Housing advocates and San Jose neighborhood groups are pushing back against a proposed Chick-fil-A at the corner of Race and West San Carlos Streets, asserting the project does not fulfill the vision of an urban village while citing the fast food retailer’s past controversial donations to anti-LGBTQ organizations.
The developer has proposed demolishing the existing commercial building, which would displace businesses like Sharper Cuts and Taqueria Eduardo, and replace it with a one-story, 5,139-square-foot restaurant with an outdoor dining patio.
But while Chick-fil-A representatives said the building would be unique from other locations and have a mid-century design to comply with the West San Carlos urban village plan, detractors of the project told the city and developer’s representatives Thursday that it was a missed opportunity for higher-density housing and bringing in businesses that are pedestrian-friendly or encourage transit use.
“There’s also an unusual amount of consensus between the groups here tonight that aren’t always aligned, and that should send a message on its own,” said Jake Wilde, manager of development projects at CatalyzeSV. “We and our members do not believe that this project conforms with the goals or the intention of the urban village plan. In describing how this project aligns with the urban village plan, Chick-fil-A plans on transforming a surface parking lot into a vibrant and accessible business, but that’s just not the reality of the situation.”
Developers have targeted the 1.1-acre property, which was also once home to a Burger King, for more intensive use in the past, including a 230-unit, mixed-use project years ago, but those plans fell through.
Mike Conroy, executive director at The Economic Co., said that has become common throughout the Bay Area in which rising costs and a more unsteady business environment have prompted development projects to switch gears.
For locations like Race Street and West San Carlos Street, Conroy said that national retail or restaurant chains were better positioned to handle the development risk and stress.
“This has been on the market for quite some time,” Conroy said. “However, (with the) market conditions that we’re seeing – the cost of goods, borrowing costs, interest rates, you name it – developers haven’t been able to make this pencil.”
But for a large contingent of residents that live in the area — including the Buena Vista Neighborhood Association and District 6 Neighborhood Leaders Group — there is little value in using the property for a fast food restaurant, especially when the property’s location in an urban village area was meant to attract developments that were either pedestrian-oriented or promoted walking and use of public transportation.
“The fact that it’s a standalone building with dedicated parking, combined with a grab-and-go fast food format, means it’s less likely to send any foot traffic to the other local small businesses, and a shop that has such a high turnover of vehicle traffic means it’s going to be more dangerous for those pedestrians and bicyclists that we want to encourage in the area,” resident Rachel Kumar said. “Plus, as a Chick-fil-A, it’s going to be a waste of that empty space every Sunday when so many of our hard-working San Jose residents are out enjoying their day off and trying to enjoy their local community.”
Housing advocates have also argued that the proposed restaurant sits in a mixed-use residential character area, where “development is proposed to range between three and seven stories with residential uses above a mix of active ground floor retail.”
Another point of contention for some residents was Chick-fil-A’s past donations to groups identified as promoting anti-LGBTQ+ values, which was especially meaningful given the St. Leo’s neighborhood’s history of advocating for gay and lesbian rights.
“It’s a community rooted in diversity, inclusivity and love — values we live every day,” resident Brandi Moody said. “Chick-fil-A’s track record of supporting anti-LGBTQ+ causes, including groups tied to conversion therapy and opposition to same-sex marriage, directly conflicts with who we are.”
While several residents brought up the fast food restaurant’s donations, the company did reassess its charitable giving efforts in 2019.
Ashley McCutcheon, a public affairs representative for the company’s Western region, also took issue with the comments, saying that “Chick-fil-A is not anti-anyone.”
“We have over 3,000 restaurants in the United States and Canada, which are mostly locally owned and operated by independent franchisees who represent the broadest range of diverse backgrounds and perspectives,” McCutcheon said. “We operate restaurants in some of the most diverse places in the US and internationally, including Toronto and New York City and wherever we do business, we aim to earn the right to demonstrate genuine commitment to care and to create places where everyone is welcomed.”
Despite the overwhelming opposition to the project, it appears that the city will recommend approval.
Jason Lee, a project manager at the city, said planning staff believed the proposal met the urban village goals even if it did not meet every policy or aspiration set out by the General Plan and also noted that the existing commercial zoning did not require residential use.
Lee also said the planning staff’s recommendation had to be based on land-use decisions and could not take into account the past controversies at Chick-fil-A.
“I think we’re very sympathetic to the concerns here, but at the same time, we are truly unable to consider the identity of the applicant and the perceived beliefs of the applicant, etc, in reviewing this application,” Lee said. “When it goes to a decision maker, they also are not able to do that.”