SAN JOSE — A split City Council has once again rejected a businesswoman’s plan to open an ultra-lounge in an empty, blighted downtown building after a three-hour debate in which the mayor likened large rowdy nightclubs to cockroaches.

It was the third time Jenny Wolfes, who is leasing the former Bella Mia restaurant, faced San Jose leaders with a proposal to open Vanity SJ, an “ultra-lounge” inside the historic two-story building on South First Street. The city has permitted Wolfes to operate a banquet and restaurant there, but she had requested a permit to stay open and serve alcohol until 2 a.m.

The council denied that request on a 6-5 vote late Tuesday led by Mayor Sam Liccardo and joined by Vice Mayor Rose Herrera and council members Raul Peralez, Magdalena Carrasco, Chappie Jones and Manh Nguyen. Ash Kalra, Don Rocha, Tam Nguyen, Pierluigi Oliverio and Johnny Khamis dissented.

The city has approved 53 similar late-night use permits, leading Wolfes and her lawyer to claim unfair treatment.

“There is some kind of politics behind this,” said Wolfes’ attorney George Mull. “We think there’s discrimination here. I think at this point we’re going to have to explore our legal options. There are a lot of things wrong with the entertainment permitting process and they may be subject to challenge in federal court.”

Wolfes’ original proposal, filed in March 2015, was met with overwhelming opposition from a law firm next door, Hopkins & Carley, which cited safety and noise concerns. What followed was nearly two years of mixed signals from City Hall — Wolfes’ project was recommended for approval twice by planning staff who subsequently changed their minds. The Planning Commission first said yes, then it said no and then again said yes in July. The City Council three times rejected previous versions of the plan.

The only thing that changed between each vote, according to Wolfes’ plans, is the size of the club. Wolfes reduced the occupancy from 669 people to 250 on each floor. She introduced a “daytime use” — a Crawdaddy Restaurant — to serve lunch so the building isn’t dark all day.

“Everything they’ve asked for I’ve accommodated,” said Wolfes, who’s invested nearly $200,000 in remodeling the building’s interior. “I can’t believe how unfriendly to business San Jose is. The way San Jose treats entertainment is extremely disappointing — they basically run it out.”

But Liccardo and downtown Councilman Peralez opposed the project, and Peralez rallied neighboring businesses to write letters against it. The San Jose Silicon Valley Chamber of Commerce, which calls Wolfes a member, also opposed the plan.

“I’d rather see it blighted than a use that was proposed,” Peralez said. “I’m not just going to approve any business that decides I want to come in and open up in a vacant space.”

The attorneys at Hopkins & Carley appealed the Planning Commission’s approval in July, sending the decision to the City Council for a final vote on Tuesday.

Liccardo, who sparred with Wolfes’ attorney over creating a “physical barrier” to separate the top and bottom floors to prevent overcrowding the building, called a bad nightclub a “cockroach” that will survive “a nuclear war.” He worried Wolfes’ project will turn into a “mega-club” — despite its 250 per floor occupancy limit — a nuisance he’s fought in the past.

Though Wolfes promised to run the top and bottom floors as two separate businesses with 250 people or less — a banquet hall on top and ultra-lounge below — Liccardo worried she’d rent the whole space out to club promoters, turning it into a 500-person nightclub.

Liccardo said the business will attract “a bunch of 21-year-olds who are over-intoxicated with too much testosterone.” Wolfes also operates two clubs in the area, the Gold Club and Studio 8.

A host of nearby bar owners showed up Tuesday to oppose the project. Councilman Oliverio said it was like “McDonalds versus Burger King” and the opponents were just worried about new competition.

Councilman Khamis, who’s supported the project from the beginning, said San Jose needs to live up to its reputation of being open for business.

“If we can’t treat every business owner in a fair manner, then I don’t think we deserve the reputation of being pro-business,” he said.