Good morning. We are calling to order the planning director hearing of November 19,

2025. My name is Ruth Gueto, and I am the hearing officer for today's agenda on behalf of and

delegated by the director of planning, building, and code enforcement, Christopher Burton.

This meeting is being held via Zoom conference call. Members of the public may participate by

following the instructions listed on page two of the agenda. If you would like to provide public

comment, you have two methods to do so. For participants who joined electronically and have

audio input available on their computer or smartphone, they can use a raised hand feature

in Zoom during the agenda item they would like to speak to or click star nine on their phone.

Remember to keep your raised hand feature on until the planning support staff identify your turn to

speak. During the meeting, please call 408-535-8512 or email planningsupportstaff

at sanjosaca.gov and identify your name that is listed on Zoom, phone number that you'll call into

Zoom with, and what item or items you would like to comment on. All members of the public will

remain on mute until the individual identifies they would like to speak, and they are unmuted.

Planning support staff will identify you by name when it is your turn to speak.

At that time, you will be unmuted and can provide comment for the allotted time.

If you exceed your allotted time, you may be muted so we can move on to the next speaker.

Please note the following.

The hearing procedure and order of input will be as follows.

I will identify each project as described on the agenda.

For those items listed on the consent calendar, I will ask if anyone wishes to speak on the item.

If a separate discussion is warranted, I will move the item to the public hearing portion of the agenda.

If a separate discussion is not needed, the item will remain on the consent calendar for approval.

For those items listed under public hearing, I will ask staff to provide a brief report.

The applicant or their representative who wishes to speak on the item will have up to five minutes to speak and should identify themselves by stating their name for the record.

After the applicant or their representative has spoken, any member of the public who wishes to speak on the item may provide testimony up to two minutes per speaker, either for or against the project.

All members of the public should identify their name for the record, although it is not required.

Following comments from the public, the applicant may make additional remarks for up to five minutes.

I will then close the public hearing and I may ask staff to answer questions, respond to comments made by the applicant or the public, or further discuss the item.

I will then take action on the item.

If you challenge these land use decisions in court, you will be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at this public hearing or in written correspondence delivered to the city at or prior to the public hearing.

The planning director's actions on agenda items will be final when the permit is signed and mailed, unless the permit or the environmental clearance determination is appealed.

The planning director's actions on the permits are appealable in accordance with the requirements of Title 20 of the Municipal Code, the Zoning Ordinance.

The planning director's actions on the environmental review for the permits under the California Environmental Quality Act, CEQA, are separately appealable in accordance with the requirements of Title 21 of the Municipal Code.

the Environmental Clearance Code. Before we begin, I want to remind members of the public to follow

our code of conduct at meetings. This includes commenting on the specific agenda item only.

Public speakers will not engage in a conversation with the hearing officer or staff.

The hearing officer, staff, and the public are expected to refrain from abusive language.

Repeated failure to comply with the code of conduct, which will disturb, disrupt, or impede

the orderly conduct of this meeting may result in removal from the meeting.

This meeting of the director hearing will now come to order.

We will begin today's meeting.

Thank you.

Let's see.

With the consent calendar.

We do not have any current items on deferral, but I will move to item 3A first, SP24-041 and ER24-274, a special use permit to allow an approximately 28,235 square foot addition to an existing aircraft hangar and office facility on an approximately 7.09 gross acre site.

The project includes minor site improvements, including the removal of four non-ordinance sized trees, new landscaping and construction of a new trash enclosure located at 1210 Aviation Avenue.

The CEQA is an addendum to the amendment to the San Jose Mineta International Airport Master Plan Final Environmental Impact Report.

staff recommendation is to consider the addendum to the amendment to the San Jose

Mineta International Airport master final environmental impact report I see staff has

their hand raised Alec yes thank you hearing officer Alec Atienza the planning project manager

we request that this item be dropped to be renoticed we're looking at a hearing in mid

January, we're having some issues with fee payment for this project. Thanks. Thank you.

I will go ahead and speak to the other two items and then see if there's any requests to

pull the agendas from the consent item, from the consent calendar, and then vote.

The second item on the consent calendar is item 3B.

T25-018 and ER25-134, a vesting tentative map to allow the subdivision of one lot into two residential condominiums on an approximately 0.18 gross acre site, located at 365 Nature Court.

CEQA is an exemption pursuant to CEQA guidelines,

section 15301 for existing facilities

and staff recommendation is to consider the exemption

in accordance with CEQA and approve a vesting tentative map.

Do we have any comments or any comments from staff

or wish to move this item off to a public hearing?

Okay, hearing none, if we can please move on to item 3C.

This is item 3C, V25-001 and ER25-102, a development variance for a reduction in the rear setback to 10 feet and 10 inches,

and a reduction in the front setback to 11 feet 9 inches for a proposed approximately 1,174 square foot single-family home with approximately 338 square foot attached garage

on an approximately 0.09 gross acre vacant site located at Zero Willow Glen Way.

The CEQA is an exemption pursuant to CEQA guidelines section 15305 for minor alterations and land use limitations.

staff recommendation is to consider the exemption

in accordance with CEQA and approve a development variance.

Does anyone wish to speak on these items?

Okay, hearing no request to speak or no hands raised,

item 3A is dropped to be re-noticed.

Item 3B and 3C are hereby approved.

Thank you.

Moving on to the public hearing portion of the calendar,

there is one item under the public hearing, and that is item 4A, PDA 11-002-02, and ER 25-039.

This is a planned development permit amendment to allow up to 15 concerts per year at PayPal

Park located on the southwest corner of Newhall Drive and Coleman Avenue, 1123 Coleman Avenue.

CEQA is an addendum to the Airport West Stadium and Great Oaks Place Project Final Environmental Impact Report.

Staff recommendation is to consider the addendum to the Airport West Stadium and Great Oaks Place Project Final Environmental Impact Report in accordance with CEQA and approve a plan development permit amendment.

I will now ask staff to provide a brief report, followed by the applicant or applicant representative if they wish, and then we will take public comment.

Thank you, hearing officer. Good morning. My name is Cameron Gee. I'm the planning project manager for Item 4A.

This project consists of a plan development permit amendment to allow the operation of up to 15 concerts per year at PayPal Park.

Concerts will begin no earlier than 9 a.m. and conclude no later than 11 p.m. and may occur on any day of the week.

The project does not include any building or site modifications, demolition, or tree removals.

The project site, PayPal Park, is surrounded by the San Jose Mineta International Airport to the northeast across Coleman Avenue,

offices and a hotel to the northwest across Earthquakes Way,

commercial retail to the southeast across Newhall Drive, and residential uses to the southwest across Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority train tracks.

The project is consistent with the general plan land use designation of combined industrial commercial and general plan policies regarding social and economic development through the provision of cultural attractions.

The site is located within the APD Plan Development Zoning District, file number PDC19-007, which became effective on May 10, 2019.

The project is consistent with the use regulations of the Plan Development Zoning District, as the general development plan allows concerts in addition to the existing sporting events that currently take place.

I'll now hand it over to Court Hitchens, who is the Environmental Project Manager, and he will discuss the project's environmental review process and noise study.

Thanks, Cameron. Good morning, Harriet and Officer, and everyone on the call.

My name is Court Hitchens, and I am the Environmental Project Manager for this project.

An addendum to the previously approved Airport West Stadium and Great Oaks Place Environmental Impact Report was prepared for the proposed project in accordance with CEQA.

The addendum was posted online for public review on November 10th, and known interested parties were notified of the project documents being posted online at that same day.

A hybrid in-person and virtual community meeting was held for the project on September 15th of this year.

Comments and concerns raised during the community meeting were generally related to noise levels heard during the sound testing for the project's noise assessment,

the increase in ambient noise levels compared to existing conditions, noise modeling and data

credibility, event management and enforcement, and location compatibility for concerts in general at

PayPal Park. In response to the general questions and concerns raised at the community meeting,

staff worked with the project's noise consultant on responding to those issues raised and included

responses in an appendix attached to the CEQA addendum posted online.

Based on the analysis in the noise assessment and in the CEQA addendum,

no new or greater impacts would occur from implementation of the proposed

project as compared to the project analyzed and approved with

the EIR. Pass it back to Cameron.

Thanks, Court. As Court mentioned,

a community meeting was held on Monday, September 15, 2025,

and a total of 24 individuals attended that meeting.

As part of our public outreach policy,

an on-site sign has been posted on the property

since May 6th, 2025.

Notices for the public hearing

were mailed to property owners and tenants

within a 1,000-foot radius,

which is consistent with our public outreach policy.

Staff recommends the consideration of the addendum

and approval of the planned development permit amendment.

This concludes staff's presentation.

Thank you, staff. Is the applicant in attendance and do they wish to speak? They have five minutes.

Yes, the applicant's representative is Eric Schenauer.

Good morning, hearing officer. Can you hear me?

Yes.

Great.

My name is Eric Schanauer and I represent the earthquakes, the applicant on this project.

So first of all, we would like to thank city staff as well as the community members for their long-term engagement about the operations of PayPal Park.

Regardless of the outcome of this decision, the earthquakes look forward to their longstanding, ongoing relationship with the Newhall neighborhood moving forward.

Secondly, I wanted to emphasize the point that the big benefit of having live music concerts, besides providing an activity that our residents and businesses want, is the economic development.

development. Live music concerts at a venue like PayPal Park support hundreds of jobs in the

facility operation, in the concert operation directly. In addition, there is economic support

in the community as concert fans will go to restaurants and bars before and after shows,

as well as visitors who are from a greater distance will fill hotel rooms before or after going to a show.

And that is the primary motivation behind this project for the city of San Jose and its economy.

Third, this proposal has had the most extensive, among the most extensive acoustical analyses ever done in the city for an entitlement project.

Most noise studies for entitlement projects simply measure to the property line and in addition are based on theoretical modeling only.

In the case of this proposal, the acoustical analysis was conducted by Illingsworth and Rodkin, who are among the most prominent acoustical experts in the Bay Area.

An actual concert speaker noise generation event happened, simulation of an actual concert, and the noise levels were played at above city standards so that Illingsworth could actually measure noise at numerous locations beyond the property line of the site.

throughout the Newhall residential neighborhood.

And then based on that real-world noise simulation,

the consultant made recommendations of what operational requirements

would be necessary to have the noise levels meet city standards.

And as you can see in the mitigations and the conditions of approval,

the project will be required to keep noise levels, decibel levels of the speakers during the event

at a particular decibel level so that the noise standard of the city will be met in the neighborhood.

In order to validate, revalidate that the noise levels are consistent with the noise study,

the staff has recommended a condition that the first two concerts that face the neighborhood

will have follow-up validation studies for the noise, which is a reasonable proposal to conduct

yet two more analyses and tests to ensure that the original study and recommendations came to

the correct conclusion. So there will be an opportunity in those validation studies to ensure

that the noise standards of the city are being met, and if they're not, there would be course

correction at that time. So with the recommendations proposed by the permit and the environmental CEQA

document. We believe that is a good balance point between PayPal being able to host live concerts

and protecting the interests of the neighborhood by meeting the noise standards of the city of San

Jose. So we hope that the hearing officer will approve the permit. Thank you so much.

Thank you. We will now move on to the public. Anyone from the public who wishes to comment on the project, please raise your hand. If you are on a phone, you can press star nine to enable the raised hand feature. Support staff will call your name and we will begin to take your comments.

John, please unmute your device.

Unmuted.

John Poach, Executive Director of the San Jose Sports Authority.

You know, the mission of the Sports Authority is to increase the City of San Jose's economic development, visibility, and civic pride through sports.

We have served as the Sports Commission for the City of San Jose and the South Bay since 1991 and attracted hundreds of events.

And the key to our success has been the San Jose Earthquakes, especially since they built PayPal Stadium.

They've been a key partner of ours in drawing world-class sporting events.

And if it wasn't for the Earthquakes and their leadership and presence, there will be no FIFA World Cup in San Jose.

The Earthquakes' 50 years of promoting the game and promoting the game in the right way has set the precedent for San Jose to be a major sports destination.

I share this because I compete with cities from all over the nation to draw sporting events.

The opportunity to provide a concert venue at PayPal Park is going to open the doors for more major sporting events that we're able to host.

A number of these major events require ancillary events, which include concerts pre or post.

This will now level the playing field.

In addition, this will generate additional events, which is going to drive economic activity, not only for the PayPal Park Newhall region, but all of the city of San Jose.

And more importantly, it's going to provide visibility on a domestic and international scale.

So I thank you for your consideration.

I thank the earthquakes for moving forward with this project.

and the San Jose Sports Authority is 100% in support of this proposal.

Thank you.

Matthew Bright, please unmute your device.

Can you hear me?

Yes, we can.

All right.

I want to thank you for the opportunity to speak today on behalf of the neighborhood

and share concerns regarding the proposed permit amendment and proposed addendum to the EIR.

For the reasons I'll outline, our conclusion is that the city's draft documents

is currently written are insufficient as the basis for a fair decision, and the proposed

replacement mitigation measure is insufficient to replace the EIR's existing mitigation

because it lacks the ability to effectively monitor noise levels and ensure compliance

on an ongoing basis. Furthermore, the proposed mitigation ignores feasible, reasonable measures

that are already successfully implemented in our local area. As a result, the city should deny the

application or, at a minimum, defer the decision to allow time for evaluation of more effective

mitigation measures. As detailed in the letter sent today, I will summarize the following

conclusions. The city's characterization of the applicant's noise study is fundamentally flawed

and will lead decision makers toward flawed conclusions. The decision documents use terms

like below typical background levels and at or below ambient conditions, while the applicant's

own study plainly admits increases up to 15 DBA, which the applicant's consultant states is beyond

the values that can be perceived as twice as loud. The proposed rise of mitigation does not reflect

the reality and diversity of concert events and is overwhelmingly temporary in nature

and abdicates the city's responsibility to provide ongoing actionable monitoring data.

Fewer than 20% of first-year events and exactly 0% of all following events in perpetuity

will be monitored in the neighborhood. It ignores obvious locally implemented best-known measures

such as permanent real-time monitoring at Levi's Stadium. Further, the city asserts that mitigation

measures allow for real-time feedback, but an annual reporting cycle contradicts this.

The proposed mitigation measures, if implemented, require revision to properly react to violations

of noise standards.

The promised economic impact of concerts may be much lower than indicated by the applicant,

as evidenced by persistent closures of big box retail and small business dining in the

adjacent plaza.

Finally, the proposal is contrary to elected leadership's publicly stated desire to build

a downtown entertainment district.

Thank you very much.

Dan Orloff.

Thank you. Good morning. My name is Dan Orloff. I'm a San Jose resident for more than 40 years as principal of a marketing firm in San Jose.

I've produced and promoted live music events throughout our region, from Mountain Winery in Saratoga to the San Jose Jazz Festival, Fountain Blues and Brews Festival, and clubs throughout our city.

I was on the team that won voter approval to build what is now SAP Center, and we've seen firsthand the transformative impact that venue has had, putting San Jose on the world map and reversing decades of exporting entertainment dollars to San Francisco and Oakland.

Today, SAP Center hosts as many live music events each year as hockey games.

As founder of San Jose Rocks, a new nonprofit celebrating San Jose and Silicon Valley's pivotal role in changing how the world hears, plays, and shares music,

I can tell you that our city has an extraordinary legacy.

From launching the world's first radio station in 1909 to being home to the Doobie Brothers, San Jose and Silicon Valley have always led in bringing music to the masses and producing artists who've changed the world.

Adding PayPal Park as another jewel in our crown of music destinations will only strengthen this legacy.

The San Jose Earthquakes' proposal to host 15 music concerts is, as we say in Rotary, good for all concerned.

It creates jobs, generates tax revenue, keeps entertainment dollars local, and offers residents world-class experiences without leaving our city.

I urge the hearing officer to approve the San Jose earthquake's request. Thank you.

Robert Lindo.

Good morning.

My name is Rob Lindo. I am chairperson of the San Jose Chamber of Commerce Board and a resident of downtown San Jose for the last 11 years.

I am calling to and happy to speak on in support of the amendment to this permit to allow for these 15 concerts a year at PayPal Park.

San Jose is on the precipice of several major events and activations next year,

and supporting increased entertainment operations at PayPal Park encourages a long-term vision and ecosystem for events in San Jose.

More importantly, each concert night brings increased customers for hotels, restaurants, bars, retail,

and transportation services that support small business and boost the local economy,

and that's beyond just the specific region where PayPal Park exists that extends throughout our city.

Additional concerts will grow transient occupancy tax, sales tax, and business activity, which creates new revenue streams that support essential public services without requiring new taxes.

This type of economic development is exactly what our city needs right now.

Allowing 15 concerts increases the utilization of PayPal Park and surrounding infrastructure, ensuring that public and private investments in the area deliver their full economic return.

And with that, I would like to encourage staff to approve the amendment. Thank you very much.

Frank Guerrero.

Good morning, everyone. I'd like to first thank you for allowing me to speak on behalf of one of my biggest passions.

My name is Frank Guerrero, and I'm here today to ask you to support in amending the existing permit for PayPal Park to hold concerts and other outside performing arts events.

I've been a proud San Josean for over 30 years after having moved from Los Angeles to the capital of Silicon Valley.

And having been born and raised in Los Angeles, I spent a lot of my early years going to countless concerts at the countless number of venues in Los Angeles.

My bragging rights are the envy of friends and family.

However, after moving to San Jose in the 1990s, I found myself having to constantly go up north to San Francisco and Oakland to continue my concert going.

Luckily, shortly after moving here, I did happen to have attended the first music concert ever at SAP Center in 1993.

This made me feel that I'd continued my concert going passion.

But other than Santa Clara's Levi's Stadium, which came much later and which only hosts elite performers, the concert scene here in San Jose hasn't grown much since then.

Every year, I hope that this changes, but it never does.

If Santa Clara can do it for 80,000 people in a much more resident, concentrated neighborhood, I ask myself, why can't we do it here for a fraction of that amount of people and sound levels?

I feel enabling concerts here at Papal Park would be a first step in continuing to raise

San Jose's visibility to the Bay Area as the capital of Silicon Valley and attracting a

lot more performers to a modern outside venue and would obviously contribute to the city

and community revenue and pride.

I'm sure an overwhelming majority of my fellow San Joseans would agree.

So in closing, these are the reasons why I ask you for your support in amending the permit

and thank you for your time this morning.

Kat?

Kat?

Good morning.

My name is Kat Angelov, and I'm policy manager for the San Jose Chamber of Commerce.

I'm here today to speak in strong support of the amendment for the PayPal concert permit.

You know, as our board chair Rob Lindo just mentioned, San Jose is truly on the precipice of several major events coming to our region next year.

year. We are the first city to ever host the Super Bowl and the FIFA World Cup games in the

same year. It's a very exciting opportunity for us. A world-class outdoor concert venue brings

tons of new attention to San Jose and strengthens our position long-term as a leading destination

for major sporting events like next year, as well as other concert tours, venues, and entertainment

options. We know that concerts each night directly boost our local economy through filling hotel

rooms or driving business to our amazing local restaurants, bars, and retailers. It's clear

additional events provide meaningful support for our small businesses. We also know that these

events generate tax revenue for the city at a time when we are facing a potential deficit for their

next budget cycle. Authorizing 15 concerts maximizes the use of existing public and private

investments and delivers the economic return our community deserves. In summary, we urge your support.

Thank you. Matthew?

Good morning, and thank you for the opportunity to speak in favor of this amendment. My name is

Matthew Martinucci. I'm the Vice President of Sales and Destination Services for Visit San Jose.

And in that capacity, our biggest mission is to bring events of all types to the city.

And I believe that adding this ability for PayPal Park to host these concerts would create a world

class outdoor live music venue immediately, which would no doubt attract more events to the city

It's important to note that the competitive landscape continues to change across the country,

and many other locations have built or expanded venues.

And so the competition for all types of events is increasingly more difficult.

This will help give us a competitive edge.

It will absolutely create a thriving environment, the nights of these events,

and it will increase not just local travel, but as tourism and traveling to concerts has become

so popular, it will no doubt attract people from other parts of the United States to San Jose

based on whatever the event happens to be. So once again, thank you for the opportunity.

We definitely hope that the amendment will be approved and thank you.

Number ending in 059.

Please unmute your device.

Hello.

This is John Urban living in the Newhall Neighborhood Association for the last 30 years.

Can you hear me?

Yes, we can.

Okay.

Okay. There's so many people have commented so far about the economic advantages, and that's been the sole focus, and that's great.

We all want jobs. We all want economic prosperity.

But we'd also like to go ahead and have our system, our process, our stadium to go ahead and follow processes in place by other venues.

And it was mentioned, the 49er Stadium, how they can go ahead and host folks of, you know, something like 80,000.

And that's great.

Well, let's follow their process.

They've got a process in place that has monitoring for every event.

And right now the proposal for this event or this amendment to the environmental impact statement is to go ahead and have two initially.

And then after that, it's good luck.

So I'd like to be able to have the applicant put a process in place.

Maybe that would be monitor the decibel level.

on each event basis.

And it's just decibel dust the cost to go ahead and implement that,

considering Fisher wants to sell this venue for gazillions of dollars.

I mean, just go ahead and place and work with us.

We're your neighbors.

Work with us and go ahead and put a process in place.

And yes, all the economic benefits that have been spewed for the last 15 minutes will be in place.

Sorry, your time is up. Bob Edmonds, please admit your device.

Hi, my name is Bob Edmonds. I live in the neighboring Newhall neighborhood.

And while I do agree with the last speaker, we have talked about all the economic impact and growth.

We're not talking too much about the technical side of it regarding the decibel level.

So I feel that the proposed revised mitigation does not serve the public interest as written, and we need to work towards a better plan containing a mutual agreement, agreeable mitigation measures.

So I'd like to ask the committee to please defer the decision and work to put more effective mitigation and monitoring measures in place as current one is insufficient. So please revise in cooperation with the neighborhood. Thank you.

Thank you. That concludes our speakers.

Thank you. Thank you for all of the folks who called in and gave us their comments.

Staff or the applicant, you have some time as well to respond. I will allow the applicant

to respond and then staff can respond after if they desire. Thank you. Hearing Officer Eric

Schenauer representing the earthquakes. Just a few follow-up observations. First of all, as a

lay person, not an expert, I found it interesting that the acoustical consultant

went as far as playing multiple genres and types of music during the simulation, right?

It speaks to the level of thoroughness and detail that the consultant took to evaluate the potential impacts in the residential neighborhood, since different types of music can have different perceptions of sound on humans.

So that was done in the study, and I found that interesting.

Another important observation is that in the Bay Area, during the summer concert season,

most promoters and most artists prefer to go outdoors.

So it is the norm in the Bay Area, especially the South Bay,

that most significant concerts migrate to Shoreline Amphitheater and Mountain View.

San Jose doesn't have an outdoor venue that is suitable to concert promoters to date.

And so wouldn't it be nice if instead of all of these customers and economic benefit that goes to Mountain View in the summer season,

that some of that would come to San Jose instead?

An anecdotal example of the economic benefit to sports and entertainment travel. I was having lunch at BJ's on Coleman Avenue during the Bay FC season. And there were four women in Bay FC clothing, even though the game was seven hours away from kickoff.

And so I engaged them and I said, well, why are you here and dressed already? And they said, well, we're from Sacramento. So we drove to San Jose early. We're going to a matinee theater show of Broadway San Jose.

and then after the show, we're going to a Bay FC game at PayPal Park.

So that's a perfect example how someone from anywhere in Northern California or beyond

could travel to San Jose for an event, whether it be a concert or sport or other,

and spend money in our city at restaurants and stay overnight in a hotel and so forth.

That's the economic benefit that our city will realize.

And then lastly, it is clear that the city staff has worked to find balance between allowing PayPal Park to function as a concert venue while also protecting noise levels in the neighborhood.

The acoustical consultant only recommended that certain noise levels on the speakers be maintained to stay within the city's noise standard.

Those were the only recommendations of the acoustical consultant.

However, the city staff went further in their recommended conditions of approval.

As we've mentioned, they are recommending follow-up validation studies with actual concerts happening facing towards the neighborhood to ensure that the noise calculations done by Illingsworth as part of their study actually play out completely in a real-world scenario.

And in addition, the city staff is requiring sound measurements at the stadium and reporting to the city for every show.

It's an annual report, but it'll report the sound levels from every show that is conducted at PayPal Park.

So for all of these reasons, we believe that the city staff has found balance that will address the feasibility of the stadium operating and having concerts with measuring and maintaining the city noise standards for the neighborhood.

So we hope that the hearing officer will approve the permit, and we thank the community and the staff for all of their work in this discussion. Thank you so much.

Thank you. Staff, is there anything else you would like to add?

Hi, Hearing Officer. Court Hitchens, the Environmental Project Manager for this project.

I just wanted to clarify and kind of set the environmental setting under CEQA for the proposed

for CEQA is the addendum to the certified EIR. So under CEQA, the certified EIR sets the baseline

for impact analysis for addendums in the instance like this one that we're discussing now.

So in 2010, the City Council certified the EIR and formally acknowledged that concerts in the future could generate significant and unavoidable noise impacts.

At that time, the Council adopted a statement of overriding considerations, recognizing that the overall benefits of the project outweighed the significant and unavoidable impacts from construction and operation of the stadium, including to noise from future concerts.

demonstrating that the city has already accepted and approved higher levels of concert of noise than what is actually being proposed today.

The 2010 EIR modeled concert noise reaching 64 to 69 decibels at hourly averages, as well as 62 to 67 decibels daily averages.

with implementation of the current mitigation and recognizing the facts in the noise study.

Those indicate that the proposed and mitigated controls can keep noise

from concerts at or below ambient levels around 60 decibels, which is lower than what council

has already approved and accepted with their override in 2010. Therefore, the mitigation

measure in the proposed project would be would result in noise levels lower than what was already

approved with the EIR and the statement of overriding considerations. Thank you, Court.

I have one question for the applicant, Eric. One of the conditions in the permit, it is

with condition number seven, operations management plan,

subset F, community engagement and communication.

It references quarterly meetings that are held

to address resident concerns

and provide updates on scheduled concerts.

Would the applicant be open to,

in addition to giving information on the concerts

and hearing residents concerns report on any

or share any of the noise reports that the city may get

or that annual report that we are conditioned to receive,

is the applicant open to sharing that information

with them at those meetings as well?

You can go ahead.

Can you hear me?

Yes.

Okay, I'm sorry, they didn't say to unmute.

In any case, certainly we would be happy to share

the annual report that is submitted to the city with the neighborhood as part of our regular

engagement. The earthquakes, and I'm sure the neighbors would agree, the earthquakes have

consistently had an ongoing relationship with the neighborhood since the stadium was built.

and that's going to continue going forward regardless of the outcome of this proposal.

And yes, as part of those regular engagements, we can share the annual report with the neighbors

at the same time that it is submitted to the city.

Thank you, Eric.

um okay well i um i don't have any more questions for the applicant or for staff

i do want to thank the folks who joined us again today for giving us your feedback

and um you know providing the context whether you're a resident or someone you know a booster

of san jose and economic development we certainly appreciate hearing from you um i

I am sensitive to the concerns raised by the neighborhood, you know, stadiums, concert venues,

they, they, they, there is an impact. And obviously we've saw that with the 2010 EIR

and the folks calling in. What I heard was obviously concerns about the noise,

some issues raised regarding the compliance and monitoring and the accuracy of the noise study.

However, given staff's feedback, the report, the noise assessment itself, and the comments and clarifications received from the applicant, I believe that those issues are adequately addressed.

I also want the folks here to know that, you know, we are balancing these concerns about quality of life and noise with the long term goals that the city has in terms of economic development.

And, you know, making sure that our businesses thrive and that we have cultural facilities available to continue to promote this great city.

We're the largest city in the Bay Area, the third in the state, and 13th in the country.

And I think we have an opportunity here to lean into those economic development goals

that we have in our general plan.

And as staff outlined in their report, it is consistent in that sense with the general

plan.

I also want to note that the economic revenue that's generated from either the jobs at the

concert or folks who come and visit, that eventually trickles down to provide those services that all of our residents want and need.

And so there is that connection. And I think when the city council approved this in 2010, that was their sort of, as, as court discussed, the overriding statement of, um, the, uh, overriding statement of, of, um, benefits is that, you know, they saw sort of, they, they had to balance that and they made that determination that it is, um, it is something that the city wants to support.

So with that, I will go ahead and close the public hearing and approve this project item 4A PDA 11-002-02 and ER 25-039.

This concludes the director's hearing for November 19th, 2025.

Thank you for joining us.