for their project. Without intimating that this will occur, staff notes that should the area continue to succeed and land values increase, it becomes more possible that the parking lot (or the entire site) is redeveloped to a higher-density or mixed-use project in the future, and that a restaurant/retail use and parking lot is much more likely to be developed than low- or medium-density residential.

6/4/25, 12:44 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 1/3

[External Email. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. Learn more] The City will hold a community meeting for this project, which is now expected in the latter half of March, and I have put you on the list to be notified when that is finalized.

Thank you,
Jason

---
Jason Lee, Planner II
[email protected] | 408.535.3887

City of San José
Planning, Building, & Code Enforcement
200 E. Santa Clara Street, 3F Tower
San José, California 95113-1905
www.sanjoseca.gov/planning

From: Mike Gibson
Sent: Sunday, February 16, 2025 11:36
To: Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Lee, Jason <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>; Subject: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal

Some people who received this message don't often get email from Learn why this is important To the San José Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement Department, Mayor Mahan, Councilmember Davis, and Councilmember-elect Mulcahy,
I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed Chick-fil-A at 1301 W San Carlos Street. This project is at odds with San José’s vision for West San Carlos and what I want to see in this neighborhood.

The West San Carlos Urban Village Plan describes the site of the proposed development as an area with “higher- density mixed-use and residential development drawing energy from nearby Downtown San José and the Diridon Station. Development is proposed to range between three and seven stories with residential uses above a mix of active groundfloor retail.”
A single-story, 5,139-square-foot fast-food restaurant does not align with this description. It actively works against the atmosphere an urban village is supposed to foster by encouraging customers to travel by car. This location is right along VTA’s 523/23 bus line and just a few minutes away from light rail by foot.

Additionally, construction of the larger parking lot detailed in the proposal would require demolishing two existing local businesses. This new restaurant should not need a parking lot larger than the one that supported the previous fast-food establishment that occupied the corner of this site.

As is currently proposed, a standalone Chick-fil-A and a large parking lot are not acceptable uses of the extremely 6/4/25, 12:44 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 2/3

This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. limited land where higher-density, mixed-use development is allowed and needed in San José.

Please stand by the principles and plans we have created to guide our city and region into a better, more sustainable future. Please tell Chick-fil-A to majorly re-work its San Carlos St proposal or locate elsewhere.

6/4/25, 12:44 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 3/3 Outlook
RE: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal From Lee, Jason <[email protected]>
Date Fri 2025-02-21 14:53
To ' Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>;
Dear Michelena,
Thank you for your e-mail, and your opposition to the project is noted.

Regarding the incorporation of the existing building into the project: staff is beholden to review private development projects as they have been proposed by the applicant. In this case, the owner of the land wishes to demolish the existing commercial building. Staff has brought up retaining the building to the applicant before, and they have stated that the owner of the land (Chick-fil-A does not currently own the parcel) is not in favor of keeping the building. Therefore, we must consider, on its merits, the project as the applicant has requested. Ultimately, the totality of the project, including demolition, will be considered by a decision maker.

For the remainder of the e-mail:

Staff notes the description of the Character Area definition of the project site; however, the allowable land use is controlled by the Land Use Designation portion of the document. This is a commercial project on a commercial-designated and commercial-zoned parcel that does not have a required minimum density. While the description allows for higher-density uses and the project does not meet some of the aspirational goals of the plan, lower-density uses are not precluded in Urban Villages, and can still fit within the urban fabric of a higher-density area by contributing to the streetscape, walkability, and street-level vibrancy of districts.

Staff has worked with the applicant to include elements in the project that would meet the West San Carlos Urban Village Plan goals by encouraging pedestrian access to the site and beyond, including widening both the San Carlos and Race sidewalks on the project site and making pedestrian and traffic safety improvements to the San Carlos and Race intersection. If approved and built, the project will also include a mural on the San Carlos frontage to integrate public art and contribute to the streetscape, and will create an outdoor patio on the corner to enhance pedestrian vibrancy through a low-barrier gathering space. Staff also notes that nothing prevents nearby residents from walking to the site, nor would it prevent residents from other areas, including Downtown, or employees from taking transit to the site.
6/4/25, 12:46 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 1/3

Regarding the proposed demolition and parking lot, ultimately, a private developer has proposed the project in this manner, and staff must review and formulate a recommendation on the project as proposed. Ultimately, a decision on the project will be made by a decisionmaker, whether it be the Director/Hearing Officer at Director’s Hearing, or Planning Commission or City Council on appeal.

Nevertheless, staff has encouraged the applicant at every turn to reduce the amount of parking and will continue to do so. However, the applicant has been insistent on the amount of parking and has relayed that the project is not feasible without this amount of parking spaces. While the City has eliminated minimum parking requirements, there are no maximum parking requirements, so the applicant is able to choose the amount of parking they find appropriate for their project. Without intimating that this will occur, staff notes that should the area continue to succeed and land values increase, it becomes more possible that the parking lot (or the entire site) is redeveloped to a higher-density or mixed-use project in the future, and that a restaurant/retail use and parking lot is much more likely to be developed than low- or medium-density residential.

The City will hold a community meeting for this project, which is now expected in the latter half of March, and I have put you on the list to be notified when that is finalized.

Thank you,
Jason
---
Jason Lee, Planner II
[email protected] | 408.535.3887

City of San José
Planning, Building, & Code Enforcement
200 E. Santa Clara Street, 3F Tower
San José, California 95113-1905
www.sanjoseca.gov/planning
-----Original Message-----
From:

Sent: Sunday, February 16, 2025 08:41
To: Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Lee, Jason <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>;
Subject: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal [External Email. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. Learn more<https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification>]
6/4/25, 12:46 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 2/3

[Some people who received this message don't often get email from Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ] To the San José Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement Department, Mayor Mahan, Councilmember Davis, and Councilmember-elect Mulcahy,
I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed Chick-fil-A at 1301 W San Carlos Street. This project is at odds with San José’s vision for West San Carlos and what I want to see in this neighborhood.

The West San Carlos Urban Village Plan describes the site of the proposed development as an area with “higher-density mixed-use and residential development drawing energy from nearby Downtown San José and the Diridon Station. Development is proposed to range between three and seven stories with residential uses above a mix of active groundfloor retail.” A single-story, 5,139-square-foot fast-food restaurant does not align with this description. It actively works against the atmosphere an urban village is supposed to foster by encouraging customers to travel by car. This location is right along VTA’s 523/23 bus line and just a few minutes away from light rail by foot.

Additionally, construction of the larger parking lot detailed in the proposal would require demolishing two existing local businesses. This new restaurant should not need a parking lot larger than the one that supported the previous fast-food establishment that occupied the corner of this site.

As is currently proposed, a standalone Chick-fil-A and a large parking lot are not acceptable uses of the extremely limited land where higher-density, mixed-use development is allowed and needed in San José.

Please stand by the principles and plans we have created to guide our city and region into a better, more sustainable future. Please tell Chick-fil-A to majorly re-work its San Carlos St proposal or locate elsewhere.

This is a pretty disgusting use of land and I hope San Jose tries to incorporate these local community members’ businesses into the any new plans to develop Midtown.

Regards,
Michelena Goddard
Lifelong San Jose Resident
This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
6/4/25, 12:46 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 3/3

Outlook
RE: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal From Lee, Jason <[email protected]>
Date Fri 2025-02-21 14:53
To Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>;
Dear Michelena,
Thank you for your e-mail, and your opposition to the project is noted.

Regarding the incorporation of the existing building into the project: staff is beholden to review private development projects as they have been proposed by the applicant. In this case, the owner of the land wishes to demolish the existing commercial building. Staff has brought up retaining the building to the applicant before, and they have stated that the owner of the land (Chick-fil-A does not currently own the parcel) is not in favor of keeping the building. Therefore, we must consider, on its merits, the project as the applicant has requested. Ultimately, the totality of the project, including demolition, will be considered by a decision maker.

For the remainder of the e-mail:

Staff notes the description of the Character Area definition of the project site; however, the allowable land use is controlled by the Land Use Designation portion of the document. This is a commercial project on a commercial-designated and commercial-zoned parcel that does not have a required minimum density. While the description allows for higher-density uses and the project does not meet some of the aspirational goals of the plan, lower-density uses are not precluded in Urban Villages, and can still fit within the urban fabric of a higher-density area by contributing to the streetscape, walkability, and street-level vibrancy of districts.

Staff has worked with the applicant to include elements in the project that would meet the West San Carlos Urban Village Plan goals by encouraging pedestrian access to the site and beyond, including widening both the San Carlos and Race sidewalks on the project site and making pedestrian and traffic safety improvements to the San Carlos and Race intersection. If approved and built, the project will also include a mural on the San Carlos frontage to integrate public art and contribute to the streetscape, and will create an outdoor patio on the corner to enhance pedestrian vibrancy through a low-barrier gathering space. Staff also notes that nothing prevents nearby residents from walking to the site, nor would it prevent residents from other areas, including Downtown, or employees from taking transit to the site.
6/4/25, 12:46 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 1/3

Regarding the proposed demolition and parking lot, ultimately, a private developer has proposed the project in this manner, and staff must review and formulate a recommendation on the project as proposed. Ultimately, a decision on the project will be made by a decisionmaker, whether it be the Director/Hearing Officer at Director’s Hearing, or Planning Commission or City Council on appeal.

Nevertheless, staff has encouraged the applicant at every turn to reduce the amount of parking and will continue to do so. However, the applicant has been insistent on the amount of parking and has relayed that the project is not feasible without this amount of parking spaces. While the City has eliminated minimum parking requirements, there are no maximum parking requirements, so the applicant is able to choose the amount of parking they find appropriate for their project. Without intimating that this will occur, staff notes that should the area continue to succeed and land values increase, it becomes more possible that the parking lot (or the entire site) is redeveloped to a higher-density or mixed-use project in the future, and that a restaurant/retail use and parking lot is much more likely to be developed than low- or medium-density residential.

The City will hold a community meeting for this project, which is now expected in the latter half of March, and I have put you on the list to be notified when that is finalized.

Thank you,
Jason
---
Jason Lee, Planner II
[email protected] | 408.535.3887

City of San José
Planning, Building, & Code Enforcement
200 E. Santa Clara Street, 3F Tower
San José, California 95113-1905
www.sanjoseca.gov/planning
-----Original Message-----
Sunday, February 16, 2025 08:41
To: Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Lee, Jason <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>;
Subject: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal [External Email. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. Learn more<https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification>]
6/4/25, 12:46 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 2/3

[Some people who received this message don't often get email from . Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ] To the San José Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement Department, Mayor Mahan, Councilmember Davis, and Councilmember-elect Mulcahy,
I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed Chick-fil-A at 1301 W San Carlos Street. This project is at odds with San José’s vision for West San Carlos and what I want to see in this neighborhood.

The West San Carlos Urban Village Plan describes the site of the proposed development as an area with “higher-density mixed-use and residential development drawing energy from nearby Downtown San José and the Diridon Station. Development is proposed to range between three and seven stories with residential uses above a mix of active groundfloor retail.” A single-story, 5,139-square-foot fast-food restaurant does not align with this description. It actively works against the atmosphere an urban village is supposed to foster by encouraging customers to travel by car. This location is right along VTA’s 523/23 bus line and just a few minutes away from light rail by foot.

Additionally, construction of the larger parking lot detailed in the proposal would require demolishing two existing local businesses. This new restaurant should not need a parking lot larger than the one that supported the previous fast-food establishment that occupied the corner of this site.

As is currently proposed, a standalone Chick-fil-A and a large parking lot are not acceptable uses of the extremely limited land where higher-density, mixed-use development is allowed and needed in San José.

Please stand by the principles and plans we have created to guide our city and region into a better, more sustainable future. Please tell Chick-fil-A to majorly re-work its San Carlos St proposal or locate elsewhere.

This is a pretty disgusting use of land and I hope San Jose tries to incorporate these local community members’ businesses into the any new plans to develop Midtown.

Regards,
Michelena Goddard
Lifelong San Jose Resident
This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
6/4/25, 12:46 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 3/3

Outlook
RE: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal From Lee, Jason <[email protected]>
Date Fri 2025-02-21 14:39
To 'Steve Grant' ; Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>;
Dear Steve,

Thank you for your e-mail, and your opposition to the project is noted.

Staff notes the description of the Character Area definition of the project site; however, the allowable land use is controlled by the Land Use Designation portion of the document. This is a commercial project on a commercial- designated and commercial-zoned parcel that does not have a required minimum density. While the description allows for higher-density uses and the project does not meet some of the aspirational goals of the plan, lower- density uses are not precluded in Urban Villages, and can still fit within the urban fabric of a higher-density area by contributing to the streetscape, walkability, and street-level vibrancy of districts.

Staff has worked with the applicant to include elements in the project that would meet the West San Carlos Urban Village Plan goals by encouraging pedestrian access to the site and beyond, including widening both the San Carlos and Race sidewalks on the project site and making pedestrian and traffic safety improvements to the San Carlos and Race intersection. If approved and built, the project will also include a mural on the San Carlos frontage to integrate public art and contribute to the streetscape, and will create an outdoor patio on the corner to enhance pedestrian vibrancy through a low-barrier gathering space. Staff also notes that nothing prevents nearby residents from walking to the site, nor would it prevent residents from other areas, including Downtown, or employees from taking transit to the site.

Regarding the proposed demolition and parking lot, ultimately, a private developer has proposed the project in this manner, and staff must review and formulate a recommendation on the project as proposed. Ultimately, a decision on the project will be made by a decisionmaker, whether it be the Director/Hearing Officer at Director’s Hearing, or Planning Commission or City Council on appeal.

Nevertheless, staff has encouraged the applicant at every turn to reduce the amount of parking and will continue to do so. However, the applicant has been insistent on the amount of parking and has relayed that the project is not feasible without this amount of parking spaces. While the City has eliminated minimum parking requirements, there are no maximum parking requirements, so the applicant is able to choose the amount of parking they find appropriate for their project. Without intimating that this will occur, staff notes that should the area continue to succeed and land values increase, it becomes more possible that the parking lot (or the entire site) is redeveloped to a higher-density or mixed-use project in the future, and that a restaurant/retail use and parking lot is much more likely to be developed than low- or medium-density residential.

6/4/25, 12:45 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 1/3

[External Email. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. Learn more] The City will hold a community meeting for this project, which is now expected in the latter half of March, and I have put you on the list to be notified when that is finalized.

Thank you,
Jason

---
Jason Lee, Planner II
[email protected] | 408.535.3887

City of San José
Planning, Building, & Code Enforcement
200 E. Santa Clara Street, 3F Tower
San José, California 95113-1905
www.sanjoseca.gov/planning

From: Steve Grant
Sent: Sunday, February 16, 2025 11:21
To: Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Lee, Jason <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>; Subject: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal

Some people who received this message don't often get email from Learn why this is important To the San José Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement Department, Mayor Mahan, Councilmember Davis, and Councilmember-elect Mulcahy, I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed Chick-fil-A at 1301 W San Carlos Street. This project is at odds with San José’s vision for West San Carlos and what I want to see in this neighborhood. The West San Carlos Urban Village Plan describes the site of the proposed development as an area with “higher-density mixed-use and residential development drawing energy from nearby Downtown San José and the Diridon Station. Development is proposed to range between three and seven stories with residential uses above a mix of active ground
floor retail.” A single-story, 5,139-square-foot fast-food restaurant does not align with this description. It actively works against the atmosphere an urban village is supposed to foster by encouraging customers to travel by car. This location is right along VTA’s 523/23 bus line and just a few minutes away from light rail by foot. Additionally, construction of the larger parking lot detailed in the proposal would require demolishing two existing local businesses. This new restaurant should not need a parking lot larger than the one that supported the previous fast-food establishment that occupied the corner of this site. As is currently proposed, a standalone Chick-
fil-A and a large parking lot are not acceptable uses of the extremely limited land where higher- density, mixed-use development is allowed and needed in San José. Please stand by the principles and plans we have created to guide our city and region into a better, more sustainable future. Please tell Chick-fil-A to majorly re-work its San Carlos St proposal or locate elsewhere.

Thank you.

Steve Grant
Frequent customer of Eduardo’s
6/4/25, 12:45 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 2/3

This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

6/4/25, 12:45 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 3/3 Outlook
RE: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal From Lee, Jason <[email protected]>
Date Fri 2025-02-21 14:28
To 'Christine Hanchett' ; Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>;
Dear Christine,
Thank you for your e-mail, and your opposition to the project is noted.

Staff notes the description of the Character Area definition of the project site; however, the allowable land use is controlled by the Land Use Designation portion of the document. This is a commercial project on a commercial-designated and commercial-zoned parcel that does not have a required minimum density. While the description allows for higher-density uses and the project does not meet some of the aspirational goals of the plan, lower-density uses are not precluded in Urban Villages, and can still fit within the urban fabric of a higher-density area by contributing to the streetscape, walkability, and street-level vibrancy of districts.

Staff has worked with the applicant to include elements in the project that would meet the West San Carlos Urban Village Plan goals by encouraging pedestrian access to the site and beyond, including widening both the San Carlos and Race sidewalks on the project site and making pedestrian and traffic safety improvements to the San Carlos and Race intersection. If approved and built, the project will also include a mural on the San Carlos frontage to integrate public art and contribute to the streetscape, and will create an outdoor patio on the corner to enhance pedestrian vibrancy through a low-barrier gathering space. Staff also notes that nothing prevents nearby residents from walking to the site, nor would it prevent residents from other areas, including Downtown, or employees from taking transit to the site.

Regarding the proposed demolition and parking lot, ultimately, a private developer has proposed the project in this manner, and staff must review and formulate a recommendation on the project as proposed. Ultimately, a decision on the project will be made by a decisionmaker, whether it be the Director/Hearing Officer at Director’s Hearing, or Planning Commission or City Council on appeal.

Nevertheless, staff has encouraged the applicant at every turn to reduce the amount of parking and will continue to do so. However, the applicant has been insistent on the amount of parking and has relayed that the project is not feasible without this amount of parking spaces. While the City has eliminated minimum parking requirements, there are no maximum parking requirements, so the applicant is able to 6/4/25, 12:40 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 1/3

choose the amount of parking they find appropriate for their project. Without intimating that this will occur, staff notes that should the area continue to succeed and land values increase, it becomes more possible that the parking lot (or the entire site) is redeveloped to a higher-density or mixed-use project in the future, and that a restaurant/retail use and parking lot is much more likely to be developed than low- or medium-density residential.

The City will hold a community meeting for this project, which is now expected in the latter half of March, and I have put you on the list to be notified when that is finalized.

Thank you,
Jason
---
Jason Lee, Planner II
[email protected] | 408.535.3887

City of San José
Planning, Building, & Code Enforcement
200 E. Santa Clara Street, 3F Tower
San José, California 95113-1905
www.sanjoseca.gov/planning
-----Original Message-----
From: Christine Hanchett
Sent: Sunday, February 16, 2025 12:34
To: Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Lee, Jason <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>;
Subject: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal [External Email. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. Learn more<https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification>]
[You don't often get email from . Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ]
To the San José Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement Department, Mayor Mahan, Councilmember Davis, and Councilmember-elect Mulcahy,
I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed Chick-fil-A at 1301 W San Carlos Street. This project is at odds with San José’s vision for West San Carlos and what I want to see in this neighborhood. 6/4/25, 12:40 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 2/3

The West San Carlos Urban Village Plan describes the site of the proposed development as an area with “higher-density mixed-use and residential development drawing energy from nearby Downtown San José and the Diridon Station. Development is proposed to range between three and seven stories with residential uses above a mix of active groundfloor retail.” A single-story, 5,139-square-foot fast-food restaurant does not align with this description. It actively works against the atmosphere an urban village is supposed to foster by encouraging customers to travel by car. This location is right along VTA’s 523/23 bus line and just a few minutes away from light rail by foot.

Additionally, construction of the larger parking lot detailed in the proposal would require demolishing two existing local businesses. This new restaurant should not need a parking lot larger than the one that supported the previous fast-food establishment that occupied the corner of this site.

As is currently proposed, a standalone Chick-fil-A and a large parking lot are not acceptable uses of the extremely limited land where higher-density, mixed-use development is allowed and needed in San José.

Please stand by the principles and plans we have created to guide our city and region into a better, more sustainable future. Please tell Chick-fil-A to majorly re-work its San Carlos St proposal or locate elsewhere.
---------------------
Christine Hanchett
This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
6/4/25, 12:40 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 3/3

Outlook
RE: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal From Lee, Jason <[email protected]>
Date Fri 2025-02-21 14:35
To 'Melissa Harder' Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>;
Dear Melissa,
Thank you for your e-mail, and your opposition to the project is noted.

Staff notes the description of the Character Area definition of the project site; however, the allowable land use is controlled by the Land Use Designation portion of the document. This is a commercial project on a commercial-designated and commercial-zoned parcel that does not have a required minimum density. While the description allows for higher-density uses and the project does not meet some of the aspirational goals of the plan, lower-density uses are not precluded in Urban Villages, and can still fit within the urban fabric of a higher-density area by contributing to the streetscape, walkability, and street-level vibrancy of districts.

Staff has worked with the applicant to include elements in the project that would meet the West San Carlos Urban Village Plan goals by encouraging pedestrian access to the site and beyond, including widening both the San Carlos and Race sidewalks on the project site and making pedestrian and traffic safety improvements to the San Carlos and Race intersection. If approved and built, the project will also include a mural on the San Carlos frontage to integrate public art and contribute to the streetscape, and will create an outdoor patio on the corner to enhance pedestrian vibrancy through a low-barrier gathering space. Staff also notes that nothing prevents nearby residents from walking to the site, nor would it prevent residents from other areas, including Downtown, or employees from taking transit to the site.

Regarding the proposed demolition and parking lot, ultimately, a private developer has proposed the project in this manner, and staff must review and formulate a recommendation on the project as proposed. Ultimately, a decision on the project will be made by a decisionmaker, whether it be the Director/Hearing Officer at Director’s Hearing, or Planning Commission or City Council on appeal.

Nevertheless, staff has encouraged the applicant at every turn to reduce the amount of parking and will continue to do so. However, the applicant has been insistent on the amount of parking and has relayed that the project is not feasible without this amount of parking spaces. While the City has eliminated minimum parking requirements, there are no maximum parking requirements, so the applicant is able to 6/4/25, 12:43 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 1/3

choose the amount of parking they find appropriate for their project. Without intimating that this will occur, staff notes that should the area continue to succeed and land values increase, it becomes more possible that the parking lot (or the entire site) is redeveloped to a higher-density or mixed-use project in the future, and that a restaurant/retail use and parking lot is much more likely to be developed than low- or medium-density residential.

The City will hold a community meeting for this project, which is now expected in the latter half of March, and I have put you on the list to be notified when that is finalized.

Thank you,
Jason
---
Jason Lee, Planner II
[email protected] | 408.535.3887

City of San José
Planning, Building, & Code Enforcement
200 E. Santa Clara Street, 3F Tower
San José, California 95113-1905
www.sanjoseca.gov/planning
-----Original Message-----
From: Melissa Harder
Sent: Sunday, February 16, 2025 11:52
To: Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Lee, Jason <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>
Subject: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal [External Email. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. Learn more<https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification>]
[Some people who received this message don't often get email from . Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ] To the San José Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement Department, Mayor Mahan, Councilmember Davis, and Councilmember-elect Mulcahy,
I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed Chick-fil-A at 1301 W San Carlos Street. This project is at odds with San José’s vision for West San Carlos and what I want to see in this neighborhood. 6/4/25, 12:43 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 2/3

The West San Carlos Urban Village Plan describes the site of the proposed development as an area with “higher-density mixed-use and residential development drawing energy from nearby Downtown San José and the Diridon Station. Development is proposed to range between three and seven stories with residential uses above a mix of active groundfloor retail.” A single-story, 5,139-square-foot fast-food restaurant does not align with this description. It actively works against the atmosphere an urban village is supposed to foster by encouraging customers to travel by car. This location is right along VTA’s 523/23 bus line and just a few minutes away from light rail by foot.

Additionally, construction of the larger parking lot detailed in the proposal would require demolishing two existing local businesses. This new restaurant should not need a parking lot larger than the one that supported the previous fast-food establishment that occupied the corner of this site.

As is currently proposed, a standalone Chick-fil-A and a large parking lot are not acceptable uses of the extremely limited land where higher-density, mixed-use development is allowed and needed in San José.

Please stand by the principles and plans we have created to guide our city and region into a better, more sustainable future. Please tell Chick-fil-A to majorly re-work its San Carlos St proposal or locate elsewhere.

Sent from my iPhone
This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
6/4/25, 12:43 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 3/3 Outlook
RE: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal From Lee, Jason <[email protected]>
Date Fri 2025-02-21 14:28
To 'Cynthia Helms' ; Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>;
Dear Cynthia,
Thank you for your e-mail, and your opposition to the project is noted.

Staff notes the description of the Character Area definition of the project site; however, the allowable land use is controlled by the Land Use Designation portion of the document. This is a commercial project on a commercial-designated and commercial-zoned parcel that does not have a required minimum density. While the description allows for higher-density uses and the project does not meet some of the aspirational goals of the plan, lower-density uses are not precluded in Urban Villages, and can still fit within the urban fabric of a higher-density area by contributing to the streetscape, walkability, and street-level vibrancy of districts.

Staff has worked with the applicant to include elements in the project that would meet the West San Carlos Urban Village Plan goals by encouraging pedestrian access to the site and beyond, including widening both the San Carlos and Race sidewalks on the project site and making pedestrian and traffic safety improvements to the San Carlos and Race intersection. If approved and built, the project will also include a mural on the San Carlos frontage to integrate public art and contribute to the streetscape, and will create an outdoor patio on the corner to enhance pedestrian vibrancy through a low-barrier gathering space. Staff also notes that nothing prevents nearby residents from walking to the site, nor would it prevent residents from other areas, including Downtown, or employees from taking transit to the site.

Regarding the proposed demolition and parking lot, ultimately, a private developer has proposed the project in this manner, and staff must review and formulate a recommendation on the project as proposed. Ultimately, a decision on the project will be made by a decisionmaker, whether it be the Director/Hearing Officer at Director’s Hearing, or Planning Commission or City Council on appeal.

Nevertheless, staff has encouraged the applicant at every turn to reduce the amount of parking and will continue to do so. However, the applicant has been insistent on the amount of parking and has relayed that the project is not feasible without this amount of parking spaces. While the City has eliminated minimum parking requirements, there are no maximum parking requirements, so the applicant is able to 6/4/25, 12:40 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 1/3

choose the amount of parking they find appropriate for their project. Without intimating that this will occur, staff notes that should the area continue to succeed and land values increase, it becomes more possible that the parking lot (or the entire site) is redeveloped to a higher-density or mixed-use project in the future, and that a restaurant/retail use and parking lot is much more likely to be developed than low- or medium-density residential.

The City will hold a community meeting for this project, which is now expected in the latter half of March, and I have put you on the list to be notified when that is finalized.

Thank you,
Jason
---
Jason Lee, Planner II
[email protected] | 408.535.3887

City of San José
Planning, Building, & Code Enforcement
200 E. Santa Clara Street, 3F Tower
San José, California 95113-1905
www.sanjoseca.gov/planning
-----Original Message-----
From: Cynthia Helms
Sent: Sunday, February 16, 2025 13:08
To: Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Lee, Jason <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>;
Subject: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal [External Email. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. Learn more<https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification>]
[You don't often get email from Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ]
To the San José Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement Department, Mayor Mahan, Councilmember Davis, and Councilmember-elect Mulcahy,
I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed Chick-fil-A at 1301 W San Carlos Street. This project is at odds with San José’s vision for West San Carlos and what I want to see in this neighborhood. 6/4/25, 12:40 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 2/3

The West San Carlos Urban Village Plan describes the site of the proposed development as an area with “higher-density mixed-use and residential development drawing energy from nearby Downtown San José and the Diridon Station. Development is proposed to range between three and seven stories with residential uses above a mix of active groundfloor retail.” A single-story, 5,139-square-foot fast-food restaurant does not align with this description. It actively works against the atmosphere an urban village is supposed to foster by encouraging customers to travel by car. This location is right along VTA’s 523/23 bus line and just a few minutes away from light rail by foot.

Additionally, construction of the larger parking lot detailed in the proposal would require demolishing two existing local businesses. This new restaurant should not need a parking lot larger than the one that supported the previous fast-food establishment that occupied the corner of this site.

As is currently proposed, a standalone Chick-fil-A and a large parking lot are not acceptable uses of the extremely limited land where higher-density, mixed-use development is allowed and needed in San José.

Please stand by the principles and plans we have created to guide our city and region into a better, more sustainable future. Please tell Chick-fil-A to majorly re-work its San Carlos St proposal or locate elsewhere.

Sent from my iPhone
This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
6/4/25, 12:40 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 3/3 Outlook
RE: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal From Lee, Jason <[email protected]>
Date Fri 2025-02-21 14:26
To Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>;
Dear Alexandria,

Thank you for your e-mail, and your opposition to the project is noted.

Staff notes the description of the Character Area definition of the project site; however, the allowable land use is controlled by the Land Use Designation portion of the document. This is a commercial project on a commercial- designated and commercial-zoned parcel that does not have a required minimum density. While the description allows for higher-density uses and the project does not meet some of the aspirational goals of the plan, lower- density uses are not precluded in Urban Villages, and can still fit within the urban fabric of a higher-density area by contributing to the streetscape, walkability, and street-level vibrancy of districts.

Staff has worked with the applicant to include elements in the project that would meet the West San Carlos Urban Village Plan goals by encouraging pedestrian access to the site and beyond, including widening both the San Carlos and Race sidewalks on the project site and making pedestrian and traffic safety improvements to the San Carlos and Race intersection. If approved and built, the project will also include a mural on the San Carlos frontage to integrate public art and contribute to the streetscape, and will create an outdoor patio on the corner to enhance pedestrian vibrancy through a low-barrier gathering space. Staff also notes that nothing prevents nearby residents from walking to the site, nor would it prevent residents from other areas, including Downtown, or employees from taking transit to the site.

Regarding the proposed demolition and parking lot, ultimately, a private developer has proposed the project in this manner, and staff must review and formulate a recommendation on the project as proposed. Ultimately, a decision on the project will be made by a decisionmaker, whether it be the Director/Hearing Officer at Director’s Hearing, or Planning Commission or City Council on appeal.

Nevertheless, staff has encouraged the applicant at every turn to reduce the amount of parking and will continue to do so. However, the applicant has been insistent on the amount of parking and has relayed that the project is not feasible without this amount of parking spaces. While the City has eliminated minimum parking requirements, there are no maximum parking requirements, so the applicant is able to choose the amount of parking they find appropriate for their project. Without intimating that this will occur, staff notes that should the area continue to succeed and land values increase, it becomes more possible that the parking lot (or the entire site) is redeveloped to a higher-density or mixed-use project in the future, and that a restaurant/retail use and parking lot is much more likely to be developed than low- or medium-density residential.

6/4/25, 12:38 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 1/3

[External Email. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. Learn more] The City will hold a community meeting for this project, which is now expected in the latter half of March, and I have put you on the list to be notified when that is finalized.

Thank you,
Jason

---
Jason Lee, Planner II
[email protected] | 408.535.3887

City of San José
Planning, Building, & Code Enforcement
200 E. Santa Clara Street, 3F Tower
San José, California 95113-1905
www.sanjoseca.gov/planning

From:

Sent: Sunday, February 16, 2025 09:50
To: Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Lee, Jason <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>; Subject: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal

Some people who received this message don't often get email from Learn why this is important To the San José Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement Department, Mayor Mahan, Councilmember Davis, and Councilmember-elect Mulcahy,
I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed Chick-fil-A at 1301 W San Carlos Street. This project is at odds with San José’s vision for West San Carlos and what I want to see in this neighborhood.

The West San Carlos Urban Village Plan describes the site of the proposed development as an area with “higher- density mixed-use and residential development drawing energy from nearby Downtown San José and the Diridon Station. Development is proposed to range between three and seven stories with residential uses above a mix of active groundfloor retail.”
A single-story, 5,139-square-foot fast-food restaurant does not align with this description. It actively works against the atmosphere an urban village is supposed to foster by encouraging customers to travel by car. This location is right along VTA’s 523/23 bus line and just a few minutes away from light rail by foot.

Additionally, construction of the larger parking lot detailed in the proposal would require demolishing two existing local businesses. This new restaurant should not need a parking lot larger than the one that supported the previous fast-food establishment that occupied the corner of this site.

As is currently proposed, a standalone Chick-fil-A and a large parking lot are not acceptable uses of the extremely limited land where higher-density, mixed-use development is allowed and needed in San José. 6/4/25, 12:38 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 2/3

This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

Please stand by the principles and plans we have created to guide our city and region into a better, more sustainable future. Please tell Chick-fil-A to majorly re-work its San Carlos St proposal or locate elsewhere.

Respectfully,
Alexandria Iraheta

Sent from my T-Mobile 5G Device

6/4/25, 12:38 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 3/3 Outlook
RE: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal From Lee, Jason <[email protected]>
Date Fri 2025-02-21 14:33
To 'Kaylee Jensen' ; Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>;
Dear Kaylee,

Thank you for your e-mail, and your opposition to the project is noted.

Staff notes the description of the Character Area definition of the project site; however, the allowable land use is controlled by the Land Use Designation portion of the document. This is a commercial project on a commercial- designated and commercial-zoned parcel that does not have a required minimum density. While the description allows for higher-density uses and the project does not meet some of the aspirational goals of the plan, lower- density uses are not precluded in Urban Villages, and can still fit within the urban fabric of a higher-density area by contributing to the streetscape, walkability, and street-level vibrancy of districts.

Staff has worked with the applicant to include elements in the project that would meet the West San Carlos Urban Village Plan goals by encouraging pedestrian access to the site and beyond, including widening both the San Carlos and Race sidewalks on the project site and making pedestrian and traffic safety improvements to the San Carlos and Race intersection. If approved and built, the project will also include a mural on the San Carlos frontage to integrate public art and contribute to the streetscape, and will create an outdoor patio on the corner to enhance pedestrian vibrancy through a low-barrier gathering space. Staff also notes that nothing prevents nearby residents from walking to the site, nor would it prevent residents from other areas, including Downtown, or employees from taking transit to the site.

Regarding the proposed demolition and parking lot, ultimately, a private developer has proposed the project in this manner, and staff must review and formulate a recommendation on the project as proposed. Ultimately, a decision on the project will be made by a decisionmaker, whether it be the Director/Hearing Officer at Director’s Hearing, or Planning Commission or City Council on appeal.

Nevertheless, staff has encouraged the applicant at every turn to reduce the amount of parking and will continue to do so. However, the applicant has been insistent on the amount of parking and has relayed that the project is not feasible without this amount of parking spaces. While the City has eliminated minimum parking requirements, there are no maximum parking requirements, so the applicant is able to choose the amount of parking they find appropriate for their project. Without intimating that this will occur, staff notes that should the area continue to succeed and land values increase, it becomes more possible that the parking lot (or the entire site) is redeveloped to a higher-density or mixed-use project in the future, and that a restaurant/retail use and parking lot is much more likely to be developed than low- or medium-density residential.

6/4/25, 12:42 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 1/3

[External Email. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. Learn more] The City will hold a community meeting for this project, which is now expected in the latter half of March, and I have put you on the list to be notified when that is finalized.

Thank you,
Jason

---
Jason Lee, Planner II
[email protected] | 408.535.3887

City of San José
Planning, Building, & Code Enforcement
200 E. Santa Clara Street, 3F Tower
San José, California 95113-1905
www.sanjoseca.gov/planning

From: Kaylee Jensen
Sent: Sunday, February 16, 2025 10:34
To: Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Lee, Jason <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>; Subject: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal

Some people who received this message don't often get email from . Learn why this is important To the San José Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement Department, Mayor Mahan, Councilmember Davis, and Councilmember-elect Mulcahy,
I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed Chick-fil-A at 1301 W San Carlos Street. This project is at odds with San José’s vision for West San Carlos and what I want to see in this neighborhood.

The West San Carlos Urban Village Plan describes the site of the proposed development as an area with “higher- density mixed-use and residential development drawing energy from nearby Downtown San José and the Diridon Station. Development is proposed to range between three and seven stories with residential uses above a mix of active groundfloor retail.”
A single-story, 5,139-square-foot fast-food restaurant does not align with this description. It actively works against the atmosphere an urban village is supposed to foster by encouraging customers to travel by car. This location is right along VTA’s 523/23 bus line and just a few minutes away from light rail by foot.

Additionally, construction of the larger parking lot detailed in the proposal would require demolishing two existing local businesses. This new restaurant should not need a parking lot larger than the one that supported the previous fast-food establishment that occupied the corner of this site.

As is currently proposed, a standalone Chick-fil-A and a large parking lot are not acceptable uses of the extremely 6/4/25, 12:42 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 2/3

This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. limited land where higher-density, mixed-use development is allowed and needed in San José.

Please stand by the principles and plans we have created to guide our city and region into a better, more sustainable future. Please tell Chick-fil-A to majorly re-work its San Carlos St proposal or locate elsewhere.

6/4/25, 12:42 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 3/3 Outlook
Re: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal From Rachel Kumar
Date Fri 2025-02-21 16:00
To Lee, Jason <[email protected]>
[External Email. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. Learn more<https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification>]
[You don't often get email from Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ]
Thanks for your response, and I look forward to receiving details on the community meeting when those are finalized.
-Rachel
> On Feb 21, 2025, at 3:00 PM, Lee, Jason <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Dear Rachel,
>
> Thank you for your e-mail, and your opposition to the project is noted. >
> Staff would like to note that we are not making an exception for Chick-fil-A with regard to the walkability of the site, and staff does not believe an exception is being made regarding the density (as the proposed site does not have a minimum density, and does not require high density). Although a lower-density development, staff is still applying the same sidewalk and intersection improvement requirements that would be asked of any project on the site in order to make the West San Carlos UV plan area more walkable in adherence to the UV plan and its policies. Staff has also worked with Chick- fil-A to include elements to contribute to the vibrancy of the corner. Additionally, the UV plan designates this site for commercial uses; although residential can be allowed on the site, it is not required, and a restaurant of any type is a commercial use.
>
> For the rest of the e-mail:
>
> Staff notes the description of the Character Area definition of the project site; however, the allowable land use is controlled by the Land Use Designation portion of the document. This is a commercial project on a commercial-designated and commercial-zoned parcel that does not have a required minimum density. While the description allows for higher-density uses and the project does not meet some of the 6/4/25, 12:47 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 1/4

aspirational goals of the plan, lower-density uses are not precluded in Urban Villages, and can still fit within the urban fabric of a higher-density area by contributing to the streetscape, walkability, and street-level vibrancy of districts.
>
> Staff has worked with the applicant to include elements in the project that would meet the West San Carlos Urban Village Plan goals by encouraging pedestrian access to the site and beyond, including widening both the San Carlos and Race sidewalks on the project site and making pedestrian and traffic safety improvements to the San Carlos and Race intersection. If approved and built, the project will also include a mural on the San Carlos frontage to integrate public art and contribute to the streetscape, and will create an outdoor patio on the corner to enhance pedestrian vibrancy through a low-barrier gathering space. Staff also notes that nothing prevents nearby residents from walking to the site, nor would it prevent residents from other areas, including Downtown, or employees from taking transit to the site.
>
> Regarding the proposed demolition and parking lot, ultimately, a private developer has proposed the project in this manner, and staff must review and formulate a recommendation on the project as proposed. Ultimately, a decision on the project will be made by a decisionmaker, whether it be the Director/Hearing Officer at Director’s Hearing, or Planning Commission or City Council on appeal. >
> Nevertheless, staff has encouraged the applicant at every turn to reduce the amount of parking and will continue to do so. However, the applicant has been insistent on the amount of parking and has relayed that the project is not feasible without this amount of parking spaces. While the City has eliminated minimum parking requirements, there are no maximum parking requirements, so the applicant is able to choose the amount of parking they find appropriate for their project. Without intimating that this will occur, staff notes that should the area continue to succeed and land values increase, it becomes more possible that the parking lot (or the entire site) is redeveloped to a higher- density or mixed-use project in the future, and that a restaurant/retail use and parking lot is much more likely to be developed than low- or medium-density residential. >
> The City will hold a community meeting for this project, which is now expected in the latter half of March, and I have put you on the list to be notified when that is finalized. >
> Thank you,
> Jason
>
> ---
> Jason Lee, Planner II
> [email protected] | 408.535.3887
>
> City of San José
> Planning, Building, & Code Enforcement
> 200 E. Santa Clara Street, 3F Tower
> San José, California 95113-1905
>
www.sanjoseca.gov/planning
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rachel Kumar
> Sent: Sunday, February 16, 2025 10:40
> To: Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Lee, Jason <[email protected]>; Tu, 6/4/25, 12:47 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 2/4

John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <Michael.Lomio@sanjoseca
> Subject: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal >
>
>
> [External Email. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. Learn more<
https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification>]
>
>
>
> [Some people who received this message don't often get email from Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ] >
> As a San Jose resident and homeowner for the last 20 years, I want to see investments in San Jose as a community, which means commerce should be balanced with the concerns of residential and communal spaces. Please adhere to your commitments to make this area high density and walkable, do NOT make an exception for Chick-fil-a.
>
>
> —-
> To the San José Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement Department, Mayor Mahan, Councilmember Davis, and Councilmember-elect Mulcahy,
>
> I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed Chick-fil-A at 1301 W San Carlos Street. This project is at odds with San José’s vision for West San Carlos and what I want to see in this neighborhood. >
> The West San Carlos Urban Village Plan describes the site of the proposed development as an area with “higher-density mixed-use and residential development drawing energy from nearby Downtown San José and the Diridon Station. Development is proposed to range between three and seven stories with residential uses above a mix of active groundfloor retail.” >
> A single-story, 5,139-square-foot fast-food restaurant does not align with this description. It actively works against the atmosphere an urban village is supposed to foster by encouraging customers to travel by car. This location is right along VTA’s 523/23 bus line and just a few minutes away from light rail by foot.
>
> Additionally, construction of the larger parking lot detailed in the proposal would require demolishing two existing local businesses. This new restaurant should not need a parking lot larger than the one that supported the previous fast-food establishment that occupied the corner of this site. >
> As is currently proposed, a standalone Chick-fil-A and a large parking lot are not acceptable uses of the extremely limited land where higher-density, mixed-use development is allowed and needed in San José.
>
> Please stand by the principles and plans we have created to guide our city and region into a better, 6/4/25, 12:47 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 3/4

more sustainable future. Please tell Chick-fil-A to majorly re-work its San Carlos St proposal or locate elsewhere.
>
>
>
> This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
>
>
This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
6/4/25, 12:47 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 4/4 Outlook
RE: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal From Lee, Jason <[email protected]>
Date Fri 2025-02-21 14:32
To 'Jessica Lawrence' >; Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>;
Dear Jessica,
Thank you for your e-mail, and your opposition to the project is noted.

Staff notes the description of the Character Area definition of the project site; however, the allowable land use is controlled by the Land Use Designation portion of the document. This is a commercial project on a commercial-designated and commercial-zoned parcel that does not have a required minimum density. While the description allows for higher-density uses and the project does not meet some of the aspirational goals of the plan, lower-density uses are not precluded in Urban Villages, and can still fit within the urban fabric of a higher-density area by contributing to the streetscape, walkability, and street-level vibrancy of districts.

Staff has worked with the applicant to include elements in the project that would meet the West San Carlos Urban Village Plan goals by encouraging pedestrian access to the site and beyond, including widening both the San Carlos and Race sidewalks on the project site and making pedestrian and traffic safety improvements to the San Carlos and Race intersection. If approved and built, the project will also include a mural on the San Carlos frontage to integrate public art and contribute to the streetscape, and will create an outdoor patio on the corner to enhance pedestrian vibrancy through a low-barrier gathering space. Staff also notes that nothing prevents nearby residents from walking to the site, nor would it prevent residents from other areas, including Downtown, or employees from taking transit to the site.

Regarding the proposed demolition and parking lot, ultimately, a private developer has proposed the project in this manner, and staff must review and formulate a recommendation on the project as proposed. Ultimately, a decision on the project will be made by a decisionmaker, whether it be the Director/Hearing Officer at Director’s Hearing, or Planning Commission or City Council on appeal.

Nevertheless, staff has encouraged the applicant at every turn to reduce the amount of parking and will continue to do so. However, the applicant has been insistent on the amount of parking and has relayed that the project is not feasible without this amount of parking spaces. While the City has eliminated minimum parking requirements, there are no maximum parking requirements, so the applicant is able to 6/4/25, 12:41 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 1/3

choose the amount of parking they find appropriate for their project. Without intimating that this will occur, staff notes that should the area continue to succeed and land values increase, it becomes more possible that the parking lot (or the entire site) is redeveloped to a higher-density or mixed-use project in the future, and that a restaurant/retail use and parking lot is much more likely to be developed than low- or medium-density residential.

The City will hold a community meeting for this project, which is now expected in the latter half of March, and I have put you on the list to be notified when that is finalized.

Thank you,
Jason
---
Jason Lee, Planner II
[email protected] | 408.535.3887

City of San José
Planning, Building, & Code Enforcement
200 E. Santa Clara Street, 3F Tower
San José, California 95113-1905
www.sanjoseca.gov/planning
-----Original Message-----
From: Jessica Lawrence
Sent: Sunday, February 16, 2025 10:19
To: Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Lee, Jason <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>;
Subject: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal [External Email. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. Learn more<https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification>]
[Some people who received this message don't often get email from Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ] To the San José Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement Department, Mayor Mahan, Councilmember Davis, and Councilmember-elect Mulcahy,
I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed Chick-fil-A at 1301 W San Carlos Street. This project is at odds with San José’s vision for West San Carlos and what I want to see in this neighborhood. 6/4/25, 12:41 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 2/3

The West San Carlos Urban Village Plan describes the site of the proposed development as an area with “higher-density mixed-use and residential development drawing energy from nearby Downtown San José and the Diridon Station. Development is proposed to range between three and seven stories with residential uses above a mix of active groundfloor retail.” A single-story, 5,139-square-foot fast-food restaurant does not align with this description. It actively works against the atmosphere an urban village is supposed to foster by encouraging customers to travel by car. This location is right along VTA’s 523/23 bus line and just a few minutes away from light rail by foot.

Additionally, construction of the larger parking lot detailed in the proposal would require demolishing two existing local businesses. This new restaurant should not need a parking lot larger than the one that supported the previous fast-food establishment that occupied the corner of this site.

As is currently proposed, a standalone Chick-fil-A and a large parking lot are not acceptable uses of the extremely limited land where higher-density, mixed-use development is allowed and needed in San José.

Please stand by the principles and plans we have created to guide our city and region into a better, more sustainable future. Please tell Chick-fil-A to majorly re-work its San Carlos St proposal or locate elsewhere.

This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
6/4/25, 12:41 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 3/3 Outlook
RE: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal From Lee, Jason <[email protected]>
Date Fri 2025-02-21 14:37
To 'Nahui Legorreta' ; Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; Michael Mulcahy <michaelmulcahyd6@
Dear Nahui,

Thank you for your e-mail, and your opposition to the project is noted.

Staff notes the description of the Character Area definition of the project site; however, the allowable land use is controlled by the Land Use Designation portion of the document. This is a commercial project on a commercial- designated and commercial-zoned parcel that does not have a required minimum density. While the description allows for higher-density uses and the project does not meet some of the aspirational goals of the plan, lower- density uses are not precluded in Urban Villages, and can still fit within the urban fabric of a higher-density area by contributing to the streetscape, walkability, and street-level vibrancy of districts.

Staff has worked with the applicant to include elements in the project that would meet the West San Carlos Urban Village Plan goals by encouraging pedestrian access to the site and beyond, including widening both the San Carlos and Race sidewalks on the project site and making pedestrian and traffic safety improvements to the San Carlos and Race intersection. If approved and built, the project will also include a mural on the San Carlos frontage to integrate public art and contribute to the streetscape, and will create an outdoor patio on the corner to enhance pedestrian vibrancy through a low-barrier gathering space. Staff also notes that nothing prevents nearby residents from walking to the site, nor would it prevent residents from other areas, including Downtown, or employees from taking transit to the site.

Regarding the proposed demolition and parking lot, ultimately, a private developer has proposed the project in this manner, and staff must review and formulate a recommendation on the project as proposed. Ultimately, a decision on the project will be made by a decisionmaker, whether it be the Director/Hearing Officer at Director’s Hearing, or Planning Commission or City Council on appeal.

Nevertheless, staff has encouraged the applicant at every turn to reduce the amount of parking and will continue to do so. However, the applicant has been insistent on the amount of parking and has relayed that the project is not feasible without this amount of parking spaces. While the City has eliminated minimum parking requirements, there are no maximum parking requirements, so the applicant is able to choose the amount of parking they find appropriate for their project. Without intimating that this will occur, staff notes that should the area continue to succeed and land values increase, it becomes more possible that the parking lot (or the entire site) is redeveloped to a higher-density or mixed-use project in the future, and that a restaurant/retail use and parking lot is much more likely to be developed than low- or medium-density residential.

6/4/25, 12:44 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 1/3

[External Email. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. Learn more] The City will hold a community meeting for this project, which is now expected in the latter half of March, and I have put you on the list to be notified when that is finalized.

Thank you,
Jason

---
Jason Lee, Planner II
[email protected] | 408.535.3887

City of San José
Planning, Building, & Code Enforcement
200 E. Santa Clara Street, 3F Tower
San José, California 95113-1905
www.sanjoseca.gov/planning

From: Nahui Legorreta
Sent: Sunday, February 16, 2025 10:17
To: Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Lee, Jason <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>; Subject: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal

Some people who received this message don't often get email from . Learn why this is important To the San José Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement Department, Mayor Mahan, Councilmember Davis, and Councilmember-elect Mulcahy,
I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed Chick-fil-A at 1301 W San Carlos Street. This project is at odds with San José’s vision for West San Carlos and what I want to see in this neighborhood.

The West San Carlos Urban Village Plan describes the site of the proposed development as an area with “higher- density mixed-use and residential development drawing energy from nearby Downtown San José and the Diridon Station. Development is proposed to range between three and seven stories with residential uses above a mix of active groundfloor retail.”
A single-story, 5,139-square-foot fast-food restaurant does not align with this description. It actively works against the atmosphere an urban village is supposed to foster by encouraging customers to travel by car. This location is right along VTA’s 523/23 bus line and just a few minutes away from light rail by foot.

Additionally, construction of the larger parking lot detailed in the proposal would require demolishing two existing local businesses. This new restaurant should not need a parking lot larger than the one that supported the previous fast-food establishment that occupied the corner of this site.

As is currently proposed, a standalone Chick-fil-A and a large parking lot are not acceptable uses of the extremely 6/4/25, 12:44 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 2/3

This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. limited land where higher-density, mixed-use development is allowed and needed in San José.

Please stand by the principles and plans we have created to guide our city and region into a better, more sustainable future. Please tell Chick-fil-A to majorly re-work its San Carlos St proposal or locate elsewhere.

6/4/25, 12:44 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 3/3 Outlook
RE: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal From Lee, Jason <[email protected]>
Date Fri 2025-02-21 14:27
To 'Briana Lipka' Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>;
Dear Briana,
Thank you for your e-mail, and your opposition to the project is noted.

Staff notes the description of the Character Area definition of the project site; however, the allowable land use is controlled by the Land Use Designation portion of the document. This is a commercial project on a commercial-designated and commercial-zoned parcel that does not have a required minimum density. While the description allows for higher-density uses and the project does not meet some of the aspirational goals of the plan, lower-density uses are not precluded in Urban Villages, and can still fit within the urban fabric of a higher-density area by contributing to the streetscape, walkability, and street-level vibrancy of districts.

Staff has worked with the applicant to include elements in the project that would meet the West San Carlos Urban Village Plan goals by encouraging pedestrian access to the site and beyond, including widening both the San Carlos and Race sidewalks on the project site and making pedestrian and traffic safety improvements to the San Carlos and Race intersection. If approved and built, the project will also include a mural on the San Carlos frontage to integrate public art and contribute to the streetscape, and will create an outdoor patio on the corner to enhance pedestrian vibrancy through a low-barrier gathering space. Staff also notes that nothing prevents nearby residents from walking to the site, nor would it prevent residents from other areas, including Downtown, or employees from taking transit to the site.

Regarding the proposed demolition and parking lot, ultimately, a private developer has proposed the project in this manner, and staff must review and formulate a recommendation on the project as proposed. Ultimately, a decision on the project will be made by a decisionmaker, whether it be the Director/Hearing Officer at Director’s Hearing, or Planning Commission or City Council on appeal.

Nevertheless, staff has encouraged the applicant at every turn to reduce the amount of parking and will continue to do so. However, the applicant has been insistent on the amount of parking and has relayed that the project is not feasible without this amount of parking spaces. While the City has eliminated minimum parking requirements, there are no maximum parking requirements, so the applicant is able to 6/4/25, 12:39 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 1/3

choose the amount of parking they find appropriate for their project. Without intimating that this will occur, staff notes that should the area continue to succeed and land values increase, it becomes more possible that the parking lot (or the entire site) is redeveloped to a higher-density or mixed-use project in the future, and that a restaurant/retail use and parking lot is much more likely to be developed than low- or medium-density residential.

The City will hold a community meeting for this project, which is now expected in the latter half of March, and I have put you on the list to be notified when that is finalized.

Thank you,
Jason
---
Jason Lee, Planner II
[email protected] | 408.535.3887

City of San José
Planning, Building, & Code Enforcement
200 E. Santa Clara Street, 3F Tower
San José, California 95113-1905
www.sanjoseca.gov/planning
-----Original Message-----
From: Briana Lipka
Sent: Sunday, February 16, 2025 09:29
To: Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Lee, Jason <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>
Subject: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal [External Email. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. Learn more<https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification>]
[Some people who received this message don't often get email from . Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ] To the San José Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement Department, Mayor Mahan, Councilmember Davis, and Councilmember-elect Mulcahy,
I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed Chick-fil-A at 1301 W San Carlos Street. This project is at odds with San José’s vision for West San Carlos and what I want to see in this neighborhood. 6/4/25, 12:39 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 2/3

The West San Carlos Urban Village Plan describes the site of the proposed development as an area with “higher-density mixed-use and residential development drawing energy from nearby Downtown San José and the Diridon Station. Development is proposed to range between three and seven stories with residential uses above a mix of active groundfloor retail.” A single-story, 5,139-square-foot fast-food restaurant does not align with this description. It actively works against the atmosphere an urban village is supposed to foster by encouraging customers to travel by car. This location is right along VTA’s 523/23 bus line and just a few minutes away from light rail by foot.

Additionally, construction of the larger parking lot detailed in the proposal would require demolishing two existing local businesses. This new restaurant should not need a parking lot larger than the one that supported the previous fast-food establishment that occupied the corner of this site.

As is currently proposed, a standalone Chick-fil-A and a large parking lot are not acceptable uses of the extremely limited land where higher-density, mixed-use development is allowed and needed in San José.

Please stand by the principles and plans we have created to guide our city and region into a better, more sustainable future. Please tell Chick-fil-A to majorly re-work its San Carlos St proposal or locate elsewhere.

Briana Lipka
This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
6/4/25, 12:39 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 3/3 Outlook
RE: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal From Lee, Jason <[email protected]>
Date Fri 2025-02-21 14:39
To 'Tim Lopez' ; Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>;
Dear Tim,
Thank you for your e-mail, and your opposition to the project is noted.

Staff notes the description of the Character Area definition of the project site; however, the allowable land use is controlled by the Land Use Designation portion of the document. This is a commercial project on a commercial-designated and commercial-zoned parcel that does not have a required minimum density. While the description allows for higher-density uses and the project does not meet some of the aspirational goals of the plan, lower-density uses are not precluded in Urban Villages, and can still fit within the urban fabric of a higher-density area by contributing to the streetscape, walkability, and street-level vibrancy of districts.

Staff has worked with the applicant to include elements in the project that would meet the West San Carlos Urban Village Plan goals by encouraging pedestrian access to the site and beyond, including widening both the San Carlos and Race sidewalks on the project site and making pedestrian and traffic safety improvements to the San Carlos and Race intersection. If approved and built, the project will also include a mural on the San Carlos frontage to integrate public art and contribute to the streetscape, and will create an outdoor patio on the corner to enhance pedestrian vibrancy through a low-barrier gathering space. Staff also notes that nothing prevents nearby residents from walking to the site, nor would it prevent residents from other areas, including Downtown, or employees from taking transit to the site.

Regarding the proposed demolition and parking lot, ultimately, a private developer has proposed the project in this manner, and staff must review and formulate a recommendation on the project as proposed. Ultimately, a decision on the project will be made by a decisionmaker, whether it be the Director/Hearing Officer at Director’s Hearing, or Planning Commission or City Council on appeal.

Nevertheless, staff has encouraged the applicant at every turn to reduce the amount of parking and will continue to do so. However, the applicant has been insistent on the amount of parking and has relayed that the project is not feasible without this amount of parking spaces. While the City has eliminated minimum parking requirements, there are no maximum parking requirements, so the applicant is able to 6/4/25, 12:45 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 1/3

choose the amount of parking they find appropriate for their project. Without intimating that this will occur, staff notes that should the area continue to succeed and land values increase, it becomes more possible that the parking lot (or the entire site) is redeveloped to a higher-density or mixed-use project in the future, and that a restaurant/retail use and parking lot is much more likely to be developed than low- or medium-density residential.

The City will hold a community meeting for this project, which is now expected in the latter half of March, and I have put you on the list to be notified when that is finalized.

Thank you,
Jason
---
Jason Lee, Planner II
[email protected] | 408.535.3887

City of San José
Planning, Building, & Code Enforcement
200 E. Santa Clara Street, 3F Tower
San José, California 95113-1905
www.sanjoseca.gov/planning
-----Original Message-----
From: Tim Lopez
Sent: Sunday, February 16, 2025 09:18
To: Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Lee, Jason <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>;
Subject: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal [External Email. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. Learn more<https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification>]
[Some people who received this message don't often get email from . Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ] To the San José Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement Department, Mayor Mahan, Councilmember Davis, and Councilmember-elect Mulcahy,
I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed Chick-fil-A at 1301 W San Carlos Street. This project is at odds with San José’s vision for West San Carlos and what I want to see in this neighborhood. 6/4/25, 12:45 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 2/3

The West San Carlos Urban Village Plan describes the site of the proposed development as an area with “higher-density mixed-use and residential development drawing energy from nearby Downtown San José and the Diridon Station. Development is proposed to range between three and seven stories with residential uses above a mix of active groundfloor retail.” A single-story, 5,139-square-foot fast-food restaurant does not align with this description. It actively works against the atmosphere an urban village is supposed to foster by encouraging customers to travel by car. This location is right along VTA’s 523/23 bus line and just a few minutes away from light rail by foot.

Additionally, construction of the larger parking lot detailed in the proposal would require demolishing two existing local businesses. This new restaurant should not need a parking lot larger than the one that supported the previous fast-food establishment that occupied the corner of this site.

As is currently proposed, a standalone Chick-fil-A and a large parking lot are not acceptable uses of the extremely limited land where higher-density, mixed-use development is allowed and needed in San José.

Please stand by the principles and plans we have created to guide our city and region into a better, more sustainable future. Please tell Chick-fil-A to majorly re-work its San Carlos St proposal or locate elsewhere.

Tim Lopez
This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
6/4/25, 12:45 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 3/3 Outlook
RE: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal From Lee, Jason <[email protected]>
Date Fri 2025-02-21 14:31
To 'Haddie Lyons' Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>
Dear Haddie,

Thank you for your e-mail, and your opposition to the project is noted.

Staff notes the description of the Character Area definition of the project site; however, the allowable land use is controlled by the Land Use Designation portion of the document. This is a commercial project on a commercial- designated and commercial-zoned parcel that does not have a required minimum density. While the description allows for higher-density uses and the project does not meet some of the aspirational goals of the plan, lower- density uses are not precluded in Urban Villages, and can still fit within the urban fabric of a higher-density area by contributing to the streetscape, walkability, and street-level vibrancy of districts.

Staff has worked with the applicant to include elements in the project that would meet the West San Carlos Urban Village Plan goals by encouraging pedestrian access to the site and beyond, including widening both the San Carlos and Race sidewalks on the project site and making pedestrian and traffic safety improvements to the San Carlos and Race intersection. If approved and built, the project will also include a mural on the San Carlos frontage to integrate public art and contribute to the streetscape, and will create an outdoor patio on the corner to enhance pedestrian vibrancy through a low-barrier gathering space. Staff also notes that nothing prevents nearby residents from walking to the site, nor would it prevent residents from other areas, including Downtown, or employees from taking transit to the site.

Regarding the proposed demolition and parking lot, ultimately, a private developer has proposed the project in this manner, and staff must review and formulate a recommendation on the project as proposed. Ultimately, a decision on the project will be made by a decisionmaker, whether it be the Director/Hearing Officer at Director’s Hearing, or Planning Commission or City Council on appeal.

Nevertheless, staff has encouraged the applicant at every turn to reduce the amount of parking and will continue to do so. However, the applicant has been insistent on the amount of parking and has relayed that the project is not feasible without this amount of parking spaces. While the City has eliminated minimum parking requirements, there are no maximum parking requirements, so the applicant is able to choose the amount of parking they find appropriate for their project. Without intimating that this will occur, staff notes that should the area continue to succeed and land values increase, it becomes more possible that the parking lot (or the entire site) is redeveloped to a higher-density or mixed-use project in the future, and that a restaurant/retail use and parking lot is much more likely to be developed than low- or medium-density residential.

6/4/25, 12:41 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 1/3

[External Email. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. Learn more] The City will hold a community meeting for this project, which is now expected in the latter half of March, and I have put you on the list to be notified when that is finalized.

Thank you,
Jason

---
Jason Lee, Planner II
[email protected] | 408.535.3887

City of San José
Planning, Building, & Code Enforcement
200 E. Santa Clara Street, 3F Tower
San José, California 95113-1905
www.sanjoseca.gov/planning

From: Haddie Lyons
Sent: Sunday, February 16, 2025 15:01
To: Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Lee, Jason <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>; Proposal

Some people who received this message don't often get email from Learn why this is important To the San José Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement Department, Mayor Mahan, Councilmember Davis, and Councilmember-elect Mulcahy,
I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed Chick-fil-A at 1301 W San Carlos Street. This project is at odds with San José’s vision for West San Carlos and what I want to see in this neighborhood.

The West San Carlos Urban Village Plan describes the site of the proposed development as an area with “higher- density mixed-use and residential development drawing energy from nearby Downtown San José and the Diridon Station. Development is proposed to range between three and seven stories with residential uses above a mix of active groundfloor retail.”
A single-story, 5,139-square-foot fast-food restaurant does not align with this description. It actively works against the atmosphere an urban village is supposed to foster by encouraging customers to travel by car. This location is right along VTA’s 523/23 bus line and just a few minutes away from light rail by foot.

Additionally, construction of the larger parking lot detailed in the proposal would require demolishing two existing local businesses. This new restaurant should not need a parking lot larger than the one that supported the previous fast-food establishment that occupied the corner of this site.

As is currently proposed, a standalone Chick-fil-A and a large parking lot are not acceptable uses of the extremely 6/4/25, 12:41 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 2/3

This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. limited land where higher-density, mixed-use development is allowed and needed in San José.

Please stand by the principles and plans we have created to guide our city and region into a better, more sustainable future. Please tell Chick-fil-A to majorly re-work its San Carlos St proposal or locate elsewhere.

Haddie Koontz

6/4/25, 12:41 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 3/3 Outlook
RE: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal From Lee, Jason <[email protected]>
Date Fri 2025-02-21 14:49
To 'Em Malaspina' <[email protected]>; Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>
Hello,

Thank you for your e-mail, and your opposition to the project is noted.

Staff notes that we are beholden to review private development projects as they have been proposed by the applicant. In this case, the owner of the land wishes to demolish the existing commercial building, including Eduardo’s, and therefore, we must consider the project, including the demolition of the building, as the applicant has requested. Ultimately, the totality of the project, including demolition, will be considered by a decisionmaker.

For the remainder of the e-mail:

Staff notes the description of the Character Area definition of the project site; however, the allowable land use is controlled by the Land Use Designation portion of the document. This is a commercial project on a commercial- designated and commercial-zoned parcel that does not have a required minimum density. While the description allows for higher-density uses and the project does not meet some of the aspirational goals of the plan, lower- density uses are not precluded in Urban Villages, and can still fit within the urban fabric of a higher-density area by contributing to the streetscape, walkability, and street-level vibrancy of districts.

Staff has worked with the applicant to include elements in the project that would meet the West San Carlos Urban Village Plan goals by encouraging pedestrian access to the site and beyond, including widening both the San Carlos and Race sidewalks on the project site and making pedestrian and traffic safety improvements to the San Carlos and Race intersection. If approved and built, the project will also include a mural on the San Carlos frontage to integrate public art and contribute to the streetscape, and will create an outdoor patio on the corner to enhance pedestrian vibrancy through a low-barrier gathering space. Staff also notes that nothing prevents nearby residents from walking to the site, nor would it prevent residents from other areas, including Downtown, or employees from taking transit to the site.

Regarding the proposed demolition and parking lot, ultimately, a private developer has proposed the project in this manner, and staff must review and formulate a recommendation on the project as proposed. Ultimately, a decision on the project will be made by a decisionmaker, whether it be the Director/Hearing Officer at Director’s Hearing, or Planning Commission or City Council on appeal.

Nevertheless, staff has encouraged the applicant at every turn to reduce the amount of parking and will continue to do so. However, the applicant has been insistent on the amount of parking and has relayed that the project is not feasible without this amount of parking spaces. While the City has eliminated minimum parking requirements, 6/4/25, 12:46 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 1/3

[External Email. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. Learn more] there are no maximum parking requirements, so the applicant is able to choose the amount of parking they find appropriate for their project. Without intimating that this will occur, staff notes that should the area continue to succeed and land values increase, it becomes more possible that the parking lot (or the entire site) is redeveloped to a higher-density or mixed-use project in the future, and that a restaurant/retail use and parking lot is much more likely to be developed than low- or medium-density residential.

The City will hold a community meeting for this project, which is now expected in the latter half of March, and I have put you on the list to be notified when that is finalized.

Thank you,
Jason

---
Jason Lee, Planner II
[email protected] | 408.535.3887

City of San José
Planning, Building, & Code Enforcement
200 E. Santa Clara Street, 3F Tower
San José, California 95113-1905
www.sanjoseca.gov/planning

From: Em Malaspina
Sent: Sunday, February 16, 2025 10:55
To: Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Lee, Jason <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>; [email protected]; Michael Mulcahy <[email protected]>; [email protected]; Subject: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal

Some people who received this message don't often get email from Learn why this is important To the San José Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement Department, Mayor Mahan, Councilmember Davis, and Councilmember-elect Mulcahy,
I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed Chick-fil-A at 1301 W San Carlos Street. This project is at odds with San José’s vision for West San Carlos and what I want to see in this neighborhood.

I am a long time consumer of Eduardo's and would be heartbroken to see it go away.

The West San Carlos Urban Village Plan describes the site of the proposed development as an area with “higher- density mixed-use and residential development drawing energy from nearby Downtown San José and the Diridon Station. Development is proposed to range between three and seven stories with residential uses above a mix of active groundfloor retail.”
A single-story, 5,139-square-foot fast-food restaurant does not align with this description. It actively works against 6/4/25, 12:46 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 2/3

Outlook
RE: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal From Lee, Jason <[email protected]>
Date Fri 2025-02-21 14:35
To 'Melate Mariam' ; Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>;
Dear Melate,
Thank you for your e-mail, and your opposition to the project is noted.

Staff notes the description of the Character Area definition of the project site; however, the allowable land use is controlled by the Land Use Designation portion of the document. This is a commercial project on a commercial-designated and commercial-zoned parcel that does not have a required minimum density. While the description allows for higher-density uses and the project does not meet some of the aspirational goals of the plan, lower-density uses are not precluded in Urban Villages, and can still fit within the urban fabric of a higher-density area by contributing to the streetscape, walkability, and street-level vibrancy of districts.

Staff has worked with the applicant to include elements in the project that would meet the West San Carlos Urban Village Plan goals by encouraging pedestrian access to the site and beyond, including widening both the San Carlos and Race sidewalks on the project site and making pedestrian and traffic safety improvements to the San Carlos and Race intersection. If approved and built, the project will also include a mural on the San Carlos frontage to integrate public art and contribute to the streetscape, and will create an outdoor patio on the corner to enhance pedestrian vibrancy through a low-barrier gathering space. Staff also notes that nothing prevents nearby residents from walking to the site, nor would it prevent residents from other areas, including Downtown, or employees from taking transit to the site.

Regarding the proposed demolition and parking lot, ultimately, a private developer has proposed the project in this manner, and staff must review and formulate a recommendation on the project as proposed. Ultimately, a decision on the project will be made by a decisionmaker, whether it be the Director/Hearing Officer at Director’s Hearing, or Planning Commission or City Council on appeal.

Nevertheless, staff has encouraged the applicant at every turn to reduce the amount of parking and will continue to do so. However, the applicant has been insistent on the amount of parking and has relayed that the project is not feasible without this amount of parking spaces. While the City has eliminated minimum parking requirements, there are no maximum parking requirements, so the applicant is able to 6/4/25, 12:43 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 1/3

choose the amount of parking they find appropriate for their project. Without intimating that this will occur, staff notes that should the area continue to succeed and land values increase, it becomes more possible that the parking lot (or the entire site) is redeveloped to a higher-density or mixed-use project in the future, and that a restaurant/retail use and parking lot is much more likely to be developed than low- or medium-density residential.

The City will hold a community meeting for this project, which is now expected in the latter half of March, and I have put you on the list to be notified when that is finalized.

Thank you,
Jason
---
Jason Lee, Planner II
[email protected] | 408.535.3887

City of San José
Planning, Building, & Code Enforcement
200 E. Santa Clara Street, 3F Tower
San José, California 95113-1905
www.sanjoseca.gov/planning
-----Original Message-----
From: Melate Mariam
Sent: Wednesday, February 19, 2025 13:16
To: Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Lee, Jason <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>;
Subject: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal [External Email. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. Learn more<https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification>]
[You don't often get email from . Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ]
To the San José Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement Department, Mayor Mahan, Councilmember Davis, and Councilmember-elect Mulcahy,
I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed Chick-fil-A at 1301 W San Carlos Street. This project is at odds with San José’s vision for West San Carlos and what I want to see in this neighborhood. 6/4/25, 12:43 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 2/3

The West San Carlos Urban Village Plan describes the site of the proposed development as an area with “higher-density mixed-use and residential development drawing energy from nearby Downtown San José and the Diridon Station. Development is proposed to range between three and seven stories with residential uses above a mix of active groundfloor retail.” A single-story, 5,139-square-foot fast-food restaurant does not align with this description. It actively works against the atmosphere an urban village is supposed to foster by encouraging customers to travel by car. This location is right along VTA’s 523/23 bus line and just a few minutes away from light rail by foot.

Additionally, construction of the larger parking lot detailed in the proposal would require demolishing two existing local businesses. This new restaurant should not need a parking lot larger than the one that supported the previous fast-food establishment that occupied the corner of this site.

As is currently proposed, a standalone Chick-fil-A and a large parking lot are not acceptable uses of the extremely limited land where higher-density, mixed-use development is allowed and needed in San José.

Please stand by the principles and plans we have created to guide our city and region into a better, more sustainable future. Please tell Chick-fil-A to majorly re-work its San Carlos St proposal or locate elsewhere.

Sent from my iPhone
This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
6/4/25, 12:43 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 3/3 This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. the atmosphere an urban village is supposed to foster by encouraging customers to travel by car. This location is right along VTA’s 523/23 bus line and just a few minutes away from light rail by foot.

Additionally, construction of the larger parking lot detailed in the proposal would require demolishing two existing local businesses. This new restaurant should not need a parking lot larger than the one that supported the previous fast-food establishment that occupied the corner of this site.

As is currently proposed, a standalone Chick-fil-A and a large parking lot are not acceptable uses of the extremely limited land where higher-density, mixed-use development is allowed and needed in San José.

Please stand by the principles and plans we have created to guide our city and region into a better, more sustainable future. Please tell Chick-fil-A to majorly re-work its San Carlos St proposal or locate elsewhere.

6/4/25, 12:46 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 3/3 Outlook
RE: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal From Lee, Jason <[email protected]>
Date Fri 2025-02-21 14:39
To 'tmartini33' Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>;
Dear Tony,

Thank you for your e-mail, and your opposition to the project is noted.

Staff notes the description of the Character Area definition of the project site; however, the allowable land use is controlled by the Land Use Designation portion of the document. This is a commercial project on a commercial- designated and commercial-zoned parcel that does not have a required minimum density. While the description allows for higher-density uses and the project does not meet some of the aspirational goals of the plan, lower- density uses are not precluded in Urban Villages, and can still fit within the urban fabric of a higher-density area by contributing to the streetscape, walkability, and street-level vibrancy of districts.

Staff has worked with the applicant to include elements in the project that would meet the West San Carlos Urban Village Plan goals by encouraging pedestrian access to the site and beyond, including widening both the San Carlos and Race sidewalks on the project site and making pedestrian and traffic safety improvements to the San Carlos and Race intersection. If approved and built, the project will also include a mural on the San Carlos frontage to integrate public art and contribute to the streetscape, and will create an outdoor patio on the corner to enhance pedestrian vibrancy through a low-barrier gathering space. Staff also notes that nothing prevents nearby residents from walking to the site, nor would it prevent residents from other areas, including Downtown, or employees from taking transit to the site.

Regarding the proposed demolition and parking lot, ultimately, a private developer has proposed the project in this manner, and staff must review and formulate a recommendation on the project as proposed. Ultimately, a decision on the project will be made by a decisionmaker, whether it be the Director/Hearing Officer at Director’s Hearing, or Planning Commission or City Council on appeal.

Nevertheless, staff has encouraged the applicant at every turn to reduce the amount of parking and will continue to do so. However, the applicant has been insistent on the amount of parking and has relayed that the project is not feasible without this amount of parking spaces. While the City has eliminated minimum parking requirements, there are no maximum parking requirements, so the applicant is able to choose the amount of parking they find appropriate for their project. Without intimating that this will occur, staff notes that should the area continue to succeed and land values increase, it becomes more possible that the parking lot (or the entire site) is redeveloped to a higher-density or mixed-use project in the future, and that a restaurant/retail use and parking lot is much more likely to be developed than low- or medium-density residential.

6/4/25, 12:45 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 1/3

[External Email. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. Learn more] The City will hold a community meeting for this project, which is now expected in the latter half of March, and I have put you on the list to be notified when that is finalized.

Thank you,
Jason

---
Jason Lee, Planner II
[email protected] | 408.535.3887

City of San José
Planning, Building, & Code Enforcement
200 E. Santa Clara Street, 3F Tower
San José, California 95113-1905
www.sanjoseca.gov/planning

From: tmartini33
Sent: Sunday, February 16, 2025 10:47
To: Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Lee, Jason <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>; Subject: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal

You don't often get email from Learn why this is important To the San José Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement Department, Mayor Mahan, Councilmember Davis, and Councilmember-elect Mulcahy,
I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed Chick-fil-A at 1301 W San Carlos Street. This project is at odds with San José’s vision for West San Carlos and what I want to see in this neighborhood.

The West San Carlos Urban Village Plan describes the site of the proposed development as an area with “higher- density mixed-use and residential development drawing energy from nearby Downtown San José and the Diridon Station. Development is proposed to range between three and seven stories with residential uses above a mix of active groundfloor retail.”
A single-story, 5,139-square-foot fast-food restaurant does not align with this description. It actively works against the atmosphere an urban village is supposed to foster by encouraging customers to travel by car. This location is right along VTA’s 523/23 bus line and just a few minutes away from light rail by foot.

Additionally, construction of the larger parking lot detailed in the proposal would require demolishing two existing local businesses. This new restaurant should not need a parking lot larger than the one that supported the previous fast-food establishment that occupied the corner of this site.

As is currently proposed, a standalone Chick-fil-A and a large parking lot are not acceptable uses of the extremely 6/4/25, 12:45 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 2/3

This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. limited land where higher-density, mixed-use development is allowed and needed in San José.

Please stand by the principles and plans we have created to guide our city and region into a better, more sustainable future. Please tell Chick-fil-A to majorly re-work its San Carlos St proposal or locate elsewhere.

Thank you,

Tony Martinico

6/4/25, 12:45 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 3/3 Outlook
RE: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal From Lee, Jason <[email protected]>
Date Fri 2025-02-21 14:34
To 'Marta Matos' Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>;
Dear Marta,
Thank you for your e-mail, and your opposition to the project is noted.

Staff notes the description of the Character Area definition of the project site; however, the allowable land use is controlled by the Land Use Designation portion of the document. This is a commercial project on a commercial-designated and commercial-zoned parcel that does not have a required minimum density. While the description allows for higher-density uses and the project does not meet some of the aspirational goals of the plan, lower-density uses are not precluded in Urban Villages, and can still fit within the urban fabric of a higher-density area by contributing to the streetscape, walkability, and street-level vibrancy of districts.

Staff has worked with the applicant to include elements in the project that would meet the West San Carlos Urban Village Plan goals by encouraging pedestrian access to the site and beyond, including widening both the San Carlos and Race sidewalks on the project site and making pedestrian and traffic safety improvements to the San Carlos and Race intersection. If approved and built, the project will also include a mural on the San Carlos frontage to integrate public art and contribute to the streetscape, and will create an outdoor patio on the corner to enhance pedestrian vibrancy through a low-barrier gathering space. Staff also notes that nothing prevents nearby residents from walking to the site, nor would it prevent residents from other areas, including Downtown, or employees from taking transit to the site.

Regarding the proposed demolition and parking lot, ultimately, a private developer has proposed the project in this manner, and staff must review and formulate a recommendation on the project as proposed. Ultimately, a decision on the project will be made by a decisionmaker, whether it be the Director/Hearing Officer at Director’s Hearing, or Planning Commission or City Council on appeal.

Nevertheless, staff has encouraged the applicant at every turn to reduce the amount of parking and will continue to do so. However, the applicant has been insistent on the amount of parking and has relayed that the project is not feasible without this amount of parking spaces. While the City has eliminated minimum parking requirements, there are no maximum parking requirements, so the applicant is able to 6/4/25, 12:43 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 1/3

choose the amount of parking they find appropriate for their project. Without intimating that this will occur, staff notes that should the area continue to succeed and land values increase, it becomes more possible that the parking lot (or the entire site) is redeveloped to a higher-density or mixed-use project in the future, and that a restaurant/retail use and parking lot is much more likely to be developed than low- or medium-density residential.

The City will hold a community meeting for this project, which is now expected in the latter half of March, and I have put you on the list to be notified when that is finalized.

Thank you,
Jason
---
Jason Lee, Planner II
[email protected] | 408.535.3887

City of San José
Planning, Building, & Code Enforcement
200 E. Santa Clara Street, 3F Tower
San José, California 95113-1905
www.sanjoseca.gov/planning
-----Original Message-----
From: Marta Matos
Sent: Sunday, February 16, 2025 10:26
To: Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Lee, Jason <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>;
Subject: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal [External Email. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. Learn more<https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification>]
[Some people who received this message don't often get email from . Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ] To the San José Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement Department, Mayor Mahan, Councilmember Davis, and Councilmember-elect Mulcahy,
I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed Chick-fil-A at 1301 W San Carlos Street. This project is at odds with San José’s vision for West San Carlos and what I want to see in this neighborhood. 6/4/25, 12:43 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 2/3

The West San Carlos Urban Village Plan describes the site of the proposed development as an area with “higher-density mixed-use and residential development drawing energy from nearby Downtown San José and the Diridon Station. Development is proposed to range between three and seven stories with residential uses above a mix of active groundfloor retail.” A single-story, 5,139-square-foot fast-food restaurant does not align with this description. It actively works against the atmosphere an urban village is supposed to foster by encouraging customers to travel by car. This location is right along VTA’s 523/23 bus line and just a few minutes away from light rail by foot.

Additionally, construction of the larger parking lot detailed in the proposal would require demolishing two existing local businesses. This new restaurant should not need a parking lot larger than the one that supported the previous fast-food establishment that occupied the corner of this site.

As is currently proposed, a standalone Chick-fil-A and a large parking lot are not acceptable uses of the extremely limited land where higher-density, mixed-use development is allowed and needed in San José.

Please stand by the principles and plans we have created to guide our city and region into a better, more sustainable future. Please tell Chick-fil-A to majorly re-work its San Carlos St proposal or locate elsewhere.

Sent from my iPhone
This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
6/4/25, 12:43 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 3/3 Outlook
RE: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal From Lee, Jason <[email protected]>
Date Fri 2025-02-21 14:33
To 'Kirsten Matyjasik' ; Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>;
Dear Kirsten,
Thank you for your e-mail, and your opposition to the project is noted.

Staff notes the description of the Character Area definition of the project site; however, the allowable land use is controlled by the Land Use Designation portion of the document. This is a commercial project on a commercial-designated and commercial-zoned parcel that does not have a required minimum density. While the description allows for higher-density uses and the project does not meet some of the aspirational goals of the plan, lower-density uses are not precluded in Urban Villages, and can still fit within the urban fabric of a higher-density area by contributing to the streetscape, walkability, and street-level vibrancy of districts.

Staff has worked with the applicant to include elements in the project that would meet the West San Carlos Urban Village Plan goals by encouraging pedestrian access to the site and beyond, including widening both the San Carlos and Race sidewalks on the project site and making pedestrian and traffic safety improvements to the San Carlos and Race intersection. If approved and built, the project will also include a mural on the San Carlos frontage to integrate public art and contribute to the streetscape, and will create an outdoor patio on the corner to enhance pedestrian vibrancy through a low-barrier gathering space. Staff also notes that nothing prevents nearby residents from walking to the site, nor would it prevent residents from other areas, including Downtown, or employees from taking transit to the site.

Regarding the proposed demolition and parking lot, ultimately, a private developer has proposed the project in this manner, and staff must review and formulate a recommendation on the project as proposed. Ultimately, a decision on the project will be made by a decisionmaker, whether it be the Director/Hearing Officer at Director’s Hearing, or Planning Commission or City Council on appeal.

Nevertheless, staff has encouraged the applicant at every turn to reduce the amount of parking and will continue to do so. However, the applicant has been insistent on the amount of parking and has relayed that the project is not feasible without this amount of parking spaces. While the City has eliminated minimum parking requirements, there are no maximum parking requirements, so the applicant is able to 6/4/25, 12:47 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 1/3

choose the amount of parking they find appropriate for their project. Without intimating that this will occur, staff notes that should the area continue to succeed and land values increase, it becomes more possible that the parking lot (or the entire site) is redeveloped to a higher-density or mixed-use project in the future, and that a restaurant/retail use and parking lot is much more likely to be developed than low- or medium-density residential.

The City will hold a community meeting for this project, which is now expected in the latter half of March, and I have put you on the list to be notified when that is finalized.

Thank you,
Jason
---
Jason Lee, Planner II
[email protected] | 408.535.3887

City of San José
Planning, Building, & Code Enforcement
200 E. Santa Clara Street, 3F Tower
San José, California 95113-1905
www.sanjoseca.gov/planning
-----Original Message-----
From: Kirsten Matyjasik
Sent: Monday, February 17, 2025 06:23
To: Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Lee, Jason <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>;
Subject: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal [External Email. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. Learn more<https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification>]
[Some people who received this message don't often get email from Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ] To the San José Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement Department, Mayor Mahan, Councilmember Davis, and Councilmember-elect Mulcahy,
I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed Chick-fil-A at 1301 W San Carlos Street. This project is at odds with San José’s vision for West San Carlos and what I want to see in this neighborhood. 6/4/25, 12:47 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 2/3

The West San Carlos Urban Village Plan describes the site of the proposed development as an area with “higher-density mixed-use and residential development drawing energy from nearby Downtown San José and the Diridon Station. Development is proposed to range between three and seven stories with residential uses above a mix of active groundfloor retail.” A single-story, 5,139-square-foot fast-food restaurant does not align with this description. It actively works against the atmosphere an urban village is supposed to foster by encouraging customers to travel by car. This location is right along VTA’s 523/23 bus line and just a few minutes away from light rail by foot.

Additionally, construction of the larger parking lot detailed in the proposal would require demolishing two existing local businesses. This new restaurant should not need a parking lot larger than the one that supported the previous fast-food establishment that occupied the corner of this site.

As is currently proposed, a standalone Chick-fil-A and a large parking lot are not acceptable uses of the extremely limited land where higher-density, mixed-use development is allowed and needed in San José.

Please stand by the principles and plans we have created to guide our city and region into a better, more sustainable future. Please tell Chick-fil-A to majorly re-work its San Carlos St proposal or locate elsewhere.

Sent from my iPhone
This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
6/4/25, 12:47 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 3/3 Outlook
RE: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal From Lee, Jason <[email protected]>
Date Fri 2025-02-21 14:32
To 'Julie Nano' Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <
Dear Julie,
Thank you for your e-mail, and your opposition to the project is noted.

Staff notes the description of the Character Area definition of the project site; however, the allowable land use is controlled by the Land Use Designation portion of the document. This is a commercial project on a commercial-designated and commercial-zoned parcel that does not have a required minimum density. While the description allows for higher-density uses and the project does not meet some of the aspirational goals of the plan, lower-density uses are not precluded in Urban Villages, and can still fit within the urban fabric of a higher-density area by contributing to the streetscape, walkability, and street-level vibrancy of districts.

Staff has worked with the applicant to include elements in the project that would meet the West San Carlos Urban Village Plan goals by encouraging pedestrian access to the site and beyond, including widening both the San Carlos and Race sidewalks on the project site and making pedestrian and traffic safety improvements to the San Carlos and Race intersection. If approved and built, the project will also include a mural on the San Carlos frontage to integrate public art and contribute to the streetscape, and will create an outdoor patio on the corner to enhance pedestrian vibrancy through a low-barrier gathering space. Staff also notes that nothing prevents nearby residents from walking to the site, nor would it prevent residents from other areas, including Downtown, or employees from taking transit to the site.

Regarding the proposed demolition and parking lot, ultimately, a private developer has proposed the project in this manner, and staff must review and formulate a recommendation on the project as proposed. Ultimately, a decision on the project will be made by a decisionmaker, whether it be the Director/Hearing Officer at Director’s Hearing, or Planning Commission or City Council on appeal.

Nevertheless, staff has encouraged the applicant at every turn to reduce the amount of parking and will continue to do so. However, the applicant has been insistent on the amount of parking and has relayed that the project is not feasible without this amount of parking spaces. While the City has eliminated minimum parking requirements, there are no maximum parking requirements, so the applicant is able to 6/4/25, 12:42 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 1/3

choose the amount of parking they find appropriate for their project. Without intimating that this will occur, staff notes that should the area continue to succeed and land values increase, it becomes more possible that the parking lot (or the entire site) is redeveloped to a higher-density or mixed-use project in the future, and that a restaurant/retail use and parking lot is much more likely to be developed than low- or medium-density residential.

The City will hold a community meeting for this project, which is now expected in the latter half of March, and I have put you on the list to be notified when that is finalized.

Thank you,
Jason
---
Jason Lee, Planner II
[email protected] | 408.535.3887

City of San José
Planning, Building, & Code Enforcement
200 E. Santa Clara Street, 3F Tower
San José, California 95113-1905
www.sanjoseca.gov/planning
-----Original Message-----
From: Julie Nano
Sent: Sunday, February 16, 2025 09:44
To: Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Lee, Jason <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>;
Subject: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal [External Email. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. Learn more<https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification>]
[You don't often get email from Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ]
To the San José Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement Department, Mayor Mahan, Councilmember Davis, and Councilmember-elect Mulcahy,
I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed Chick-fil-A at 1301 W San Carlos Street. This project is at odds with San José’s vision for West San Carlos and what I want to see in this neighborhood. 6/4/25, 12:42 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 2/3

The West San Carlos Urban Village Plan describes the site of the proposed development as an area with “higher-density mixed-use and residential development drawing energy from nearby Downtown San José and the Diridon Station. Development is proposed to range between three and seven stories with residential uses above a mix of active groundfloor retail.” A single-story, 5,139-square-foot fast-food restaurant does not align with this description. It actively works against the atmosphere an urban village is supposed to foster by encouraging customers to travel by car. This location is right along VTA’s 523/23 bus line and just a few minutes away from light rail by foot.

Additionally, construction of the larger parking lot detailed in the proposal would require demolishing two existing local businesses. This new restaurant should not need a parking lot larger than the one that supported the previous fast-food establishment that occupied the corner of this site.

As is currently proposed, a standalone Chick-fil-A and a large parking lot are not acceptable uses of the extremely limited land where higher-density, mixed-use development is allowed and needed in San José.

Please stand by the principles and plans we have created to guide our city and region into a better, more sustainable future. Please tell Chick-fil-A to majorly re-work its San Carlos St proposal or locate elsewhere.
-Julie Nano (N 13th St)
This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
6/4/25, 12:42 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 3/3 Outlook
RE: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal From Lee, Jason <[email protected]>
Date Fri 2025-02-21 14:27
To 'Cary Newcomer' Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>;
Dear Cary,
Thank you for your e-mail, and your opposition to the project is noted.

Staff notes the description of the Character Area definition of the project site; however, the allowable land use is controlled by the Land Use Designation portion of the document. This is a commercial project on a commercial-designated and commercial-zoned parcel that does not have a required minimum density. While the description allows for higher-density uses and the project does not meet some of the aspirational goals of the plan, lower-density uses are not precluded in Urban Villages, and can still fit within the urban fabric of a higher-density area by contributing to the streetscape, walkability, and street-level vibrancy of districts.

Staff has worked with the applicant to include elements in the project that would meet the West San Carlos Urban Village Plan goals by encouraging pedestrian access to the site and beyond, including widening both the San Carlos and Race sidewalks on the project site and making pedestrian and traffic safety improvements to the San Carlos and Race intersection. If approved and built, the project will also include a mural on the San Carlos frontage to integrate public art and contribute to the streetscape, and will create an outdoor patio on the corner to enhance pedestrian vibrancy through a low-barrier gathering space. Staff also notes that nothing prevents nearby residents from walking to the site, nor would it prevent residents from other areas, including Downtown, or employees from taking transit to the site.

Regarding the proposed demolition and parking lot, ultimately, a private developer has proposed the project in this manner, and staff must review and formulate a recommendation on the project as proposed. Ultimately, a decision on the project will be made by a decisionmaker, whether it be the Director/Hearing Officer at Director’s Hearing, or Planning Commission or City Council on appeal.

Nevertheless, staff has encouraged the applicant at every turn to reduce the amount of parking and will continue to do so. However, the applicant has been insistent on the amount of parking and has relayed that the project is not feasible without this amount of parking spaces. While the City has eliminated minimum parking requirements, there are no maximum parking requirements, so the applicant is able to 6/4/25, 12:39 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 1/3

choose the amount of parking they find appropriate for their project. Without intimating that this will occur, staff notes that should the area continue to succeed and land values increase, it becomes more possible that the parking lot (or the entire site) is redeveloped to a higher-density or mixed-use project in the future, and that a restaurant/retail use and parking lot is much more likely to be developed than low- or medium-density residential.

The City will hold a community meeting for this project, which is now expected in the latter half of March, and I have put you on the list to be notified when that is finalized.

Thank you,
Jason
---
Jason Lee, Planner II
[email protected] | 408.535.3887

City of San José
Planning, Building, & Code Enforcement
200 E. Santa Clara Street, 3F Tower
San José, California 95113-1905
www.sanjoseca.gov/planning
-----Original Message-----
From: Cary Newcomer
Sent: Sunday, February 16, 2025 09:43
To: Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Lee, Jason <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>;
Subject: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal [External Email. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. Learn more<https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification>]
[Some people who received this message don't often get email from Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ] To the San José Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement Department, Mayor Mahan, Councilmember Davis, and Councilmember-elect Mulcahy,
I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed Chick-fil-A at 1301 W San Carlos Street. This project is at odds with San José’s vision for West San Carlos and what I want to see in this neighborhood. 6/4/25, 12:39 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 2/3

The West San Carlos Urban Village Plan describes the site of the proposed development as an area with “higher-density mixed-use and residential development drawing energy from nearby Downtown San José and the Diridon Station. Development is proposed to range between three and seven stories with residential uses above a mix of active groundfloor retail.” A single-story, 5,139-square-foot fast-food restaurant does not align with this description. It actively works against the atmosphere an urban village is supposed to foster by encouraging customers to travel by car. This location is right along VTA’s 523/23 bus line and just a few minutes away from light rail by foot.

Additionally, construction of the larger parking lot detailed in the proposal would require demolishing two existing local businesses. This new restaurant should not need a parking lot larger than the one that supported the previous fast-food establishment that occupied the corner of this site.

As is currently proposed, a standalone Chick-fil-A and a large parking lot are not acceptable uses of the extremely limited land where higher-density, mixed-use development is allowed and needed in San José.

Please stand by the principles and plans we have created to guide our city and region into a better, more sustainable future. Please tell Chick-fil-A to majorly re-work its San Carlos St proposal or locate elsewhere. Prioritize San Jose small business and support the community over major multi million dollar chain corporations.

This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
6/4/25, 12:39 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 3/3 Outlook
RE: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal From Lee, Jason <[email protected]>
Date Fri 2025-02-21 14:34
To 'Matt P' ; Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>;
Dear Matt,

Thank you for your e-mail, and your opposition to the project is noted.

Staff notes the description of the Character Area definition of the project site; however, the allowable land use is controlled by the Land Use Designation portion of the document. This is a commercial project on a commercial- designated and commercial-zoned parcel that does not have a required minimum density. While the description allows for higher-density uses and the project does not meet some of the aspirational goals of the plan, lower- density uses are not precluded in Urban Villages, and can still fit within the urban fabric of a higher-density area by contributing to the streetscape, walkability, and street-level vibrancy of districts.

Staff has worked with the applicant to include elements in the project that would meet the West San Carlos Urban Village Plan goals by encouraging pedestrian access to the site and beyond, including widening both the San Carlos and Race sidewalks on the project site and making pedestrian and traffic safety improvements to the San Carlos and Race intersection. If approved and built, the project will also include a mural on the San Carlos frontage to integrate public art and contribute to the streetscape, and will create an outdoor patio on the corner to enhance pedestrian vibrancy through a low-barrier gathering space. Staff also notes that nothing prevents nearby residents from walking to the site, nor would it prevent residents from other areas, including Downtown, or employees from taking transit to the site.

Regarding the proposed demolition and parking lot, ultimately, a private developer has proposed the project in this manner, and staff must review and formulate a recommendation on the project as proposed. Ultimately, a decision on the project will be made by a decisionmaker, whether it be the Director/Hearing Officer at Director’s Hearing, or Planning Commission or City Council on appeal.

Nevertheless, staff has encouraged the applicant at every turn to reduce the amount of parking and will continue to do so. However, the applicant has been insistent on the amount of parking and has relayed that the project is not feasible without this amount of parking spaces. While the City has eliminated minimum parking requirements, there are no maximum parking requirements, so the applicant is able to choose the amount of parking they find appropriate for their project. Without intimating that this will occur, staff notes that should the area continue to succeed and land values increase, it becomes more possible that the parking lot (or the entire site) is redeveloped to a higher-density or mixed-use project in the future, and that a restaurant/retail use and parking lot is much more likely to be developed than low- or medium-density residential.

6/4/25, 12:43 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 1/3

[External Email. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. Learn more] The City will hold a community meeting for this project, which is now expected in the latter half of March, and I have put you on the list to be notified when that is finalized.

Thank you,
Jason

---
Jason Lee, Planner II
[email protected] | 408.535.3887

City of San José
Planning, Building, & Code Enforcement
200 E. Santa Clara Street, 3F Tower
San José, California 95113-1905
www.sanjoseca.gov/planning

From: Matt P
Sent: Sunday, February 16, 2025 10:39
To: Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Lee, Jason <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>; Subject: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal

Some people who received this message don't often get email from . Learn why this is important To the San José Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement Department, Mayor Mahan, Councilmember Davis, and Councilmember-elect Mulcahy,
I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed Chick-fil-A at 1301 W San Carlos Street. This project is at odds with San José’s vision for West San Carlos and what I want to see in this neighborhood.

The West San Carlos Urban Village Plan describes the site of the proposed development as an area with “higher- density mixed-use and residential development drawing energy from nearby Downtown San José and the Diridon Station. Development is proposed to range between three and seven stories with residential uses above a mix of active groundfloor retail.”
A single-story, 5,139-square-foot fast-food restaurant does not align with this description. It actively works against the atmosphere an urban village is supposed to foster by encouraging customers to travel by car. This location is right along VTA’s 523/23 bus line and just a few minutes away from light rail by foot.

Additionally, construction of the larger parking lot detailed in the proposal would require demolishing two existing local businesses. This new restaurant should not need a parking lot larger than the one that supported the previous fast-food establishment that occupied the corner of this site.

As is currently proposed, a standalone Chick-fil-A and a large parking lot are not acceptable uses of the extremely 6/4/25, 12:43 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 2/3

This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. limited land where higher-density, mixed-use development is allowed and needed in San José.

Please stand by the principles and plans we have created to guide our city and region into a better, more sustainable future. Please tell Chick-fil-A to majorly re-work its San Carlos St proposal or locate elsewhere.

Best,
Matt Piasecki

6/4/25, 12:43 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 3/3 Outlook
RE: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal - Save Eduardo's Taqueria! From Lee, Jason <[email protected]>
Date Fri 2025-02-21 15:09
To 'Susan Popko' >; Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>;
Dear Susan,
Thank you for your e-mail, and your opposition to the project is noted.

Regarding the demolition of the existing building, including Eduardo's: staff is beholden to review private development projects as they have been proposed by the applicant. In this case, the owner of the land wishes to demolish the existing commercial building, and therefore, we must consider the merits of the project as the applicant has requested. Ultimately, the totality of the project, including demolition, will be considered by a decisionmaker.

For the remainder of the e-mail:

Staff notes the description of the Character Area definition of the project site; however, the allowable land use is controlled by the Land Use Designation portion of the document. This is a commercial project on a commercial-designated and commercial-zoned parcel that does not have a required minimum density. While the description allows for higher-density uses and the project does not meet some of the aspirational goals of the plan, lower-density uses are not precluded in Urban Villages, and can still fit within the urban fabric of a higher-density area by contributing to the streetscape, walkability, and street-level vibrancy of districts.

Staff has worked with the applicant to include elements in the project that would meet the West San Carlos Urban Village Plan goals by encouraging pedestrian access to the site and beyond, including widening both the San Carlos and Race sidewalks on the project site and making pedestrian and traffic safety improvements to the San Carlos and Race intersection. If approved and built, the project will also include a mural on the San Carlos frontage to integrate public art and contribute to the streetscape, and will create an outdoor patio on the corner to enhance pedestrian vibrancy through a low-barrier gathering space. Staff also notes that nothing prevents nearby residents from walking to the site, nor would it prevent residents from other areas, including Downtown, or employees from taking transit to the site.

Regarding the proposed demolition and parking lot, ultimately, a private developer has proposed the 6/4/25, 12:47 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 1/3

project in this manner, and staff must review and formulate a recommendation on the project as proposed. Ultimately, a decision on the project will be made by a decisionmaker, whether it be the Director/Hearing Officer at Director’s Hearing, or Planning Commission or City Council on appeal.

Nevertheless, staff has encouraged the applicant at every turn to reduce the amount of parking and will continue to do so. However, the applicant has been insistent on the amount of parking and has relayed that the project is not feasible without this amount of parking spaces. While the City has eliminated minimum parking requirements, there are no maximum parking requirements, so the applicant is able to choose the amount of parking they find appropriate for their project. Without intimating that this will occur, staff notes that should the area continue to succeed and land values increase, it becomes more possible that the parking lot (or the entire site) is redeveloped to a higher-density or mixed-use project in the future, and that a restaurant/retail use and parking lot is much more likely to be developed than low- or medium-density residential.

The City will hold a community meeting for this project, which is now expected in the latter half of March, and I have put you on the list to be notified when that is finalized.

Thank you,
Jason
---
Jason Lee, Planner II
[email protected] | 408.535.3887

City of San José
Planning, Building, & Code Enforcement
200 E. Santa Clara Street, 3F Tower
San José, California 95113-1905
www.sanjoseca.gov/planning
-----Original Message-----
From: Susan Popko
Sent: Friday, February 14, 2025 21:07
To: Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Lee, Jason <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>;
Subject: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal - Save Eduardo's Taqueria! [External Email. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. Learn more<https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification>]
[You don't often get email from Learn why this is important at 6/4/25, 12:47 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 2/3

https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ]
To the San José Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement Department, Mayor Mahan, Councilmember Davis, and Councilmember-elect Mulcahy,
I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed Chick-fil-A at 1301 W San Carlos Street. This project is at odds with San José’s vision for West San Carlos and what I want to see in this neighborhood.  I love our local businesses and do not want to displace Eduardo’s Taqueria.  At this time when immigrant communities are under attack, displacing a beloved local Taqueria with a generic fast food restaurant seems not only out of touch, but rather cruel.

Furthermore, the West San Carlos Urban Village Plan describes the site of the proposed development as an area with “higher-density mixed-use and residential development drawing energy from nearby Downtown San José and the Diridon Station. Development is proposed to range between three and seven stories with residential uses above a mix of active groundfloor retail.”  A single-story, 5,139- square-foot fast-food restaurant does not align with this description. It actively works against the atmosphere an urban village is supposed to foster by encouraging customers to travel by car. This location is right along VTA’s 523/23 bus line and just a few minutes away from light rail by foot.

Additionally, construction of the larger parking lot detailed in the proposal would require demolishing two existing local businesses. This new restaurant should not need a parking lot larger than the one that supported the previous fast-food establishment that occupied the corner of this site.

As is currently proposed, a standalone Chick-fil-A and a large parking lot are not acceptable uses of the extremely limited land where higher-density, mixed-use development is allowed and needed in San José.  This is not what I want in my neighborhood.

Please stand by the principles and plans we have created to guide our city and region into a better, more sustainable future. Please tell Chick-fil-A to majorly re-work its San Carlos St proposal or locate elsewhere.

Thank you,
Susan Popko
St. Leo’s Resident
San Jose
This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
6/4/25, 12:47 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 3/3 Outlook
RE: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal From Lee, Jason <[email protected]>
Date Fri 2025-02-21 14:28
To 'Che Rangel' ; Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>
Dear Che,

Thank you for your e-mail, and your opposition to the project is noted.

Staff notes the description of the Character Area definition of the project site; however, the allowable land use is controlled by the Land Use Designation portion of the document. This is a commercial project on a commercial- designated and commercial-zoned parcel that does not have a required minimum density. While the description allows for higher-density uses and the project does not meet some of the aspirational goals of the plan, lower- density uses are not precluded in Urban Villages, and can still fit within the urban fabric of a higher-density area by contributing to the streetscape, walkability, and street-level vibrancy of districts.

Staff has worked with the applicant to include elements in the project that would meet the West San Carlos Urban Village Plan goals by encouraging pedestrian access to the site and beyond, including widening both the San Carlos and Race sidewalks on the project site and making pedestrian and traffic safety improvements to the San Carlos and Race intersection. If approved and built, the project will also include a mural on the San Carlos frontage to integrate public art and contribute to the streetscape, and will create an outdoor patio on the corner to enhance pedestrian vibrancy through a low-barrier gathering space. Staff also notes that nothing prevents nearby residents from walking to the site, nor would it prevent residents from other areas, including Downtown, or employees from taking transit to the site.

Regarding the proposed demolition and parking lot, ultimately, a private developer has proposed the project in this manner, and staff must review and formulate a recommendation on the project as proposed. Ultimately, a decision on the project will be made by a decisionmaker, whether it be the Director/Hearing Officer at Director’s Hearing, or Planning Commission or City Council on appeal.

Nevertheless, staff has encouraged the applicant at every turn to reduce the amount of parking and will continue to do so. However, the applicant has been insistent on the amount of parking and has relayed that the project is not feasible without this amount of parking spaces. While the City has eliminated minimum parking requirements, there are no maximum parking requirements, so the applicant is able to choose the amount of parking they find appropriate for their project. Without intimating that this will occur, staff notes that should the area continue to succeed and land values increase, it becomes more possible that the parking lot (or the entire site) is redeveloped to a higher-density or mixed-use project in the future, and that a restaurant/retail use and parking lot is much more likely to be developed than low- or medium-density residential.

6/4/25, 12:40 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 1/3

[External Email. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. Learn more] The City will hold a community meeting for this project, which is now expected in the latter half of March, and I have put you on the list to be notified when that is finalized.

Thank you,
Jason

---
Jason Lee, Planner II
[email protected] | 408.535.3887

City of San José
Planning, Building, & Code Enforcement
200 E. Santa Clara Street, 3F Tower
San José, California 95113-1905
www.sanjoseca.gov/planning

From: Che Rangel
Sent: Sunday, February 16, 2025 10:55
To: Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Lee, Jason <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>; Subject: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal

Some people who received this message don't often get email from Learn why this is important To the San José Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement Department, Mayor Mahan, Councilmember Davis, and Councilmember-elect Mulcahy,
I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed Chick-fil-A at 1301 W San Carlos Street. This project is at odds with San José’s vision for West San Carlos and what I want to see in this neighborhood.

The West San Carlos Urban Village Plan describes the site of the proposed development as an area with “higher- density mixed-use and residential development drawing energy from nearby Downtown San José and the Diridon Station. Development is proposed to range between three and seven stories with residential uses above a mix of active groundfloor retail.”
A single-story, 5,139-square-foot fast-food restaurant does not align with this description. It actively works against the atmosphere an urban village is supposed to foster by encouraging customers to travel by car. This location is right along VTA’s 523/23 bus line and just a few minutes away from light rail by foot.

Additionally, construction of the larger parking lot detailed in the proposal would require demolishing two existing local businesses. This new restaurant should not need a parking lot larger than the one that supported the previous fast-food establishment that occupied the corner of this site.

As is currently proposed, a standalone Chick-fil-A and a large parking lot are not acceptable uses of the extremely 6/4/25, 12:40 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 2/3

This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. limited land where higher-density, mixed-use development is allowed and needed in San José.

Please stand by the principles and plans we have created to guide our city and region into a better, more sustainable future. Please tell Chick-fil-A to majorly re-work its San Carlos St proposal or locate elsewhere.

6/4/25, 12:40 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 3/3 Outlook
RE: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal From Lee, Jason <[email protected]>
Date Fri 2025-02-21 14:37
To '[email protected]' ; Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>;
Hello,
Thank you for your e-mail, and your opposition to the project is noted.

Staff notes the description of the Character Area definition of the project site; however, the allowable land use is controlled by the Land Use Designation portion of the document. This is a commercial project on a commercial-designated and commercial-zoned parcel that does not have a required minimum density. While the description allows for higher-density uses and the project does not meet some of the aspirational goals of the plan, lower-density uses are not precluded in Urban Villages, and can still fit within the urban fabric of a higher-density area by contributing to the streetscape, walkability, and street-level vibrancy of districts.

Staff has worked with the applicant to include elements in the project that would meet the West San Carlos Urban Village Plan goals by encouraging pedestrian access to the site and beyond, including widening both the San Carlos and Race sidewalks on the project site and making pedestrian and traffic safety improvements to the San Carlos and Race intersection. If approved and built, the project will also include a mural on the San Carlos frontage to integrate public art and contribute to the streetscape, and will create an outdoor patio on the corner to enhance pedestrian vibrancy through a low-barrier gathering space. Staff also notes that nothing prevents nearby residents from walking to the site, nor would it prevent residents from other areas, including Downtown, or employees from taking transit to the site.

Regarding the proposed demolition and parking lot, ultimately, a private developer has proposed the project in this manner, and staff must review and formulate a recommendation on the project as proposed. Ultimately, a decision on the project will be made by a decisionmaker, whether it be the Director/Hearing Officer at Director’s Hearing, or Planning Commission or City Council on appeal.

Nevertheless, staff has encouraged the applicant at every turn to reduce the amount of parking and will continue to do so. However, the applicant has been insistent on the amount of parking and has relayed that the project is not feasible without this amount of parking spaces. While the City has eliminated minimum parking requirements, there are no maximum parking requirements, so the applicant is able to 6/4/25, 12:44 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 1/3

choose the amount of parking they find appropriate for their project. Without intimating that this will occur, staff notes that should the area continue to succeed and land values increase, it becomes more possible that the parking lot (or the entire site) is redeveloped to a higher-density or mixed-use project in the future, and that a restaurant/retail use and parking lot is much more likely to be developed than low- or medium-density residential.

The City will hold a community meeting for this project, which is now expected in the latter half of March, and I have put you on the list to be notified when that is finalized.

Thank you,
Jason
---
Jason Lee, Planner II
[email protected] | 408.535.3887

City of San José
Planning, Building, & Code Enforcement
200 E. Santa Clara Street, 3F Tower
San José, California 95113-1905
www.sanjoseca.gov/planning
-----Original Message-----
From:

Sent: Sunday, February 16, 2025 09:51
To: Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Lee, Jason <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>;
Subject: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal [External Email. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. Learn more<https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification>]
[Some people who received this message don't often get email from . Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ] To the San José Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement Department, Mayor Mahan, Councilmember Davis, and Councilmember-elect Mulcahy,
I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed Chick-fil-A at 1301 W San Carlos Street. This project is at odds with San José’s vision for West San Carlos and what I want to see in this neighborhood. 6/4/25, 12:44 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 2/3

The West San Carlos Urban Village Plan describes the site of the proposed development as an area with “higher-density mixed-use and residential development drawing energy from nearby Downtown San José and the Diridon Station. Development is proposed to range between three and seven stories with residential uses above a mix of active groundfloor retail.” A single-story, 5,139-square-foot fast-food restaurant does not align with this description. It actively works against the atmosphere an urban village is supposed to foster by encouraging customers to travel by car. This location is right along VTA’s 523/23 bus line and just a few minutes away from light rail by foot.

Additionally, construction of the larger parking lot detailed in the proposal would require demolishing two existing local businesses. This new restaurant should not need a parking lot larger than the one that supported the previous fast-food establishment that occupied the corner of this site.

As is currently proposed, a standalone Chick-fil-A and a large parking lot are not acceptable uses of the extremely limited land where higher-density, mixed-use development is allowed and needed in San José.

Please stand by the principles and plans we have created to guide our city and region into a better, more sustainable future. Please tell Chick-fil-A to majorly re-work its San Carlos St proposal or locate elsewhere.

Sent from my iPhone
This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
6/4/25, 12:44 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 3/3 Outlook
RE: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal From Lee, Jason <[email protected]>
Date Fri 2025-02-21 14:35
To 'Megan Rupe' ; Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>;
Dear Megan,
Thank you for your e-mail, and your opposition to the project is noted.

Staff notes the description of the Character Area definition of the project site; however, the allowable land use is controlled by the Land Use Designation portion of the document. This is a commercial project on a commercial-designated and commercial-zoned parcel that does not have a required minimum density. While the description allows for higher-density uses and the project does not meet some of the aspirational goals of the plan, lower-density uses are not precluded in Urban Villages, and can still fit within the urban fabric of a higher-density area by contributing to the streetscape, walkability, and street-level vibrancy of districts.

Staff has worked with the applicant to include elements in the project that would meet the West San Carlos Urban Village Plan goals by encouraging pedestrian access to the site and beyond, including widening both the San Carlos and Race sidewalks on the project site and making pedestrian and traffic safety improvements to the San Carlos and Race intersection. If approved and built, the project will also include a mural on the San Carlos frontage to integrate public art and contribute to the streetscape, and will create an outdoor patio on the corner to enhance pedestrian vibrancy through a low-barrier gathering space. Staff also notes that nothing prevents nearby residents from walking to the site, nor would it prevent residents from other areas, including Downtown, or employees from taking transit to the site.

Regarding the proposed demolition and parking lot, ultimately, a private developer has proposed the project in this manner, and staff must review and formulate a recommendation on the project as proposed. Ultimately, a decision on the project will be made by a decisionmaker, whether it be the Director/Hearing Officer at Director’s Hearing, or Planning Commission or City Council on appeal.

Nevertheless, staff has encouraged the applicant at every turn to reduce the amount of parking and will continue to do so. However, the applicant has been insistent on the amount of parking and has relayed that the project is not feasible without this amount of parking spaces. While the City has eliminated minimum parking requirements, there are no maximum parking requirements, so the applicant is able to 6/4/25, 12:43 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 1/3

choose the amount of parking they find appropriate for their project. Without intimating that this will occur, staff notes that should the area continue to succeed and land values increase, it becomes more possible that the parking lot (or the entire site) is redeveloped to a higher-density or mixed-use project in the future, and that a restaurant/retail use and parking lot is much more likely to be developed than low- or medium-density residential.

The City will hold a community meeting for this project, which is now expected in the latter half of March, and I have put you on the list to be notified when that is finalized.

Thank you,
Jason
---
Jason Lee, Planner II
[email protected] | 408.535.3887

City of San José
Planning, Building, & Code Enforcement
200 E. Santa Clara Street, 3F Tower
San José, California 95113-1905
www.sanjoseca.gov/planning
-----Original Message-----
From: Megan Rupe
Sent: Sunday, February 16, 2025 09:55
To: Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Lee, Jason <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>;
Subject: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal [External Email. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. Learn more<https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification>]
[Some people who received this message don't often get email from . Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ] To the San José Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement Department, Mayor Mahan, Councilmember Davis, and Councilmember-elect Mulcahy,
I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed Chick-fil-A at 1301 W San Carlos Street. This project is at odds with San José’s vision for West San Carlos and what I want to see in this neighborhood. 6/4/25, 12:43 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 2/3

The West San Carlos Urban Village Plan describes the site of the proposed development as an area with “higher-density mixed-use and residential development drawing energy from nearby Downtown San José and the Diridon Station. Development is proposed to range between three and seven stories with residential uses above a mix of active groundfloor retail.” A single-story, 5,139-square-foot fast-food restaurant does not align with this description. It actively works against the atmosphere an urban village is supposed to foster by encouraging customers to travel by car. This location is right along VTA’s 523/23 bus line and just a few minutes away from light rail by foot.

Additionally, construction of the larger parking lot detailed in the proposal would require demolishing two existing local businesses. This new restaurant should not need a parking lot larger than the one that supported the previous fast-food establishment that occupied the corner of this site.

As is currently proposed, a standalone Chick-fil-A and a large parking lot are not acceptable uses of the extremely limited land where higher-density, mixed-use development is allowed and needed in San José.

Please stand by the principles and plans we have created to guide our city and region into a better, more sustainable future. Please tell Chick-fil-A to majorly re-work its San Carlos St proposal or locate elsewhere.

Sent from my iPhone
This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
6/4/25, 12:43 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 3/3 Outlook
RE: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal From Lee, Jason <[email protected]>
Date Fri 2025-02-21 14:34
To 'Leslie Sarah Lucia Sherman' ; Burton, Chris
<[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>; Thank you for your e-mail, and your opposition to the project is noted.

Staff notes the description of the Character Area definition of the project site; however, the allowable land use is controlled by the Land Use Designation portion of the document. This is a commercial project on a commercial-designated and commercial-zoned parcel that does not have a required minimum density. While the description allows for higher-density uses and the project does not meet some of the aspirational goals of the plan, lower-density uses are not precluded in Urban Villages, and can still fit within the urban fabric of a higher-density area by contributing to the streetscape, walkability, and street-level vibrancy of districts.

Staff has worked with the applicant to include elements in the project that would meet the West San Carlos Urban Village Plan goals by encouraging pedestrian access to the site and beyond, including widening both the San Carlos and Race sidewalks on the project site and making pedestrian and traffic safety improvements to the San Carlos and Race intersection. If approved and built, the project will also include a mural on the San Carlos frontage to integrate public art and contribute to the streetscape, and will create an outdoor patio on the corner to enhance pedestrian vibrancy through a low-barrier gathering space. Staff also notes that nothing prevents nearby residents from walking to the site, nor would it prevent residents from other areas, including Downtown, or employees from taking transit to the site.

Regarding the proposed demolition and parking lot, ultimately, a private developer has proposed the project in this manner, and staff must review and formulate a recommendation on the project as proposed. Ultimately, a decision on the project will be made by a decisionmaker, whether it be the Director/Hearing Officer at Director’s Hearing, or Planning Commission or City Council on appeal.

Nevertheless, staff has encouraged the applicant at every turn to reduce the amount of parking and will continue to do so. However, the applicant has been insistent on the amount of parking and has relayed that the project is not feasible without this amount of parking spaces. While the City has eliminated minimum parking requirements, there are no maximum parking requirements, so the applicant is able to 6/4/25, 12:43 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 1/3

choose the amount of parking they find appropriate for their project. Without intimating that this will occur, staff notes that should the area continue to succeed and land values increase, it becomes more possible that the parking lot (or the entire site) is redeveloped to a higher-density or mixed-use project in the future, and that a restaurant/retail use and parking lot is much more likely to be developed than low- or medium-density residential.

The City will hold a community meeting for this project, which is now expected in the latter half of March, and I have put you on the list to be notified when that is finalized.

Thank you,
Jason
---
Jason Lee, Planner II
[email protected] | 408.535.3887

City of San José
Planning, Building, & Code Enforcement
200 E. Santa Clara Street, 3F Tower
San José, California 95113-1905
www.sanjoseca.gov/planning
-----Original Message-----
From: Leslie Sarah Lucia Sherman
February 16, 2025 09:25
To: Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Lee, Jason <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>
Subject: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal [External Email. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. Learn more<https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification>]
[Some people who received this message don't often get email from Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ] To the San José Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement Department, Mayor Mahan, Councilmember Davis, and Councilmember-elect Mulcahy,
I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed Chick-fil-A at 1301 W San Carlos Street. This project is at odds with San José’s vision for West San Carlos and what I want to see in this neighborhood. 6/4/25, 12:43 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 2/3

The West San Carlos Urban Village Plan describes the site of the proposed development as an area with “higher-density mixed-use and residential development drawing energy from nearby Downtown San José and the Diridon Station. Development is proposed to range between three and seven stories with residential uses above a mix of active groundfloor retail.” A single-story, 5,139-square-foot fast-food restaurant does not align with this description. It actively works against the atmosphere an urban village is supposed to foster by encouraging customers to travel by car. This location is right along VTA’s 523/23 bus line and just a few minutes away from light rail by foot.

Additionally, construction of the larger parking lot detailed in the proposal would require demolishing two existing local businesses. This new restaurant should not need a parking lot larger than the one that supported the previous fast-food establishment that occupied the corner of this site.

As is currently proposed, a standalone Chick-fil-A and a large parking lot are not acceptable uses of the extremely limited land where higher-density, mixed-use development is allowed and needed in San José.

Please stand by the principles and plans we have created to guide our city and region into a better, more sustainable future. Please tell Chick-fil-A to majorly re-work its San Carlos St proposal or locate elsewhere.

Thanks,
Leslie Sherman,
This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
6/4/25, 12:43 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 3/3

Outlook
RE: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal From Lee, Jason <[email protected]>
Date Fri 2025-02-21 14:33
To 'Kevin Shuk' ; Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>;
Dear Kevin,
Thank you for your e-mail, and your opposition to the project is noted.

Staff notes the description of the Character Area definition of the project site; however, the allowable land use is controlled by the Land Use Designation portion of the document. This is a commercial project on a commercial-designated and commercial-zoned parcel that does not have a required minimum density. While the description allows for higher-density uses and the project does not meet some of the aspirational goals of the plan, lower-density uses are not precluded in Urban Villages, and can still fit within the urban fabric of a higher-density area by contributing to the streetscape, walkability, and street-level vibrancy of districts.

Staff has worked with the applicant to include elements in the project that would meet the West San Carlos Urban Village Plan goals by encouraging pedestrian access to the site and beyond, including widening both the San Carlos and Race sidewalks on the project site and making pedestrian and traffic safety improvements to the San Carlos and Race intersection. If approved and built, the project will also include a mural on the San Carlos frontage to integrate public art and contribute to the streetscape, and will create an outdoor patio on the corner to enhance pedestrian vibrancy through a low-barrier gathering space. Staff also notes that nothing prevents nearby residents from walking to the site, nor would it prevent residents from other areas, including Downtown, or employees from taking transit to the site.

Regarding the proposed demolition and parking lot, ultimately, a private developer has proposed the project in this manner, and staff must review and formulate a recommendation on the project as proposed. Ultimately, a decision on the project will be made by a decisionmaker, whether it be the Director/Hearing Officer at Director’s Hearing, or Planning Commission or City Council on appeal.

Nevertheless, staff has encouraged the applicant at every turn to reduce the amount of parking and will continue to do so. However, the applicant has been insistent on the amount of parking and has relayed that the project is not feasible without this amount of parking spaces. While the City has eliminated minimum parking requirements, there are no maximum parking requirements, so the applicant is able to 6/4/25, 12:42 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 1/3

choose the amount of parking they find appropriate for their project. Without intimating that this will occur, staff notes that should the area continue to succeed and land values increase, it becomes more possible that the parking lot (or the entire site) is redeveloped to a higher-density or mixed-use project in the future, and that a restaurant/retail use and parking lot is much more likely to be developed than low- or medium-density residential.

The City will hold a community meeting for this project, which is now expected in the latter half of March, and I have put you on the list to be notified when that is finalized.

Thank you,
Jason
---
Jason Lee, Planner II
[email protected] | 408.535.3887

City of San José
Planning, Building, & Code Enforcement
200 E. Santa Clara Street, 3F Tower
San José, California 95113-1905
www.sanjoseca.gov/planning
-----Original Message-----
From: Kevin Shuk
Sent: Thursday, February 20, 2025 16:46
To: Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Lee, Jason <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>;
Subject: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal [External Email. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. Learn more<https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification>]
[You don't often get email from . Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ]
To the San José Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement Department, Mayor Mahan, Councilmember Davis, and Councilmember-elect Mulcahy,
I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed Chick-fil-A at 1301 W San Carlos Street. This project is at odds with San José’s vision for West San Carlos and what I want to see in this neighborhood. 6/4/25, 12:42 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 2/3

The West San Carlos Urban Village Plan describes the site of the proposed development as an area with “higher-density mixed-use and residential development drawing energy from nearby Downtown San José and the Diridon Station. Development is proposed to range between three and seven stories with residential uses above a mix of active groundfloor retail.” A single-story, 5,139-square-foot fast-food restaurant does not align with this description. It actively works against the atmosphere an urban village is supposed to foster by encouraging customers to travel by car. This location is right along VTA’s 523/23 bus line and just a few minutes away from light rail by foot.

Additionally, construction of the larger parking lot detailed in the proposal would require demolishing two existing local businesses. This new restaurant should not need a parking lot larger than the one that supported the previous fast-food establishment that occupied the corner of this site.

As is currently proposed, a standalone Chick-fil-A and a large parking lot are not acceptable uses of the extremely limited land where higher-density, mixed-use development is allowed and needed in San José.

Please stand by the principles and plans we have created to guide our city and region into a better, more sustainable future. Please tell Chick-fil-A to majorly re-work its San Carlos St proposal or locate elsewhere.
--
Kevin Shuk
This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
6/4/25, 12:42 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 3/3

Outlook
RE: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal From Lee, Jason <[email protected]>
Date Fri 2025-02-21 15:04
To 'Shana Siegel' Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>;
Dear Shana,
Thank you for your e-mail, and your opposition to the project is noted.

Staff notes your addition to the e-mail, and notes that while the project is lower-density, it has not been granted an exception to the pedestrian improvements required by the Urban Village plan and the planlines for San Carlos and Race. Specifically, the project will have to widen sidewalks on both San Carlos and Race, and also make pedestrian and safety improvements to the intersection. This will allow the site and its surroundings to be more walkable and provide a more comfortable pedestrian experience, even if they aren't going to the Chick-fil-A; for instance, connecting the new residences at 253 Race to the Safeway and Smart and Final across San Carlos through a wider sidewalk on Race Street.

For the remainder of the e-mail:

Staff notes the description of the Character Area definition of the project site; however, the allowable land use is controlled by the Land Use Designation portion of the document. This is a commercial project on a commercial-designated and commercial-zoned parcel that does not have a required minimum density. While the description allows for higher-density uses and the project does not meet some of the aspirational goals of the plan, lower-density uses are not precluded in Urban Villages, and can still fit within the urban fabric of a higher-density area by contributing to the streetscape, walkability, and street-level vibrancy of districts.

Staff has worked with the applicant to include elements in the project that would meet the West San Carlos Urban Village Plan goals by encouraging pedestrian access to the site and beyond, including widening both the San Carlos and Race sidewalks on the project site and making pedestrian and traffic safety improvements to the San Carlos and Race intersection. If approved and built, the project will also include a mural on the San Carlos frontage to integrate public art and contribute to the streetscape, and will create an outdoor patio on the corner to enhance pedestrian vibrancy through a low-barrier gathering space. Staff also notes that nothing prevents nearby residents from walking to the site, nor would it prevent residents from other areas, including Downtown, or employees from taking transit to the site.
6/4/25, 12:46 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 1/3

Regarding the proposed demolition and parking lot, ultimately, a private developer has proposed the project in this manner, and staff must review and formulate a recommendation on the project as proposed. Ultimately, a decision on the project will be made by a decisionmaker, whether it be the Director/Hearing Officer at Director’s Hearing, or Planning Commission or City Council on appeal.

Nevertheless, staff has encouraged the applicant at every turn to reduce the amount of parking and will continue to do so. However, the applicant has been insistent on the amount of parking and has relayed that the project is not feasible without this amount of parking spaces. While the City has eliminated minimum parking requirements, there are no maximum parking requirements, so the applicant is able to choose the amount of parking they find appropriate for their project. Without intimating that this will occur, staff notes that should the area continue to succeed and land values increase, it becomes more possible that the parking lot (or the entire site) is redeveloped to a higher-density or mixed-use project in the future, and that a restaurant/retail use and parking lot is much more likely to be developed than low- or medium-density residential.

The City will hold a community meeting for this project, which is now expected in the latter half of March, and I have put you on the list to be notified when that is finalized.

Thank you,
Jason
---
Jason Lee, Planner II
[email protected] | 408.535.3887

City of San José
Planning, Building, & Code Enforcement
200 E. Santa Clara Street, 3F Tower
San José, California 95113-1905
www.sanjoseca.gov/planning
-----Original Message-----
From: Shana Siegel
Sent: Sunday, February 16, 2025 10:20
To: Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Lee, Jason <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>
.

Subject: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal [External Email. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. Learn more<https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification>]
6/4/25, 12:46 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 2/3

[Some people who received this message don't often get email from . Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ] To the San José Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement Department, Mayor Mahan, Councilmember Davis, and Councilmember-elect Mulcahy,
I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed Chick-fil-A at 1301 W San Carlos Street. This project is at odds with San José’s vision for West San Carlos and what I want to see in this neighborhood.

The West San Carlos Urban Village Plan describes the site of the proposed development as an area with “higher-density mixed-use and residential development drawing energy from nearby Downtown San José and the Diridon Station. Development is proposed to range between three and seven stories with residential uses above a mix of active groundfloor retail.” A single-story, 5,139-square-foot fast-food restaurant does not align with this description. It actively works against the atmosphere an urban village is supposed to foster by encouraging customers to travel by car. This location is right along VTA’s 523/23 bus line and just a few minutes away from light rail by foot.

Additionally, construction of the larger parking lot detailed in the proposal would require demolishing two existing local businesses. This new restaurant should not need a parking lot larger than the one that supported the previous fast-food establishment that occupied the corner of this site.

As is currently proposed, a standalone Chick-fil-A and a large parking lot are not acceptable uses of the extremely limited land where higher-density, mixed-use development is allowed and needed in San José.

Please stand by the principles and plans we have created to guide our city and region into a better, more sustainable future. Please tell Chick-fil-A to majorly re-work its San Carlos St proposal or locate elsewhere.

Stop wasting my tax money on car centric planning, it’s the 21st century. Wake up and smell the need to plan for pedestrian focused development.

Thank you.

This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
6/4/25, 12:46 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 3/3

Outlook
RE: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal From Lee, Jason <[email protected]>
Date Fri 2025-02-21 14:40
To 'Valerie Sweeley' ; Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>;
Dear Valerie,
Thank you for your e-mail, and your opposition to the project is noted.

Staff notes the description of the Character Area definition of the project site; however, the allowable land use is controlled by the Land Use Designation portion of the document. This is a commercial project on a commercial-designated and commercial-zoned parcel that does not have a required minimum density. While the description allows for higher-density uses and the project does not meet some of the aspirational goals of the plan, lower-density uses are not precluded in Urban Villages, and can still fit within the urban fabric of a higher-density area by contributing to the streetscape, walkability, and street-level vibrancy of districts.

Staff has worked with the applicant to include elements in the project that would meet the West San Carlos Urban Village Plan goals by encouraging pedestrian access to the site and beyond, including widening both the San Carlos and Race sidewalks on the project site and making pedestrian and traffic safety improvements to the San Carlos and Race intersection. If approved and built, the project will also include a mural on the San Carlos frontage to integrate public art and contribute to the streetscape, and will create an outdoor patio on the corner to enhance pedestrian vibrancy through a low-barrier gathering space. Staff also notes that nothing prevents nearby residents from walking to the site, nor would it prevent residents from other areas, including Downtown, or employees from taking transit to the site.

Regarding the proposed demolition and parking lot, ultimately, a private developer has proposed the project in this manner, and staff must review and formulate a recommendation on the project as proposed. Ultimately, a decision on the project will be made by a decisionmaker, whether it be the Director/Hearing Officer at Director’s Hearing, or Planning Commission or City Council on appeal.

Nevertheless, staff has encouraged the applicant at every turn to reduce the amount of parking and will continue to do so. However, the applicant has been insistent on the amount of parking and has relayed that the project is not feasible without this amount of parking spaces. While the City has eliminated minimum parking requirements, there are no maximum parking requirements, so the applicant is able to 6/4/25, 12:46 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 1/3

choose the amount of parking they find appropriate for their project. Without intimating that this will occur, staff notes that should the area continue to succeed and land values increase, it becomes more possible that the parking lot (or the entire site) is redeveloped to a higher-density or mixed-use project in the future, and that a restaurant/retail use and parking lot is much more likely to be developed than low- or medium-density residential.

The City will hold a community meeting for this project, which is now expected in the latter half of March, and I have put you on the list to be notified when that is finalized.

Thank you,
Jason
---
Jason Lee, Planner II
[email protected] | 408.535.3887

City of San José
Planning, Building, & Code Enforcement
200 E. Santa Clara Street, 3F Tower
San José, California 95113-1905
www.sanjoseca.gov/planning
-----Original Message-----
From: Valerie Sweeley
Sent: Monday, February 17, 2025 05:45
To: Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Lee, Jason <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>;
Subject: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal [External Email. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. Learn more<https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification>]
[Some people who received this message don't often get email from Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ] To the San José Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement Department, Mayor Mahan, Councilmember Davis, and Councilmember-elect Mulcahy,
I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed Chick-fil-A at 1301 W San Carlos Street. This project is at odds with San José’s vision for West San Carlos and what I want to see in this neighborhood. 6/4/25, 12:46 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 2/3

The West San Carlos Urban Village Plan describes the site of the proposed development as an area with “higher-density mixed-use and residential development drawing energy from nearby Downtown San José and the Diridon Station. Development is proposed to range between three and seven stories with residential uses above a mix of active groundfloor retail.” A single-story, 5,139-square-foot fast-food restaurant does not align with this description. It actively works against the atmosphere an urban village is supposed to foster by encouraging customers to travel by car. This location is right along VTA’s 523/23 bus line and just a few minutes away from light rail by foot.

Additionally, construction of the larger parking lot detailed in the proposal would require demolishing two existing local businesses. This new restaurant should not need a parking lot larger than the one that supported the previous fast-food establishment that occupied the corner of this site.

As is currently proposed, a standalone Chick-fil-A and a large parking lot are not acceptable uses of the extremely limited land where higher-density, mixed-use development is allowed and needed in San José.

Please stand by the principles and plans we have created to guide our city and region into a better, more sustainable future. Please tell Chick-fil-A to majorly re-work its San Carlos St proposal or locate elsewhere.

Sent from my iPhone
This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
6/4/25, 12:46 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 3/3 Outlook
RE: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal From Lee, Jason <[email protected]>
Date Fri 2025-02-21 14:30
To 'Emilie Thorburn' ; Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>;
Dear Emilie,
Thank you for your e-mail, and your opposition to the project is noted.

Staff notes the description of the Character Area definition of the project site; however, the allowable land use is controlled by the Land Use Designation portion of the document. This is a commercial project on a commercial-designated and commercial-zoned parcel that does not have a required minimum density. While the description allows for higher-density uses and the project does not meet some of the aspirational goals of the plan, lower-density uses are not precluded in Urban Villages, and can still fit within the urban fabric of a higher-density area by contributing to the streetscape, walkability, and street-level vibrancy of districts.

Staff has worked with the applicant to include elements in the project that would meet the West San Carlos Urban Village Plan goals by encouraging pedestrian access to the site and beyond, including widening both the San Carlos and Race sidewalks on the project site and making pedestrian and traffic safety improvements to the San Carlos and Race intersection. If approved and built, the project will also include a mural on the San Carlos frontage to integrate public art and contribute to the streetscape, and will create an outdoor patio on the corner to enhance pedestrian vibrancy through a low-barrier gathering space. Staff also notes that nothing prevents nearby residents from walking to the site, nor would it prevent residents from other areas, including Downtown, or employees from taking transit to the site.

Regarding the proposed demolition and parking lot, ultimately, a private developer has proposed the project in this manner, and staff must review and formulate a recommendation on the project as proposed. Ultimately, a decision on the project will be made by a decisionmaker, whether it be the Director/Hearing Officer at Director’s Hearing, or Planning Commission or City Council on appeal.

Nevertheless, staff has encouraged the applicant at every turn to reduce the amount of parking and will continue to do so. However, the applicant has been insistent on the amount of parking and has relayed that the project is not feasible without this amount of parking spaces. While the City has eliminated minimum parking requirements, there are no maximum parking requirements, so the applicant is able to 6/4/25, 12:40 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 1/3

choose the amount of parking they find appropriate for their project. Without intimating that this will occur, staff notes that should the area continue to succeed and land values increase, it becomes more possible that the parking lot (or the entire site) is redeveloped to a higher-density or mixed-use project in the future, and that a restaurant/retail use and parking lot is much more likely to be developed than low- or medium-density residential.

The City will hold a community meeting for this project, which is now expected in the latter half of March, and I have put you on the list to be notified when that is finalized.

Thank you,
Jason
---
Jason Lee, Planner II
[email protected] | 408.535.3887

City of San José
Planning, Building, & Code Enforcement
200 E. Santa Clara Street, 3F Tower
San José, California 95113-1905
www.sanjoseca.gov/planning
-----Original Message-----
From: Emilie Thorburn
Sent: Sunday, February 16, 2025 10:48
To: Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Lee, Jason <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>;
Subject: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal [External Email. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. Learn more<https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification>]
[Some people who received this message don't often get email from . Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ] To the San José Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement Department, Mayor Mahan, Councilmember Davis, and Councilmember-elect Mulcahy,
I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed Chick-fil-A at 1301 W San Carlos Street. This project is at odds with San José’s vision for West San Carlos and what I want to see in this neighborhood. 6/4/25, 12:40 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 2/3

The West San Carlos Urban Village Plan describes the site of the proposed development as an area with “higher-density mixed-use and residential development drawing energy from nearby Downtown San José and the Diridon Station. Development is proposed to range between three and seven stories with residential uses above a mix of active groundfloor retail.” A single-story, 5,139-square-foot fast-food restaurant does not align with this description. It actively works against the atmosphere an urban village is supposed to foster by encouraging customers to travel by car. This location is right along VTA’s 523/23 bus line and just a few minutes away from light rail by foot.

Additionally, construction of the larger parking lot detailed in the proposal would require demolishing two existing local businesses. This new restaurant should not need a parking lot larger than the one that supported the previous fast-food establishment that occupied the corner of this site.

As is currently proposed, a standalone Chick-fil-A and a large parking lot are not acceptable uses of the extremely limited land where higher-density, mixed-use development is allowed and needed in San José.

Please stand by the principles and plans we have created to guide our city and region into a better, more sustainable future. Please tell Chick-fil-A to majorly re-work its San Carlos St proposal or locate elsewhere.

Sent from my iPhone
This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
6/4/25, 12:40 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 3/3 Outlook
RE: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal From Lee, Jason <[email protected]>
Date Fri 2025-02-21 14:35
To 'Michael Toews' ; Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>;
Dear Michael,

Thank you for your e-mail, and your opposition to the project is noted.

Staff notes the description of the Character Area definition of the project site; however, the allowable land use is controlled by the Land Use Designation portion of the document. This is a commercial project on a commercial- designated and commercial-zoned parcel that does not have a required minimum density. While the description allows for higher-density uses and the project does not meet some of the aspirational goals of the plan, lower- density uses are not precluded in Urban Villages, and can still fit within the urban fabric of a higher-density area by contributing to the streetscape, walkability, and street-level vibrancy of districts.

Staff has worked with the applicant to include elements in the project that would meet the West San Carlos Urban Village Plan goals by encouraging pedestrian access to the site and beyond, including widening both the San Carlos and Race sidewalks on the project site and making pedestrian and traffic safety improvements to the San Carlos and Race intersection. If approved and built, the project will also include a mural on the San Carlos frontage to integrate public art and contribute to the streetscape, and will create an outdoor patio on the corner to enhance pedestrian vibrancy through a low-barrier gathering space. Staff also notes that nothing prevents nearby residents from walking to the site, nor would it prevent residents from other areas, including Downtown, or employees from taking transit to the site.

Regarding the proposed demolition and parking lot, ultimately, a private developer has proposed the project in this manner, and staff must review and formulate a recommendation on the project as proposed. Ultimately, a decision on the project will be made by a decisionmaker, whether it be the Director/Hearing Officer at Director’s Hearing, or Planning Commission or City Council on appeal.

Nevertheless, staff has encouraged the applicant at every turn to reduce the amount of parking and will continue to do so. However, the applicant has been insistent on the amount of parking and has relayed that the project is not feasible without this amount of parking spaces. While the City has eliminated minimum parking requirements, there are no maximum parking requirements, so the applicant is able to choose the amount of parking they find appropriate for their project. Without intimating that this will occur, staff notes that should the area continue to succeed and land values increase, it becomes more possible that the parking lot (or the entire site) is redeveloped to a higher-density or mixed-use project in the future, and that a restaurant/retail use and parking lot is much more likely to be developed than low- or medium-density residential.

6/4/25, 12:44 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 1/3

[External Email. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. Learn more] The City will hold a community meeting for this project, which is now expected in the latter half of March, and I have put you on the list to be notified when that is finalized.

Thank you,
Jason

---
Jason Lee, Planner II
[email protected] | 408.535.3887

City of San José
Planning, Building, & Code Enforcement
200 E. Santa Clara Street, 3F Tower
San José, California 95113-1905
www.sanjoseca.gov/planning

From: Michael Toews
Sent: Sunday, February 16, 2025 10:57
To: Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Lee, Jason <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>; Subject: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal

Some people who received this message don't often get email from . Learn why this is important To the San José Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement Department, Mayor Mahan, Councilmember Davis, and Councilmember-elect Mulcahy,
I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed Chick-fil-A at 1301 W San Carlos Street. This project is at odds with San José’s vision for West San Carlos and what I want to see in this neighborhood.

The West San Carlos Urban Village Plan describes the site of the proposed development as an area with “higher- density mixed-use and residential development drawing energy from nearby Downtown San José and the Diridon Station. Development is proposed to range between three and seven stories with residential uses above a mix of active groundfloor retail.”
A single-story, 5,139-square-foot fast-food restaurant does not align with this description. It actively works against the atmosphere an urban village is supposed to foster by encouraging customers to travel by car. This location is right along VTA’s 523/23 bus line and just a few minutes away from light rail by foot.

Additionally, construction of the larger parking lot detailed in the proposal would require demolishing two existing local businesses. This new restaurant should not need a parking lot larger than the one that supported the previous fast-food establishment that occupied the corner of this site.

As is currently proposed, a standalone Chick-fil-A and a large parking lot are not acceptable uses of the extremely 6/4/25, 12:44 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 2/3

This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. limited land where higher-density, mixed-use development is allowed and needed in San José.

Please stand by the principles and plans we have created to guide our city and region into a better, more sustainable future. Please tell Chick-fil-A to majorly re-work its San Carlos St proposal or locate elsewhere.

6/4/25, 12:44 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 3/3 Outlook
RE: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal From Lee, Jason <[email protected]>
Date Fri 2025-02-21 14:38
To 'Rhemil Vidal' <[email protected]>; Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>;
Dear Rhemil,

Thank you for your e-mail, and your opposition to the project is noted.

Staff notes the description of the Character Area definition of the project site; however, the allowable land use is controlled by the Land Use Designation portion of the document. This is a commercial project on a commercial- designated and commercial-zoned parcel that does not have a required minimum density. While the description allows for higher-density uses and the project does not meet some of the aspirational goals of the plan, lower- density uses are not precluded in Urban Villages, and can still fit within the urban fabric of a higher-density area by contributing to the streetscape, walkability, and street-level vibrancy of districts.

Staff has worked with the applicant to include elements in the project that would meet the West San Carlos Urban Village Plan goals by encouraging pedestrian access to the site and beyond, including widening both the San Carlos and Race sidewalks on the project site and making pedestrian and traffic safety improvements to the San Carlos and Race intersection. If approved and built, the project will also include a mural on the San Carlos frontage to integrate public art and contribute to the streetscape, and will create an outdoor patio on the corner to enhance pedestrian vibrancy through a low-barrier gathering space. Staff also notes that nothing prevents nearby residents from walking to the site, nor would it prevent residents from other areas, including Downtown, or employees from taking transit to the site.

Regarding the proposed demolition and parking lot, ultimately, a private developer has proposed the project in this manner, and staff must review and formulate a recommendation on the project as proposed. Ultimately, a decision on the project will be made by a decisionmaker, whether it be the Director/Hearing Officer at Director’s Hearing, or Planning Commission or City Council on appeal.

Nevertheless, staff has encouraged the applicant at every turn to reduce the amount of parking and will continue to do so. However, the applicant has been insistent on the amount of parking and has relayed that the project is not feasible without this amount of parking spaces. While the City has eliminated minimum parking requirements, there are no maximum parking requirements, so the applicant is able to choose the amount of parking they find appropriate for their project. Without intimating that this will occur, staff notes that should the area continue to succeed and land values increase, it becomes more possible that the parking lot (or the entire site) is redeveloped to a higher-density or mixed-use project in the future, and that a restaurant/retail use and parking lot is much more likely to be developed than low- or medium-density residential.

6/4/25, 12:45 PM Mail - Lee, Jason - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/AAMkAGRhY2MwNjAyLWUwN2EtNDU0OS1iOWVhLThiZDJhYzU0NGUwZQAuAAAAAAApPoNilYGdS7O5gY8Ai8… 1/3

[External Email. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. Learn more] The City will hold a community meeting for this project, which is now expected in the latter half of March, and I have put you on the list to be notified when that is finalized.

Thank you,
Jason

---
Jason Lee, Planner II
[email protected] | 408.535.3887

City of San José
Planning, Building, & Code Enforcement
200 E. Santa Clara Street, 3F Tower
San José, California 95113-1905
www.sanjoseca.gov/planning

From: Rhemil Vidal
Sent: Sunday, February 16, 2025 11:03
To: Burton, Chris <[email protected]>; Lee, Jason <[email protected]>; Tu, John <[email protected]>; Zelalich, Blage <[email protected]>; District 6 <[email protected]>; Rocha, Vincent <[email protected]>; Lomio, Michael <[email protected]>; Subject: Opposition to 1301 W San Carlos Chick-fil-A Proposal

Some people who received this message don't often get email from Learn why this is important To the San José Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement Department, Mayor Mahan, Councilmember Davis, and Councilmember-elect Mulcahy,
I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed Chick-fil-A at 1301 W San Carlos Street. This project is at odds with San José’s vision for West San Carlos and what I want to see in this neighborhood.

The West San Carlos Urban Village Plan describes the site of the proposed development as an area with “higher- density mixed-use and residential development drawing energy from nearby Downtown San José and the Diridon Station. Development is proposed to range between three and seven stories with residential uses above a mix of active groundfloor retail.”
A single-story, 5,139-square-foot fast-food restaurant does not align with this description. It actively works against the atmosphere an urban village is supposed to foster by encouraging customers to travel by car. This location is right along VTA’s 523/23 bus line and just a few minutes away from light rail by foot.

← All documents from this meeting