REPORT TO COUNCIL
SUBJECT
Title
Public Hearing: Action on a Vesting Tentative Parcel Map (PLN25-00559) to Merge Four Existing Legal Parcels Into One Legal Parcel, With No Construction or Site Improvements Located at 3250 Jay Street. CEQA Status: Exempt from CEQA per Class 15 and Action to Adopt a CEQA Exemption Checklist 15183 for Future Redevelopment
Report
BACKGROUND
On December 16, 2025, the applicant, Kier and Wright, on behalf of the property owners Four Corners Properties, submitted a Vesting Tentative Subdivision Parcel Map (File No. PLN25-00559) to allow the merger of four adjacent parcels (subject site) with a total area of 7.96 acres (APNs: 224-09-178, 224-09-171). Parcels One, Two, and Three (APN: 224-09-178) are 7.9 acres in the aggregate, while the parcel identified as ‘Lands of City of Santa Clara’ (APN: 224-09-171) is approximately 843 square feet. Parcels Two, Three, and ‘Lands of City of Santa Clara’ are remnant parcels from a previous street vacation. See the Vicinity Map (Attachment 1) for location of the property.
As shown on the Tentative Parcel Map (Attachment 4), the City of Santa Clara currently owns the ‘Lands of City of Santa Clara’ parcel and is in the process of conveying it to the owner of 3250 Jay Street. Sale of the ‘Lands of City of Santa Clara’ must be finalized prior to the vesting of the subject tentative parcel map.
The City Council is requested to approve the Vesting Tentative Parcel Map and determine that the lot merger is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15315 (Class 15 - Minor Land Divisions). The subject site is currently occupied by two office buildings comprising 149,061 square feet, which the Property Owner intends to lease to a third party in the short term (the “Lease Proposal”).
In addition, the City Council is requested to consider and adopt a CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Consistency Checklist for a proposal to demolish the existing two buildings, surface parking, and landscaping to construct a new 160,000 square foot industrial building (the “Redevelopment Proposal”). The Section 15183 action is separate from the lot merger approval and would facilitate future consideration of the development proposal if pursued by the applicant.
The Project Site includes two, two-story buildings totaling 149,300 square feet, an associated parking lot and underground utilities. No site improvements, alterations, or construction are proposed under the Lease Proposal.
The applicant has also provided conceptual plans for a future redevelopment project on the merged site. While the tenant for the proposed building is unknown at this time, the proposed building would be occupied by uses allowed under the HO-RD zoning district, including Industrial (Minor), Printing and Publishing, and Storage (Warehouse/office) uses, which are allowed by right. In addition, Wholesaling and Distribution Centers are conditionally permitted, but would require a use permit. Adoption of the Section 15183 Consistency Checklist would not approve or authorize construction of the future development project without a building permit, and for the wholesaling and distribution center, a use permit.
DISCUSSION
The site consists of four parcels: Parcel One, Parcel Two, and Parcel Three are zoned High-Intensity Office/Research and Development (HO-RD) and ‘Lands of City of Santa Clara’ is zoned Light Industrial (LI). Onsite improvements, such as existing buildings, parking lots, landscaping and underground utilities will not be affected by the subdivision.
Consistency with General Plan, Zoning Code and Subdivision Map Act
Vesting Tentative Parcel Map applications are reviewed for General Plan consistency, conformance with the Zoning Code and Chapter 17.05 of the City Code (Subdivisions), and conformance with the Subdivision Map Act.
The Subdivision Map Act requires that all maps be consistent with the General Plan, Gov’t Code § 66474(a). The City’s Subdivision Clearance Committee reviewed the Vesting Tentative Map and determined it to be complete on March 25, 2026. The project is consistent with the General Plan, as it does not propose a change in use and does not include any site improvements.
Planning Commission
Per Chapter 17.05.400 (e) (Subdivisions: Article V), subdivisions of four or fewer parcels are approved, denied, or conditionally approved by the City Council. Planning Commission review is not required unless the proposed development arouses extraordinary public concern.
Proposed City Council Action
The project is presented to the City Council for consideration and action. The following specific actions are required:
1. CEQA Determination - Lease Proposal
Determine the tentative map to be exempt pursuant to CEQA Class 15 (Minor Land Divisions), Section 15315, for the Lease Proposal. A determination that future redevelopment is categorically exempt from CEQA is an “administrative” action, which is neither quasi-judicial nor legislative, but nevertheless requires specific findings. For a Class 15 exemption, the findings are:
• Fewer Than Four Parcels: The merger would result in only one parcel
• General Plan Consistency: The subdivision would be consistent with the General Plan land use designation of High Intensity Office R&D and Light Industrial in that no changes to the existing buildings are proposed.
• Zoning Code Compatibility: The subdivision also meets the applicable development standards of the Zoning Code in that the minimum lot size, setbacks, and other development standards would be maintained.
• Variances and Exceptions: No variances or exceptions are required to complete the merger and maintain the existing structure.
• Services and Access Available: The lot merger would not change the availability of services to the site or change access.
• No Recent Divisions: The site has not been involved in a division of a larger parcel within the previous 2 years.
• No slope > 20%: The project site is relatively flat.
2. CEQA Checklist - Redevelopment Proposal
Adopt the CEQA Section 15183 (Projects Consistent with a Community Plan or Zoning) checklist for future redevelopment of the site. A determination that future redevelopment is categorically exempt from CEQA is an “administrative” action, which is neither quasi-judicial nor legislative, but nevertheless requires specific findings. For a Section 15183 exemption, the findings are:
• The project is consistent with a General Plan for which an EIR was certified, in that the proposed industrial uses would be consistent with the General Plan land use designation of High Intensity Office R&D and Light Industrial; and
• All potential environmental impacts of the proposed project were previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR, in that an environmental checklist was prepared for the Project and it determined that there were no impacts peculiar to the project or the parcel.
3. Vesting Tentative Parcel Map Approval
A Vesting Tentative Parcel Map is proposed to merge the four existing parcels into one parcel. Approval of a parcel map is a quasi-judicial action, requiring the following findings:
• General Plan Consistency: The subdivision would be consistent with the General Plan land use designation of High Intensity Office R&D and Light Industrial in that no changes to the existing buildings are proposed. For the Redevelopment Proposal, the proposed 154,500 square foot building is consistent with the General Plan Designation of High Intensity Office / R&D standards by creating a new building that may be used for High Intensity Office Uses or Research and Development. The proposal also includes landscaped areas for employee activities.
• Zoning Code Compatibility: The subdivision and the redevelopment proposal also meet the applicable development standards of the Zoning Code in that the minimum lot size, setbacks, and other development standards would be maintained.
• Site Suitability: Much of the surrounding area includes similarly configured light industrial and/or office R&D properties.
• No Adverse Effects: The design of the subdivision and type of improvements will not cause substantial environmental damage and will not substantially or unavoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. For the Lease Proposal, no physical changes to the property or existing buildings are proposed. For the Redevelopment Proposal, the project is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage and will not substantially or unavoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat in that the Project Site is located in an urbanized setting, is a previously developed site, and the proposed building is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 (Projects Consistent with a Community Plan or Zoning).
• Conflicts With Easements: As designed, the project would not conflict with any recorded public easements for access through or use of the proposed subdivision.
• Natural/Passive Heating and Cooling: For the Lease Proposal, no physical changes to the property or existing buildings are proposed. For the Redevelopment Proposal, the building will comply with requirements of the current CALGreen Code.
The Tentative Parcel Map includes the conditions of approval in the form drafted by staff (Attachment 3). No site improvements, alterations, or construction are proposed as part of the lot merger application.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
For the Lease Proposal, the Council is being asked to find that the lot merger is exempt from formal environmental review under CEQA Guidelines Section 15315 (Class 15 -- Minor Land Divisions), in that the project involves merging of urbanized land into fewer than four parcels and is served by existing municipal facilities.
CEQA also mandates that a lead agency conduct environmental review before the agency takes actions that foreclose alternatives, or commit the agency to definite course of action. Although the Property Owner will be leasing the existing building in the short run, he has also indicated a commitment to redevelopment of the site in the near future. As a result, the City must consider that potential redevelopment when approving the map. For the Redevelopment Proposal, the Council is being asked to adopt a Checklist under CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 (Projects Consistent with a Community Plan or Zoning) for future redevelopment of the site. The associated analysis of CEQA exemption section 15183 is attached to this report as a link in Attachment 5.
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact to the City for processing the requested application other than administrative time and expense typically covered by processing fees paid by the applicant.
COORDINATION
This report has been coordinated with the City Attorney’s Office.
PUBLIC CONTACT
Public contact was made by posting the City Council agenda on the City’s official-notice bulletin board outside City Hall Council Chambers. A complete agenda packet is available on the City’s website and in the City Clerk’s Office at least 72 hours prior to a Regular Meeting and 24 hours prior to a Special Meeting. A hard copy of any agenda report may be requested by contacting the City Clerk’s Office at (408) 615-2220, email clerk@santaclaraca.gov <mailto:clerk@santaclaraca.gov> or at the public information desk at any City of Santa Clara public library.
On June 10, 2026, a notice of public hearing of the June 23 public hearing was published in the Weekly, a newspaper of general circulation. On June 11, 2026, the notice of public hearing for this item was mailed to 55 property owners and tenants within 500 feet of the project site. At the time of this staff report, no comments have been received by the Planning Division in support or opposition to the project.
RECOMMENDATION
Recommendation
1. Determine the tentative map to be categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15;
2. Adopt the Checklist Under CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 for the future redevelopment of the site; and
3. Adopt a resolution to approve the Vesting Tentative Parcel Map to merge the four parcels at 3250 Jay Street, making the required findings and subject to conditions of approval.
Staff
Prepared by: Summer Foss, Assistant Planner, Community Development Department
Reviewed by: Afshan Hamid, Director of Community Development
Approved by: Jovan Grogan, City Manager
ATTACHMENTS
1. Vicinity Map
2. Approval Resolution
3. Conditions of Approval
4. Tentative Map
5. Link to Environmental Documents
6. Public Comment