Council Airport Committee - Regular Meeting

And since the hard staff are really up on nutrition and healthy foods, the snack tray is... Will they? We have oranges. We have oranges, but the pringles are off.

I was really hoping for some of the...

I've heard a lot about it, but never had it. Oh, my God.

Well, we might have to change that. Okay. Good evening, everybody. It is 5.31 p.m. This is Tuesday, June 23, 2026. This is Hayward City Council Infrastructure and Airport Committees. Today, we are here with THE HAYWARD AREA RECREATION DISTRICT. WANTED TO WELCOME ADRIENNE LEE BIRD, THE RECREATION AND COMMUNITY SERVICES DIRECTOR. duane taylor who's parks and facilities maintenance director and nicole espinosa raw who is the pio and the assistant to the gm uh of course we have um our director lou andrade and heart director uh sarah lamnan with us today i wanted to welcome them um so i'd like to call this meeting in order and uh miss badass if you can please take roll

Council Member Andrews present. Council Member Cyrich.

Present.

Mayor Sotis.

Present. Thank you. Thank you. Okay, press that one more time. Oh, green. Oh, yeah. Okay. So, thank you. Next is. So, you did roll call next is public comments. This is reserved for anybody who would like to make a public comment on something that is not on the agenda. I KNOW A LOT OF FOLKS ARE HERE FOR ITEM NUMBER TWO. AND I KNOW I HAVE TWO STATS. AND I KNOW MS. BARAS IS OKAY. YEAH. ALL RIGHT. OKAY. SO THIS IS FOR ANYBODY WHO WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT ON SOMETHING THAT IS NOT ON THE AGENDA. AND I DO HAVE ONE CARD HERE FROM DELORES BURKE IN THE ROOM. MS. BURKE.

YES. RIGHT HERE.

If you want to go up to the podium right there and tell us your name and where you live and go ahead.

I'm Dolores Burke and I live on Tampa Street, Hayward. And I just became aware of a data center.

Oh, hit the button.

I just became aware about the data center being constructed. over by Eagle Landing, and I'm wondering when this went through the environmental impact studies. When was this approved? This is all new to me, and I live in the neighborhood. I need to know more about it, especially the environment. Is there any answers as far as.

We can't respond to you directly right now, but we do have your card. We have your phone number and your address. And what I can do is we can have staff get back to you.

Well, that was my answer. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

I did not know that. I didn't know. I thought none of us know that. But now we do.

Diesel power. Okay. Okay, I'm joking.

And there's a lot of water that's going to be used. Thank you.

Ms. Burke. Ms. Burke. Okay, so that's the only public comment I have on item, on something that is not on the agenda. I have one other public comment from Director Lamb. I have a general. Do you have a card? Yes, I submitted a card. But this is for, is it for? General. General.

you can block the exit here that's why we're here then item two on your card director lamden go ahead thank you mr mayor good evening everybody i just wanted to flag kind of for our shared capital committees that um you know i appreciate the collaboration around la vista and we're aware that there is i'm aware that there are some um shifting Land on that property, and so you know just wanted to say, maybe this is a moment to evaluate the design and make sure that what we're doing is. stable and natural as possible, and you know if it may be too late for that to at least reiterate that the funding that came from heart is really about the park design and not his remediation. issue that may be developing. And so, you know, it's not on our agenda tonight, so we won't discuss it. But certainly if there are policy things that you might need to talk about, we'd like that as well. And just wanted to keep that collaboration going in light of the new information. Thanks.

Thank you. Okay. So you have a card or? It's on the same one. I was trying to say paper.

It's on number two and it says general companies as well. Would you like a separate take? Go ahead.

I would like a separate card, but do it after you.

It's just a quick suggestion that committee member or committee committees are where legislation and decisions really get decided on and worked on. So your government in committee is your government at work. And I think. condensing it down into a small room. It's not being telecast on YouTube. I think it just presents barriers that are unnecessary to allow people to connect with their government. This is an uncomfortable room. It usually always is when you have items on the agenda that are of public import. So just my suggestion is, like the city of San Leandro, they hold their committee meetings in their dais.

Thank you. Moving on, that is the last public comment I have. I will move on to our next item, which is the approval of minutes. And I'll see if there's any questions. If there aren't, I'll entertain a motion.

I'll move the item. I'll second.

Moved by Council Member Andrews, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Syrup. And if there are no objections, it will be unanimously passed. Thank you. Moving on to item number two, which is joint agency discussion and recommendation to city council and revised site plan for Sky West property. And I believe our public works director will kick this off. Mr. Amiri, go right ahead.

Yes. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Good evening, everyone. We are very excited to be here this afternoon. discuss the changes that we have made to Whistler Park. As you all will recall, we had a plan for Whistler Park. We dispersed the community at large and received a lot of comments about the design of the entire facility. One of the comments was that in the park, the space was too small. The other one was that the was too large. A very important comment was that the community did not like to have airport facilities in the last 10 years or so to be constructed on the property. So we went back and tried to address all of those comments. All of those comments now have been incorporated in a revised plan that we are happy to present tonight. Doug, our airport manager, is here. He has a presentation he's going to go over, and then we'll be here and happy to answer any questions. Doug, you ready? I am.

Thank you.

Committee members, good evening. We're here to provide an update on SkyWest properties. The overarching goals guiding the future use of SkyWest properties include maintaining the existing runway safety area in the middle of the property at the western end of the airport's two runways, consistent with Federal Aviation Administration's safety requirements, providing enhanced community-oriented open space, Planning for business park development that will generate FAA-required fair market value rate lease revenue to support the long-term financial viability of the airport, including its operations and maintenance expenses. And we received public comment from a tenant about cost, revenue, and land use and so forth. Next. So this is the initial site plan on this slide. The former SkyWest Golf Course, 126 acres completed in 1963, operated by hard between 1975 and 2020. After closure, airport staff assumed basic maintenance of the property, including mowing and tree maintenance. Annual fiscal impact to airport funds is $200,000 per year, which is unsustainable. Potential to become a significant source of revenue for the airport to cover required 10% of local share of FAA and Caltrans grants and meet other operational needs. An office park that could generate $1.5 million annually. And the city's general fund would benefit from additional business license fees for property tax and sales tax. As part of the planning process, city staff and consultants held three virtual public scoping workshops during July and August of 2021. This culminated in the initial site plan that you saw a second ago. Subsequently, city staff solicited extensive community feedback on the initial site plan, and we received over 700 comments. The CIAC, the Hayward Youth Commission, the San Lorenzo Village Homeowners Association, and the City Council held public meetings to review and improve the initial site plan. The following steps have been taken in response to feedback. First, we have increased the open space to a total of 50 acres. Plans for a perimeter trail that links the site and the community with the open space is included. Reduced the business park from 49 to 28 acres. We swapped the location of the open space in the business park to connect open space with the regional shoreline uses. Negotiations with HART to add open space portion to HART's master lease are underway and engage the community in planning discussions. continue discussions with the Federal Aviation Administration regarding these rates at below fair market value, and develop an implementation plan that addresses interim safety hazard measures identified by the FAA. This shows the updated plan increases open space to approximately 50 acres. That's to the left as you're looking at the slide. The perimeter trail, the northern boundary, 10 feet wide, connecting Kennedy Park to San Lorenzo Park. Again, we decreased the business park to 28 acres, the swap, which we have talked about. The swap addresses development issues such as access, utilities, environmental concerns, and sea level rise. It eliminates the aircraft shade hangers that were originally shown. IT ADDS OPEN SPACE TO THE MASTER LEASE WITH THE CITY BETWEEN CITY AND HARD. CONTINUE FAIR MARKET VALUE DISCUSSION WITH THE FAA AND WE'RE IMPLEMENTING A PLAN TO ADDRESS THE FAA SAFETY HAZARDS. SPEAKING OF THE SAFETY HAZARDS, REDUCING AND ELIMINATING FEATURES THE FAA CONSIDERS TO BE WILDLIFE ATTRACTANTS. Open water or trees that provide food or nesting sites are examples of wildlife attractants. Physical obstructions that penetrate the restricted airspace above airports or within the runway safety area must be lowered or removed. Such obstructions can be tall trees, buildings, antennas, light poles, vehicles, and so on. And the airport has worked to preserve trees in the past by crowning 56 eucalyptus trees that are there. rather than removing them. Next steps. Continue negotiations, planning, and transactional next steps with heart. Continue discussions with the FAA on the revised site plan. Present the revised site plan to San Lorenzo residents at a convenient location. Bring the revised site plan and planning approach to the full council for review and comment and prepare an implementation plan on addressing safety hazards and bringing it back to CIAC for further review. That concludes my report. I'm happy to entertain any questions or comments.

Thank you. Before I go to questions from council, what I'm going to do is I'm going to call for public comment. There are several. Do we have any public comment online?

We have two hands raised.

Let's go to public comment online first.

Hello.

Can you hear me?

Yes. Hi, sorry, I'm joining on Zoom and I wasn't sure I was able to be heard. My name is Lena Bravo. Good evening, city council members. I'm a resident of San Lorenzo and I live on Via Helena, which is in the San Lorenzo Village, right over the fence from the former SkyWest Golf Course. And I'm here this evening to share my thoughts and opinions about the proposed development and proposed expansion of the Hayward Airport. I am not in favor of any expansion. This green space is critical to wildlife and the community. Maintaining this open space is critical to endangered wildlife and is essential to our children's ability to enjoy green spaces, to run and play and explore, as well as maintaining our quality of life and property value. As it is, the noise from the private jets and the airplanes is deafening throughout the day. It's not constant, but I work at home some days, and when the private jets go over, I literally cannot... here and no one can hear me if I'm on a meeting. So to increase this noise and airport traffic would negatively impact my life, my children's life, our property values. So I just, it seems like the council is very open to revisions and working with the community. So I am very happy to hear that and see that this evening. I just wanted to share my thoughts and opinions as a resident who lives quite close to the Hayward Airport. Thank you for listening.

Thank you. And then we can go to the next caller.

Donna?

Donna, go ahead.

Donna? Donna?

Going once? Going twice. Okay, let's go to the, is there another caller?

Joel, go right ahead.

Hey there. Yeah, my name is Joel Palermo. I live in the SkyWest townhomes off of Firestone, right near the golf course. And so we just moved recently in the last year. And so kind of catching up to speed on what the plan is. I just want to be or have a clearer understanding of the area directly by the townhomes. So is the current proposition for that to be the recreational development and then the business park? was minimized or the acreage was made smaller and that's now directly alongside the airport. Is that correct?

We cannot respond to you on public comment, but just go ahead with your public comment and we will write your question down.

Sure. Yeah, I mean, I think I had something else prepared because I think the plan that I was looking at was outdated. So this clearly shows that a lot has changed. um over the last year or two um i think my public comment would just be similar to the previous which is um really would like to preserve as much of this land as possible as either recreational or parkland i think it is already clear that hayward has a limited amount of that currently. And I think it would be a shame to lose more of that land that could be utilized for recreational. So that's all I wanted to say. Thank you. Thank you.

Yes. And Donna raised her hand up again, but I'm going to go to the next one.

Yeah.

It is going to be so...

Hello, my name is Sophie. I live in the SkyWest neighborhood. I'm just here as well as we have heard opos, that development that kind of goes over. I as well have the same issue with the planes and I hear them at night. Sometimes they're very, very loud. They wake us up. But I think more so the issue that I have is knowing that Hayward needs more space. There's so many children that I see. We live right next to the middle school. There's so many children after school that I see that don't really have a place to go. And their only other place to go is they have to go spend money. They have to go maybe look at their iPad or there's not really open space. The park, I think, is a fantastic place for them to go and have time to hang out with friends, to be safe, to enjoy actually disconnecting and not growing up just so connected to what it is looking at their iPads. I as well agree that with the fact that we are a city, we are not in the business of being a retail managers. We're not in the business of going on and figuring out what do we need to do with this land and managing a business on it. We need to be using this land for our community. Right now, a lot of us are just thinking, what do we have and what spaces do we have for everybody to spend time? And I see that, especially on weekends, like Kennedy Park gets so busy and so packed. And I love seeing it. I love seeing our community come together. It's fantastic. And I can tell you that I've seen a lot of families show up the day and then they have to go away because they didn't know that they needed to reserve that. That having more land like this, especially in this backyard connected to Kennedy, would be fantastic for them to have. So I do really hope that you guys think about that. Really, really think that who really is benefiting. And it's us, our community, who will benefit. the most from a commercial development. The only people who benefit from a commercial development are not the people who live next to it. They're people who are coming from outer, out of town. And thank you. And I hope to work with you guys on this.

Thank you.

We're going to go back to Donald too.

Donald, go ahead.

Hi, it's Dona Wessels here. And my apologies for not responding earlier. I didn't realize I was on a system that didn't have a microphone. My first experience with this project happened this past Sunday where I got invited to go on a walk around the entire area. And I must say, I was stunned by what I saw there. It was a tremendous resource, profound. And I came away with a couple of thoughts about it. The biggest is, that I think we need to have a community outreach to poll the community about what it is they would really like to have. Probably there needs to be some seed money put forward to try to find out where we can actually move to to develop something. I mean, the pieces that come together off the top of my head are that there's likely a collaboration between East Bay Mudd and HUD and possibly... the park system to be able to do a connection between the bay and the trails that lead over to the 580 miles of trails that can be accessed out in Cole Canyon. Having bridges that allow wildlife to move across very traffic-y areas would be fantastic. I just think that there's another view that is a long-range view of the future that needs to be embraced here. And I would like to see that considered before any other development is done on the property. For example, when I read through a great deal of the plan today, it was pretty clear that there are other ways to manage the hazard of the airport strip and how it's ending and starting. You know, if there's enough collective money put towards this project for the community, an abutment can be made and the building doesn't need to be taken down. There are other, especially not the trees. There are lots of other ways to approach this. But I think until, you know, a greater community development package is looked at, we'll only be addressing the needs of a few who want to make money on the property rather than the needs of the many who could access that entire area and have it completely change the outlook and view of a community because they're nourished by their their nature environment so that's what i'd like to share is there anyone else got it

Hello.

Em, go ahead.

Hi, my name is Emily Panico and I live on Via El Cerro, which is very close to your airport safety area, which was not defined, or at least I could not find it in your plans. When I Googled it, it looks like that's for airplanes that go off the runway or out of control. And I have concerns about that being that I'm very close to that area on the other side of it. I've lived in this community now for 14 years. I bought knowing that there was an airport there. However, it was very small at the time. We did not have all these Learjets coming in and out of that airport. That airport has since expanded greatly. I do not think that we need to further expand that airport. And I would like to know what the safety measures are right now for that airport. The golf course has been a big buffer. So it should have something now on the other side of that golf course. So why do we need this area in question, this airport safety area at the end of what looks like a runway? Thank you.

Thank you.

Candy.

Andy.

Hi, my name is Candy Hilder. I am the board president of SkyWest Townhomes. We just recently saw this new idea of the retail space right behind our townhomes. So my biggest question, and obviously I know this isn't for you to answer right now, but it's for me just to voice my opinion, is the concern and safety of the 140 units that live here at SkyWest Townhomes. So our big concern, obviously we have all, we all purchased with the idea that this was a golf course and that changed. I grew up in San Lorenzo against the golf course. So I've always had this open space here and I've always either utilized it to walk in the evenings and seeing all the wildlife that has happened and whether it be the turtles in the ponds or the monarch butterflies throughout this open space that has happened now. I mean, obviously it was always here as a golf course, and now it has been this, you know, left alone space these last six years. Obviously we want to do something. We want to work with the city with what they are going to do. But my concern is, If you start building in our back fences, we have very low four-foot fences that are up against this golf course. What is the plan as far as security for us if this does get passed to have a retail space? Is there going to be a buffer between our property line and where you're going to start building? Is the height of the buildings not going to be allowed to be higher than our buildings? Therefore, our view or at least... the area that we are in continues to stay safe as far as being able to exit the back of our complex if necessary. If there's a fire, we have only one way in and one way out. And I think The biggest concern here for, like I said, there's 140 units here, 140 families that live in this complex, is are we going to be safe? Are we going to be secured, whether it's going to be from the public or from the building? And then also, if there is an emergency in here, will we be able to exit out the back of our complex, which we've always been able to in case of a big fire or something? So those are my concerns. Thank you.

Thank you. Okay. Thank you. Now, I do have plenty of cards here. And, you know, I just want to encourage everyone to be concise and precise. Are those different words? Okay. Anyways, I appreciate that. And, you know, I'll spare everyone the lengthy comment that I usually make during public comment at the larger council meetings. But, you know, I do want to say this. We have received many of the emails. We know passions are high. We understand that this golf course means a lot to a lot of people. And we get it. But we're also human. And so if you can please be respectful, be professional. We're listening and we're taking everything into consideration. And, you know, and as respectful as you are to us, we will be respectful to all of you, too. So I appreciate that. Our first commenter is Cheryl. Is there Murphy? Sure. Welcome.

The green light is on. Can you hear me? Yes. Okay. Well, I'm going to be a bit redundant because I really support all the previous comments. But my name is Cheryl. My husband and I are longtime residents of the Winton Grove neighborhood of Hayward, which is adjacent from the airport. And it's walking distance, more or less, from SkyWest. We have been enjoying the beauty of SkyWest ever since the airport closed and actually been involved there a few times. The contrast between those two properties could not be more stark. One is filled with industrial buildings, including Jensen Pavement. The other is 126 acres of beautiful open space that is an oasis and intensely urban area. I'm a proud supporter of Save SkyWest and the goal to protect all of SkyWest as open space for Hayward. And I think that the comments that we've heard already and the number of people that are here absolutely confirm the fact that no one in the city of Hayward, no resident, they're saying, we want an expansion of the airport. No one is saying that. Only the airport is saying that. That's very clear. So you paid a consultant back in 2021 to find out what people wanted, and they said, we want open space and recreation, not an expansion of the airport. The goals of the Hayward Looking Forward 2040 plan include environmental leadership, reducing greenhouse emissions, and environmental justice. This plan for SkyWest is the opposite. People in our neighborhood already suffer from the noise and the air pollution generated by the airport. And no one is happy about that. We don't want more private jets spewing out fuel. And I don't need to say it, but jet fuel is a major source of pollution. It emits harmful greenhouse gases and all the rest. It would be interesting to know if respiratory illnesses, especially among children, have increased in Hayward since the increase, the expansion of the airport. So the expansion of the airport is unacceptable in any form. So here's my question for you, and if the entire city council was here, I want them to answer as well. Will you be remembered as the city council who were bold enough to be environmental and humane leaders, who protected a beautiful open space for today and for generations to come? who helped mitigate climate change and protected habitat for endangered species? Or will you be remembered as the city council that brought more private jets, more air pollution, noise pollution, more asphalt and concrete, and who whipped out trees and collaborated in killing California native turtles? Either way, I can promise you that citizens like myself and my neighbors will not forget how you proceed, especially when we go to vote. You can follow the path of politicians who serve the developers of whatever kind, the corporations and the wealthy, or you can be elected officials who keep their promises to serve the people.

Our next speaker is Sandra Frost.

My name is Sandra Frost. I'm a resident of South Hayward. I can't articulate any better what's already been said here. I came to speak about the wildlife in SkyWest. We were really shocked to learn that the turtle pond was allowed to go completely dry, completely dry. And what happens when they lose the water is they migrate to more water. And the closest water is like the ditch that's next to the roadway in the airport. And we have actually discovered a squashed turtle that got hit by a vehicle. And it's just very sad, very sad. And the other pond is going towards San Lorenzo Park, where the marshland is. But it's the track out there. And we haven't been able to spot any turtles out that direction. What they're going to do is burrow in the mud to stay cool and try and stay alive. They go into a period of senescence. But if the pond dries out, they get trapped in the mud and they can't escape. And these turtles are precious. They're precious. It was an uncontaminated population in SkyWest. We've been monitoring the turtles at San Lorenzo Park. And pet owners are releasing their, what is it, red-eared spider turtles, the pet turtles. like an enemy to the native Western pond turtles. So Sky West is just a really precious place. And like my colleague said here, if it's gone, it's gone. We can't get it back. And the other thing I wanted to speak to just really briefly is that I was able to do butterfly camp with the Xerces Society. And not only is there one major colony in that eucalyptus grove that's in the path of the development plan. We located a second one that was really significant in the promenade by the apartment buildings, which was the other part that was going to be developed. And I want to say just really quickly, I think the plan is bad. We feel like the property needs to be maintained sufficiently, no matter what the cost. It needs to be kept mowed. The ponds need to be kept filled. And that eucalyptus grove that houses the overwintering monarchs need to be preserved at all costs. I think that's all I need to say. Thanks for listening. Oh, there was one more thing. I've got 17 seconds. I'm sorry. We're asking that you don't vote tonight on moving this forward. It sounded like the community assessment was done during COVID-19.

Yeah.

Oh, I didn't have awareness of it at that time. I think it needs to be open to the public one more time and get an authentic community response on this. Thank you.

Randy one.

Hello.

I'm Randy Wagi. I live in San Lorenzo. I went to SkyWest all the time during the pandemic. I think it's great that Hayward Rec is working with the city of Hayward and the Hayward Airport to try and figure out the recreation area. I will say I'm kind of a little disappointed. It feels like the clubhouse should be included in that recreation area. It doesn't make any sense to me. Mimi has said, and we've checked the maps, and from what we can tell, the clubhouse is not in the safety zone. So the fact that you would destroy the clubhouse, smash it down, does not make any sense to me whatsoever. It should really be a community center and somewhere once we get the park going where people would have weddings or maybe you would eat there at another restaurant. So please do not destroy the clubhouse. That's why this plan right now seems kind of ludicrous. It really should include the clubhouse and the rec area. I will also say I love the ponds. I love the turtles. You know, they really should be maintained. I've said that before. Whatever happens there, we should really keep those two ponds. It doesn't make sense. And then, you know, and recently we're having data centers come into Hayward. We're having a power plant here. So you would think, you know, at the very least as mitigation that we should really keep the whole thing as open space. It just makes sense to me, especially since I live in San Lorenzo, and there are tons of jets that go over that are pretty loud. Not all the time, but it's kind of annoying. So it would be really nice for future generations to have open space in a park, connecting it from San Lorenzo Community Park to Kennedy. It's going to help so many other people, like walking, your mental health. Anyway, thank you so much. Good meeting.

Thank you.

Is it Jane Smith?

Yeah. I do not like to do this.

I don't want to speak in public.

We don't live in a closed environment. So whatever we do, whatever it is, it's going to affect us. ripple out. I'll try to be brief. In 2019, I started walking there. It was lovely and peaceful. And then COVID came along and A lot of the community used to use via Alameda to go in, even though that was not a legitimate way to go in. A lot of the community went in. Or the San Lorenzo, the community center there. I mean, I know the community was... taking parts of the fence down, but we need to reopen some of these spaces and the places to go in and not just put beautiful, no trespassing signs up because what you have, and I've worked at East Bay Regional Park before, And the parks know that when you close off an area like that, you're going to have animalism. And that's exactly what's happening. So in 2019, when I walked through there, the clubhouse was perfectly fine. Glass, everything was up. And when the public was able to go in and out and access it, they were looking and seeing. In fact, it was the homeless camp that was there that East Bay Regional Park cleared up. quite some time ago was alerted to Hayward or whatever they alert the homeless camp, big homeless camp there. And that was cleaned up and that was part of the public going in there and seeing this. You wouldn't have a fire. You wouldn't have little things going on and vagrant stuff happening if you were let the public in. and let them walk and let them use the trail. So I know you might think this is a safety issue, but mainly it's the community that uses this space. And I live around Sky West. So I know that's not what I'm supposed to say. Anyways, there seems to be a lot going on in Wynton Avenue that the airport, I know, is not losing money. put more industrial over there where there already is industrial. And I just think you can do something special with this space, and it can be really something for future generations. And I don't know, Alana, if you know about rewilding, but all over the world, they're taking sections and letting it rewild. Yes, you have to maintain it a little bit, But you have insects coming back. I've seen so much wildlife there at SkyWest. So climate change is here. And I think another thing I wanted to point out with SkyWest is in the back when we had those, oh shoot, the atmospheric rivers, SkyWest absorbed a lot of the water. So when you get rid of that, you have runoff.

Thank you. Our next speaker is, is it Augustina Noble?

Yes, that's me.

Hello, my name is Augustina Noble. I live adjacent to Sky West. I live in the Sky West town halls. My property is adjacent to what was Sky West Golf Course. I would like to see this open space. My reason for being here is to make sure that the community see this space, know that we're here, and know that we want to continue to have an open space at Sky West Golf Course. I've been a homeowner in Hayward. I work in Hayward. And I also breathe the dirty air at the airport. And I say that to say that it's not a good thing to be breathing the air, but when you bring in more traffic and more private jets into the little space, then guess what? We continue to breathe that dirty air and our health continues to decline. So with that being said, the open space is the best space to have when you're trying to stay healthy. And I do not want to see anything in my backyard because my property is right out back the work of that right onto the golf course. And that was one of the reasons why I purchased the property, because I thought I was going to be playing golf. But here it is. I'm not playing golf. I'm trying to breathe. Thank you for listening.

Our next speaker is, is it Michael Bells? Yep.

Hi, my name is Michael Bellis, a established townhomes owner, just bought there a year ago. Looking at the revised site plan, I'm concerned, as some others have expressed, with having development behind my house. So I had a suggestion, I'm sure this would work, which is to move the development section to the southern part where it's more recreational use. um keep it at 28 acres so it'd be a swap and that would maintain recreational use behind the HOA area and some amount 22 acres recreational use on the northern part of it behind some points of what's currently marking so just a suggestion thank you and thank you for being so short

um next speaker is lana cross hello thank you for having me here thank you council members and other folks i'm a san lorenzo resident born in san lorenzo grew up there lived there many years left went to san francisco came back and i'm now a homeowner i live on via la jolla and i want to thank you mayor for responding to my email I sent regarding the flights that goes through at like midnight. I don't think I've sent a screenshot to you when you were responsive and said you'd have your team look at it, which was fantastic. Concerns tonight are really around the San Lorenzo, like knowledge that this is going on. People in the community are unaware. I've reached out to our council member. Is there anyone from Alameda County here tonight? No, they don't join these meetings. Anyways, maybe they're listening. It seems like they're really not engaging in this. I've been trying to set a meeting with them and it's gone unanswered to make sure that this is brought up on newsletters and just to engage the San Lorenzo community. The jet traffic has significantly increased specifically over the last five years since I've been a homeowner there, but a lot more than when I grew up in San Lorenzo. My grandma lived in that neighborhood, so I'm very familiar with it. So residents are aware there is an app called Flight Radar 24. where you can trap the planes that are flying over So flight radar 24, you can see where the plane is. It shows the time. You can screenshot it. And I'm trying to track like how often they're flying over in the middle of the night, 2 in the morning, 7 a.m., like times that they're not specifically supposed to fly over. But it is happening. It is increased. And I want to make sure that the San Lorenzo community is aware that are the jet emissions, the loss of property values, that all of that is also taken into account as a part of the overall study, which I don't know if it has been to date. So that's my comments tonight and thank you for the time. Thank you.

Mr. Bruce King.

Hi, Bruce King with Friends of St. Lorenzo Creek. It's good news that HART has decided to proceed with the western area and the community looks forward to providing input on that. What's being shown tonight to me seems a broad general land use proposal. It's an update report. It doesn't seem like as much of a plan, at least in terms of what the community can see as a document. So I'm not sure what the action is for that, given that it seems to be just a presentation. The problems I see with the eastern portion where the industrial park is proposed, there's a growth of identified eucalyptus trees that are overwintering habitat from monarch butterflies. These populations are in decline and everyone's trying to keep the monarchs going, the western populations. It also has a pond that's habitat for Western pond turtles that are California's species of concern and proposed by the federal EPA as listed as threatened species. And we're allowing the pond to dry up and now we're proposing to build an industrial park on top of it. To me, the airport doesn't have a great record of providing environmental enhancements related to the airport. We've got Sulphur Creek that runs right along and through the middle of the airport. And I understand we need to underground the sections on the runway for the safety of the airplanes. So there goes the section of creek. We have a section of creek that runs along the flight control tower, which is currently in waterboard and at the notice of violation against because it was supposed to be a mitigation site for other creeks that the city of Hayward buried. And that was supposed to be the mitigation site. So now the city of Bayward is looking for an alternative mitigation site for that mitigation site, which we had to cut down, apparently cut down the willows for the safety of the airports and the airplanes. So I guess my comment is the airport is not exactly showing that it's improving the environment In any way. I mean, what's the, even in this latest plan, you know, even if we can't have trees, you know, what's the landscape look like where we provide habitat? It doesn't have to be trees for critters. And it doesn't have to be, you know, something that attracts birds necessarily. But there's other kind of critters. So I'm kind of concerned that we're proposing development in faith that's going to help. people who fly airplanes who don't necessarily live in the community.

Thank you.

Next question, Tyler Dragoni.

So open space mitigation for current airport operations. So SkyWest is currently mitigating the sound and the traffic and all of the associated use of the airport as it is now. So taking away any part of it, we thoroughly reject. I think it's not feasible to realistically say you're following your plans that the city council has passed, And you should stick to those plans. I guess that's my point. In a word, this plan, like Bruce alluded to, this is half baked. It's not really, it doesn't provide us any actual tangible real timelines or lease numbers, or it's just so general that I'm also of the idea that how can this actually be an action item? It should be more of a workshop with heart maybe a couple of times and we do need to pull the community like was done in the middle of COVID. So, But we want HAARP to maintain and manage the entire property until the airport actually has a actual fully tangible plan. HAARP should have been begged to continue to maintain SkyWest. not given an ultimatum. Since hard has exited the picture, the city has taken over maintenance, and the situation right now has turned catastrophic. The formerly hard-maintained pond ecosystem is dying, the pumps are broken, turtles are dying. And the airport, when it assumed responsibility for the lease expiration, needs to find the money to rectify that situation. When you take over a responsibility, you have to take over that responsibility. You can't just ignore it. Community members did not choose to let the lease expire. When negotiations failed, the airport assumed that responsibility. The airport is responsible for a California native species and its ecosystem being illegally taken by the city of Hayward from the citizens of California. We believe it's an illegal violation of the law. All three of you have immense, immense civic pride. And we know that a way to care for yourself, to have self-respect for your own family, friends, students, and community members is that you care for your environment. It's one of the reasons why we don't accept littering or illegal dumping. Trashing your neighborhood isn't cool. Killing turtles by smashing them or their ecosystem is derelict behavior. I truly believe that the three of you and the four, including Mr. McNeely, are better, more upstanding individuals and representatives who would not let California's only native turtle fry and be smashed in the hot sun. Show yourself the self-respect and civic pride that you deserve.

Your time is up. Right there. Pull apart.

Daisy Nassau. City Council members and committee members, thank you so much for your time tonight.

My name is Daisy Maction, a lifelong resident and a founder with Stack Run Club. Also shout out from this past weekend to the organizers of the event for Juneteenth and 5K. Our club provides wellness runs and walks that highlights towards trails and open spaces for the community. Stack Run Club has hosted a community run and walk event actually at SkyWest Open Space with other run clubs around the area. So by adopting plans that essentially reduces these open spaces, we are not only harming the land and animals that inhabit it, but a lot of third space community offerings that we host ourselves for other neighbors. Our run club depends on open space and environmental trails and parks to allow the community to be in relation for the land, body, and hayward. We support preserving the clubhouse and ensuring that it remains part of the revised plans. We also support keeping the two monarch butterfly groves in SkyWest as the new plan only saves one of them. And again, thank you for your time.

Thank you. Our next speaker is Anita Wah. Did I say that right?

Yes, I have a very short request. I'm disabled and I've tried to walk at SkyWest and it's very difficult. But the main gate is blocked and I have a friend who has an electric scooter, but she can't get it through for me. And I tried to walk that beautiful PATH AND I CAN'T. SO I'M ASKING THAT THE GATE IS OPEN AT THE MAIN ENTRANCE SO THAT PEOPLE IN WHEELCHAIRS AND ELECTRIC SCOOTERS CAN ACCESS THE BEAUTY ALONG WITH NON-DISABLED PEOPLE. THANK YOU.

Good evening. My name is Marcy Timberman. I am a resident of Hayward. I've lived here, amazingly enough, almost 25 years. My husband has lived here 80 years. He was born in the Hayward Hospital on A Street. And I know there are quite a few people in the community that still can make that claim. When I first moved here, I was rather actually reluctant to move to Hayward because it seemed like it was in a very sleepy state, that things were not happening that seemed to me to be very obvious to improve the lives, the health, and the enjoyment of our fellow citizens. One of the places that I started going was to Sky West. We used to go there for breakfast. I don't play golf, but I used to be a great walker around golf courses because my former husband did. I didn't want to play golf. I just wanted to take in the beauty and the serene environment that most golf courses have. If you've never walked around SkyWest, I suggest that you take a little walk. How many people have walked? There are a whole lot of you that have done. So I would suggest Before any decisions are made before any plans are made that you fully investigated personally the kinds of benefits that this type of open space offers to the Community. Because we don't have a lot of room for public areas in this Community, we have the new heritage park, which is attracting a lot of of interest people go there to sit to talk to either lunch. have a little bit of room around them. I would say that one of the things that is most important about this property is that it allows this city to breathe. We pride ourselves as being an harbor city. This is an enormous harbor, which will give us good health and beauty. If we can manage to turn it into something that is beneficial for our citizens. I do not see any airplane owners showing up to talk about this. I have been, I have, I come from an airplane family. My specialty is doing the fabric. Everybody in my family flies. But I do not want to fly over SkyWest. I want to sit in SkyWest. I want to walk in SkyWest. I want to enjoy the wildlife in SkyWest. Please consider having additional input brought into the community to see what people want here, what benefits then. What happens now is that we live with space between our houses three or four feet. You could barely fit a person walking through there. We need this space. Thank you very much.

Alan Fishman.

Good evening. I'm Alan Fishman. All of SkyWest property should be kept as open space. Hayward presently has one-third acres of open space per 1,000 people. The minimum should be three acres per 1,000 people. This is in Hayward's general plan and their own guiding principles. Climate change is here. We spend all of our lives, often governments spend their lives denying that climate change is happening, but we know climate change is here. And I guess from the count that I understand, 500 trees will be taken down with this plan that has been proposed. And this is all for the wealthy to fly over SkyWest with their jets and planes. Lastly, it's an excellent resource for public school, environmental education, restoration, and learning about climate change. I'm now a retired teacher, but I taught 25 years at San Lorenzo High School.

One of the courses I taught was an environmentally shift course.

It's amazing the power of students to effectively restore of their environment. And it has been a valuable experience to see how much they can do. So that's it. Thank you.

Thank you.

Next speaker is Cameron Rodgers or Nodgers? Rodgers? I think it's terrible.

Hi, my name is Kim and I've lived in Hayward since 2011. Let me give a little bit different flavor to my friends in the community. Usually the environment and economics are fully synonymous. Here in Hayward, our tax base is 66% homeowners being taxed as 30 or 40% business. Assuming that our economic interests are building more homes and also increasing the value of people's homes who live here, that would help our tax base, that would help our business. It's not entirely clear to me if private jet owners, who I know a couple, will spend a darn cent in Hayward in their entire lives. Data center, kind of same, right? That's my business hat. Put on my environmental hat. I've been helping count the monarch butterflies since 2016 for the Directive Society, both on both sides of this development. The last count was 516 overwintered at this development last winter. There are now 12,260 that we have counted. It's down from a high of 20 million. Uh, this was the third lowest we've seen in history. So there are about 112,000 jet planes in and out of Hayward Miss airport there. And I think private as well. Uh, a lot of planes, not just jets. There are 10 times less than the entire species that we have counted the monarchs. So both sides, economically, these people will not give you anything. Um, And the monarch will give you a lot. And I would love to see open AI not live as long as the monarch monarch. So again, I think it's your best interest economically as well as people to try and support the monarch monarch.

Is it Esther, Joseph?

Yes, correct. Good evening. My full name is Esther Elizabeth Taylor-Joseph. I just learned about the situation at SkyWest recently. I have an uncle that lived on Via Hermosa. I have a sister, excuse me, reverse that. My sister lived on Via Catherine. My uncle lived on Via Hermosa. They are not aware of this as well. So it sounds like even the residents of San Lorenzo are not aware. Someone mentioned earlier that Thelmia County should be aware, because whatever happens here in Hayward affects not only the county, but actually the entire state. Also, I have a cousin that used to live here in San Lorenzo, but he has moved to Nevada. And he used to be an airplane pilot, excuse me, small jet pilot. And he is also not aware of what's happening here in Hayworth. So I think before you continue, you need to get the word out further. One thing I have not heard anyone mention so far tonight, but I think is very important, is the possible contamination of soil from the previous year. Roundup use and fertilizer use of the golf course. So if you're planning on building a housing, that would have to be addressed. Also, the water level, a couple of people have touched upon it. I know the city of Hayward already has plans to raise certain structures that are already in flood plans, talking about the Hayward Interpretive Center. So that would be something that needs to be considered for development. You have space that could be developed for housing, shops, businesses. Instead of at the Spy West facility, how about the old Sears development that's out in the shopping center already that should be... We've talked about species that are in the area that need to be protected. I'm all in favor of that. And if you take away just one aspect of their development, it affects generations in the future for all the nations, not just here in the United States, who are on the migratory route. So please do not vote on this tonight. Consider it. Expand your research for the EPA. And I appreciate your time.

Thank you.

Thank you. That was my last public comment card. So I will close public comments. And I will come back to, I saw your card, but your card has, it's not on the agendized item. And I've already gone through public comment. So I'm going to move on to council questions and director's questions on this item.

So just so you know, I made a phone call here a half hour before and was told I could come in and do this talk, but okay.

Thank you.

I wouldn't have come here if not for that.

So I will start with hard. And either Mr. Andrade or Mr. Lambden can start. Start with, do you want to go ahead?

I've heard the comment and I know, I've heard all the comments and I hear the passion and everything. But just to give us Hart's position, this is a land use decision, and Hart is not in the land use business per se. Thank you. Thank you for that. And so the question that Hart, that they asked Hart is, if we had a third offered to you, could you handle that as a park or a centralized area? And, you know, after some, you know, research, and then staff, We think we can, and I think there are some significant opportunities for grants for stormwater retention and also trails and maybe some off-site mitigation that could really enhance that area. I see it as a naturalized park because it's not going to be a strictly native thing without eucalyptus trees, but I can see it could enhance the wildlife values and so on. So I think we can handle it. I think also it has some great opportunities to connect the park with the existing San Lorenzo Community Park and also a trail system that would go towards Hesperian and Kennedy Park. So kids wouldn't have to walk or ride or adults could ride and walk. It's a great opportunity for that. So from Kennedy to San Lorenzo. So it really has some great upper values. Any other expansion, if the whole land was given to us, we would accept it, I suppose, but we'd have to do some real soul searching to pay for it. One of the things is, you know, we wouldn't be able to manage this if this was, if it was a rent or a fee, a lease to it, or, you know, we had to buy it in April, we don't have the funds for that. But if it was offered as, you know, as, you know, a zero lease, you know, a dollar a year lease, we could handle it. And we would need to have it for, you know, a long-term lease, like a 40-year lease or something, you know, like that. So any investments would be, you know, and um i think it's a great it's a great site uh the west the western and the whole site is great but i mean the western and if we're talking about that the way this was presented i think there's some great opportunities there and uh um you know it's just a great site so um and then i hope city uh listen to everyone and you know makes a final decision and we'll be we'll be there to take up the pieces as it were so thank you thank you

So, thank you. I appreciate everybody's comments and certainly I've been hearing about SkyWest and the community's desire for that many, many years now. And I appreciate that ongoing public input was reflected in your plan and we all know and continue to listen, of course. I think that So I think before this goes to council, before we update the MAU, there's several outstanding questions in my mind. Certainly, as Director Andrade said, we are open. We'd be literally at the table if we weren't interested in taking on SkyWest. But there's some profound questions, some of which my colleague leaned into. This question of the land lease. It does seem that there are opportunities. I mean, the land, both that land and Kennedy Park are currently zoned airport recreation. Kennedy Park, we pay no land lease for. So, you know, I think there's some precedent there. The fire station is on airport property, but it's an in-kind contribution to the airport. I don't know if the police department, when they were using airport property, contributed or not. But, you know, I think there's some precedent there that we can really work with to try and figure out how to have this be community land at a price that's affordable. So that's the biggest question. The water infrastructure is another question. You know, you control the water as the city. Right now, the water that is feeding those turtles is reclaimed water. And that infrastructure through EFDA is important. outdated and needed to be replaced anyway. And so what does ongoing irrigation look like even in a natural space? How do we, you know, what does that look like? And what are the costs associated with that? How do we as fellow public agencies work together to have that be an affordable thing? You're looking at $250,000 a year of maintenance. It's probably about, and I defer to the team here, about what ours would cost too. And then we have no revenue new revenue stream for that. So, you know, I think we need to think about that. And then we need to think about some of the existing situations, right? The deferred maintenance, the environmental protection questions, right? What is the requirements around the butterflies? How do we protect them? We know that birds and butterflies are in trouble these days. And so how do we protect them, et cetera? So, you know, I don't want to take forever to move this into, you know, from city to heart. But I also want to have those answers before we go to the MOU stage, before it goes to a council vote, those kinds of things. I think, you know, our staffs are working together well. I urge that to continue and to try and get those questions. And then in terms of the site itself, personally, just speaking for me, I do think that keeping the whole space as open space is, yeah, I have heard that really clearly from the community. I know you have too. And I think, you know, there are at least two vacant properties that are possible for industrial. I am a proponent of the airport. You know, I applauded or I was happy to see The new commercial development that's happened is fixed space things. And I do know that that has created more traffic to our neighborhood. But that is beneficial. And that the commercial spaces that come in do create local jobs, do create local taxes, which pay for local services and so on. So there is benefit to the airport. And there are two big parcels that are currently vacant. And I'd love to see those developed and keep SkyWest. Thank you.

Therefore, Tim, sorry. Thank you. Before I make my comments, I'm wondering if staff maybe wanted to address some of the questions that Director Landon brought forward. So that, well, I guess I just wanted an opportunity for staff to respond to what they wanted to respond to before I gave my questions.

Why don't we, is there like a specific, are you asking for her questions in specific?

I guess the question about specifically would be a good place to start. Maybe I can ask a conscious question.

Basically, what we have provided here and presented to you is a balance, as I understand it, based on the comments that we received from the community. It's a balance between providing open space. There was a conversation, there was a comment about Kennedy Park and how nice and large it is. The open space that we are providing here as part of this compromise is 50 acres. Kennedy Park is 14. So it's like three and a half times the size of Kennedy Park. Maybe on the map here, it doesn't show. but it is a very large place. I understand that.

I want to first focus on Director Landon's questions, though, around the land lease, for example. Are we able to negotiate a land lease that's affordable, similar to the lease that they had before?

As of late, in 2024, there was a piece of legislation that allows us to have some competencies related to the use of airport land for recreational purposes. I know for a fact that it cannot be free, but it can be something that we negotiate. For instance, the benefits that a park can bring to the land, to the property, that can be taken into account when we set the rate for the lease. That is one way that we can compromise and come up with something that is workable for everyone. But they cannot be free. I know they cannot be zero.

Great, thank you. And then, you know, we've heard about the ponds and the turtles, and I think tied to Director Lin's question around water infrastructure, give me a run through of the state of the water infrastructure. And, you know, if Hart or any partner were to take that over, what would it look like for us or them to have to retrofit, rehabilitate it? From my understanding, our water main structure there?

So, since decades ago, the water that came to the Scarface property came from Oraloma Sanitary District secondary treated effluent. That is only acceptable for use by golf courses because the idea is that Golfers don't touch, you know, don't play on, you know, on the ground, in the grass. And that water is okay. It is not good for, you know, park purposes. Besides, the infrastructure that brings that water to the park is all dilapidated. The pump is broken. The generator is not working. We have to rent the generator. And East Bay Discharges Authority is begging the city to please stop this and stop monitoring those points. But we are doing that for now.

I understand. If there's a question of irrigation, let's say that park takes over the park, we're trying to figure out how to maintain it. How then would we supply the park with water?

Even if the park gets water, it would be drinking water that is used for it. or tertiary treated recycled water, which we don't have right now to be used.

Would that rely on the pre-existing broken infrastructure or is there infrastructure already out there that we would be able to leverage? I'm trying to understand how we would operate using that system for a new beast versus the one that's not currently operational.

So water system is already available near the park in the residential area and other places. we do not need to extend the drinking water infrastructure to the park.

And so I guess to go back to Director Landon's question then, would there be this hidden expense or deferred maintenance around the water system that they would have to be aware of? Or are you saying that that wouldn't be an issue?

Part of our negotiations to decide where the water comes from, but the cost is what the infrastructure needed. Okay, understood.

I just want to also, it will depend on the design of the park, because there are different types of parks. amounts of water, so depending on what the park wants to do and how they want to design it, that could influence the use of water.

Okay, understood. And then, you know, in some of this discussion, and I just want to express my appreciation that Hart has come to the table, in some of this conversation, there's also been interest in having East Bay Regional play a role, and I heard that there is also opportunity to collaborate with East Bay Regional down the line, but have we had a chance to talk with East Bay Regional at all, and how was that conversation?

Yeah, I did reach out to East Bay Regional Park District, talked to their Interim general manager several months ago now. I think they have a vast amount of acreage and a lot of acquisitions they've had. And so I think they were excited to hear that Heart was interested in and that there'd be kind of a focus on a local provider. They were certainly interested in collaborating on connections and other things and think it's a great resource. But I think at this time, If HARD's interested, which it sounds like they are, we can have those further conversations, and that would make more sense at this point.

Okay, great. And there's opportunities for East Bay Regional to partner with HARD, even if HARD was the leaseholder. Is that what I'm hearing?

Yeah, I think they're very interested in making sure there are connections and that there's collaboration, yes.

Okay, thank you. And then... You know there's a lot of questions that still remain about the airport safety area, and I think a lot of the comments were talking about a concern of. This welcoming and more air traffic or this encroaching closer to the neighborhoods from my understanding that the airport safety zone is meant to be an additional buffer it's not extending the runway or. True okay so just to be clear it's not like anything in the airport is moving closer to the homes it's just a buffer and then. we actually removed plans for additional hangers that would have got closer to the homes from the previous version. Is that correct? Right. Okay. I just wanted to really hear about that. Okay. So here's just some like initial thoughts. I'm curious to hear what my colleagues in here think too, but I think I first just want to start off by acknowledging all the residents, the activists and the organizers for getting, the city to this point i know that there's some dissatisfaction with this plan we're going to hash it out here tonight but the fact that we're even looking at a new map is because of your consistency the pressure that you brought your comments and so i don't want to discourage that and i imagine if we don't make a good decision tonight we will have to be in the council chambers next time because this is i think the fullest we've seen a committee meeting before um so i just wanted to acknowledge the work that's gone into having this discussion and you being all part of that um Why this plan is being presented is really important. I think many of you are aware that hard with managing this property in the golf course for 45 years. And over the last six years, the city has been trying to figure out how to maintain it itself. And we haven't been doing the best job of that, which is why I think we're engaging in this conversation again. We as a city are navigating a very difficult deficit ourselves, and I think we are all invested in saving as much of SkyWest as we can, and we're working that out here. And so I think the tightrope that I'm trying to walk is I don't want to slow down our conversations with hard when we have somebody that's willing to help us maintain and take on close to half of the property. And so I think what I want to figure out tonight is how we might possibly be able to move forward with at least that portion of it so we can continue conversations with hard and save at least half of SkyWest to begin with. It does sound like there needs to be more input on the other portions from the safety zone to the development. I'm very sympathetic to the comment that the last real assessment we did was in 2021 and we're five years from that and there's a lot more engagement. I think that it would behoove us to do that. That being said, when you presented a timeline earlier, there are multiple instances where we can get input. I guess I'm wondering, can we build in some additional feedback session there before anything arrives to the full council? Or can we advance at least the western portion to the council and develop a community engagement process before bringing the other half to the council? That's one question. The second question I want to raise here, or the second point I want to make to the community is, even though it says development on the right side, there's nobody currently planned. There's no interest. So even if this power moved forward, there would be multiple opportunities down the line for any potential development to have to come before the planning commission, potentially the council. So I want folks to think that if any of this moves forward and it says development, there's going to be a development there tomorrow, even the next year or the year after. I just want to make that really clear. But I'm not saying that we're necessarily moving forward. I just wanted to set some clear timelines. Sorry?

We can still stop it if you try to move forward?

What I'm saying is until, yes, you can still try to stop moving forward, even if this plan were to be moved forward, because there aren't any current developments. No developments would have to come before the city. Okay. So anyways, I just think for the parts that I think there's a general consensus we want to see in the Western portion of SkyWest. I would imagine we could all agree that something is better than nothing for now. And then we have to figure out what to do with the rest of it.

No, no. It's not acceptable.

Okay.

Okay. Well, I'm just... Council Member Cyrus, I want to stop negotiating.

Okay. I'm trying to get folks to understand what we're dealing with as a decision up here, though. Okay. Okay. The point I'm trying to make here is the city can't afford to maintain this, and we're trying to find a partner to help us maintain it as soon as possible. If we're talking about mowing, which a lot of the commenters and some of the organizers of Save Sky West says, maintain this property, we're trying to find partners to help us maintain that property.

Have it or the whole thing?

Well, for now, what we can't is what I'm saying.

Hold on a second. Time is up. I want to do a plane of order. Okay. We sat here and we respectfully listened to the audience. And so can you please let us do our job? And then we can proceed. I'm sorry. Thanks for encouraging this guy. I do appreciate this. I appreciate you. All right. So...

We all appreciate council members, sorry. But we got a timeline. Yeah, thank you. So I'm just trying to help folks get a glimpse into the consideration that are going on at the diocese up here right now and a desire to make some progress on parts of SkyWest that need maintenance right now. I'm very sympathetic to one of the speakers that said, Can we make sure that the main gate is open so folks with disabilities or other vehicles are able to use it? The line of the city right now is that this park is technically closed and it's actually a liability for the city. So if someone were to fall in the park and sue the city, these are our taxpayer dollars that are on the line. So this is the responsibility that we're required to carry just to help people understand what we're trying to juggle here, which is why if parties want to come to the table, we can begin to open up some gates. We can be able to maintain this and make sure that we're protecting, we're creating resources available to residents, but also protecting taxpayers' interests. Okay, so anyways, just to give some clear direction here, I would like for staff to meet with SOS SkyWest and other interested community members and do a legitimate community assessment, similar to what we did in 2021 around this new plan. particularly the middle and eastern sides. I feel a sense of consensus around the western portion and want to partner with heart as soon as possible to begin to maintain that. I think SOS SkyWest should be mentioned in the future staff reports as a community partner that has been engaging in this process. I apologize.

Sorry, I'm having a hard time.

Mr. Razor, you've already, you have to stop, okay?

I'm not going to hear from you.

My apologies.

Yes. Thank you. Okay. I can repeat that. Yes, please. Sorry. How far back do I need to go? I can go to the beginning. I'm just joking. Okay. So for the middle and eastern portions, the safety zone and the development, I think there's a number of questions that the community wants to answer and feedback they want to provide to those areas. I think there's a general consensus that I'm hearing around wanting sky-west city open space, and I think the western portion negotiations with HAARD in that regard. And so I think, you know, I'm curious if we are able to just move forward with approving just the open space portion of the plan or recommending that portion of it to council so that we don't slow down the timeline of at least being able to move forward the MOU portion with HAARD for the western portion of it as we figure out what to do with the middle and eastern portion. Maybe this is a question for the city manager as well.

So I'm sorry if this is a... Well, I was thinking the same thing. Now just again. Let me just say that in my mind, development of the West End Park is not going to be possible without the East End Park because we have to have the income from the East End Park in order to be able to work with FAA to convince them to have the much lower rent for the Western part.

So you're saying that the development portion is a bargaining chip for us to talk to the FAA to be able to make the Western part more space? Correct. I see. Okay. Well, I think you know where I stand on this for the moment. I want to hear my colleagues' comments, but if there's a way for us to at least begin the process of moving forward with the Western portion, I think that's at least what i feel comfortable moving forward before bringing to the whole council uh until you know the community members questions are answered to their satisfaction so i'll send my comments there but thanks for hearing me out thank you all for your comments and i hope you gained a bit more insight into what we're wrestling with here too thank you

Thank you. Thank you for the staff report and the presentation. And also want to thank everyone who came out tonight. I will say I do have to make a correction just on some of the comments. We do not own Sears. Just want to let you know that that is a private property. entity that owns that lot. So if you have communication or contact with them that they can develop there, please let me know. But I just want to make sure that that is heard up for the record. And then also, I thought I was going to have to mention this tonight, but it seems like Mayor Pro Tem Syrup has. Just for purposes of public record, this is not an open park. I understand people are walking the park and walking sideways. i just want to make sure that everyone knows for liability reasons for the city this is not an open facility this is not somewhere that we are opening up to the public but i understand you all are investigating the area okay um so um again i ditto on the the gate comment earlier um just to make sure everyone is safe I just also want to give acknowledgement to Heart. I mean, you all are doing a phenomenal job on heart development, heart maintenance, and particularly Kennedy is just such a beautiful space. I was just there for a family gathering and it was a beautiful space to be in to really just get in the good weather and just all the hard work that the staff is doing, you're doing a phenomenal job. A lot of folks can't afford to go to Disneyland and go to Universal Studios, to go to those places and to have somewhere that you can pay a low fare to ride a train and ride teacups and go to a concession stand that's affordable, that you're providing public access to public art, public entertainment, and public engagement for free, which also contributes to the community's public health. And I don't think you always get enough praises sung for all of our work that you do. You guys can give me a hand clap if you guys need that. The letter, I've been really taken in having that as an amenity in the community. So I just want to give you kudos. I also kind of am saying it as kind of a reminder. I understand there's this number here of how many How much open space we should have to a person. I understand that. And I just want to acknowledge that we do have a ton of great parks. Like, we are actually pretty good in terms of parks in this particular community. I mean, to have a Mission Hills Golf Course, Kennedy, Via's Dream, Guerin, Lake Chabot, that's not technical behavior, but to have Lake Chabot in your backyard, we are actually pretty park rich. As a human being that grew up in South Central LA, you guys, I mean, we are very rich in parks. So I just want to acknowledge that, that there's a great amount of parks here, but there's also a lot to maintain this. And I understand that This facility is a very important facility. It is a golf course that is beloved. I still have people asking me, can we open up SkyWest all the time? I hear that all the time. And with this plan, I'm hoping that we can look at something because Mission Hills is not accessible for everyone. So I would love to see something there that is golf related for that side of the community again. So I'm not negotiating any park features, but I'm just throwing it out there just because we're talking about the park. But as far as the expansion, yes, your advocacy brought us to this point. We did not. I will also say, though, those plans were not These are not even conceptual plans. If you were to give this plan to a builder, they're going to say, we can't even do anything with it. So I just want to calm some of the nervousness that I'm hearing regarding the plans for this park. What I do recommend to staff is I'm hearing a lot of advocacy on environmental concerns, and I would like to see actual data from a CEQA consultant, which is a California Environmental Quality Act before we do anything in relation to moving forward with the project. So I would be interested in seeing an initial study based off of the conceptual plan because we're getting a lot of information from the public, but we're not getting information from the consultants who study environmental concerns and who tell us what are the mitigating factors that can address the concerns. Tell us if these species are actually native, right? There's a lot of conversations about species being native but I wanna hear from the people who study this in a document that someone signed off on, that has an authorizing body signed off on it. So I am recommending that staff look into that as well. And then I would like to see, What is the minimum amount of development in order to address the costs related to maintaining the park section? I am hearing $250,000. I mean, we have so many San Lorenzo residents here. Maybe we should ask our county supervisor, Lena Tam, if she'd like to make a contribution. So feel free to start those conversations. But I would really like to see what is the minimum amount of development? to make sure maintenance costs are covered, staff costs is covered, and just operational costs in general. So that is something that we can see a breakdown on. I think it would have some clarity about why we are still looking at some development in order to maintain this facility and see if there is anything else. I also wanted to know more about the jet situation. I understand this is, I'm hearing multiple people come in about the jets. And I think we should just have an update. You do this from time to time already. So just maybe at the next infrastructure committee, you have that, have that data available for the community. There's so many times that this many jets have been called for operating off hours, just so we can make sure that the community hears those concerns that are being addressed.

Okay. And I think that is it for me. Thanks.

Thank you. Thank you. For further thought, what is related to not only how much development we need to make to other maintenance costs or other kind of financial wear and fall of the airport, but also to balance the FAA, some of their environments, because it may be that there is kind of a compromise that has to be made that if we can preserve a certain amount of open space, then we may need to develop some of it for business park uses and get fair market value to get them to agree to the overall plan. So I just want to put that out there. We need to try to balance that issue as well. And then on the CEQA issue, which is the California Environmental Quality Act, an initial study My experience with that is that usually you have to have a lot of very specific information about what the project includes. And I just want to emphasize, because this has come up, we agree this is not a plan that, this isn't a plan where you're going to go and build it. We wanted to show that kind of large colored swaths of land so that we're sure, here we are on the right track because we don't want to, we kind of are taking this one step at a time. So we're on the right track generally, which maybe there still needs to be discussion about that, that's fine. Then we can start each step, we'll start to refine the scope, refine the plan. We'll have a more detailed. And then we have enough detail. We will absolutely comply with CEQA and do a detailed analysis. Our planners over there will make sure we do that. We will follow all those rules. And there'll be very detailed studies related to biological resources, water resources, hydrology, and all of that will be very detailed analysis. So I just want to acknowledge that we're going to have to kind of take it one step at a time and keep getting specific. But there's nothing about this plan that's No one's going to go build anything using this plan. Thank you.

Okay. Yeah, I was just given a note. It says, would you also please call on Adrienne? She has all of the answers. And we'll solve this. So, wow.

You didn't even get any chips.

You will have some answers.

Thank you. Did you want to go?

No, maybe you're going to answer this question.

No, why don't we start?

Well, I was going to say, no, Councilman Thurick, he mentioned about we're going to take it over, and I just want to say we're not ready to take over. The maintenance of the entire site or mowing it without some negotiation because in the level of of just maintaining. I think we just need it for fire safety, but we have to negotiate that. So we're willing to take over that third and start planning what would happen with that. But we're not ready to just... That's not what I meant. Yeah, okay. I was talking about that third.

Thanks. So Adrienne Lieber, Director of Recreation Hearts and Community Services, also Acting General Manager at the moment. So thank you so much to the city for inviting us to the table. It's really valuable to hear all of the community feedback. And I think it really shows great commitment by our board in terms of making sure that all residents have you know, the opportunity to walk to green space within 10 minutes of their home, you know, whether it's the 27 million that we're investing in the San Lorenzo Creek Trail to connect all those trails from the bay to Don Pedro Reservoir, the 42 million at San Lorenzo Community Park, the 19 million at Kennedy Park. They really care about recreational opportunities, open space, parks for our community. But as I think our board members mentioned, we are coming to the end of the life of our bond. And so for staff, it's really important to find out the true costs of maintenance, just so we can advise the board. And after that, we'll begin our community process, getting feedback and you know, that will be the start of us considering the project. So it's a great opportunity to join you, but still a lot of questions that we'd love to get, start the conversation to make sure that it's feasible to maintain it, you know, in a responsible way. So that's all I would say. Thank you.

All right. Nice and positive to hear. Yeah. Did you want to comment now or you want me to? You can go ahead. Before I go on, does anybody want...

And we have oranges for the game on the audience.

Are you taking the words?

When can the pod be filled for the journal?

We're not going to be answering questions right now. Okay. Okay. I just, what I first want to say, I want to agree with everyone, hard, thank you to hard the relationship between the city council and the hard board has certainly evolved. And we are here today, I think, because there has been some fundamental changes to the hard board and there has been some fundamental changes to the city council. And so, you know, the things that we are talking about now certainly show we are in a different space in a different place. You know, I also wanted to acknowledge just the city, you know, Hayward and the Hayward area. You know, I wrote here, we vote, and HART has historically delivered. I mean, all you got to do is drive around to all the parks. In fact, the park just on the other side of the fence line of this idea, the duck pond, I mean, it's, I take my dog there, and it's a beautiful park. And you guys have done a phenomenal job there. You know, I wrote in one of my earlier pages here, you know, I do want to push back and disagree with this idea that, you know, we are, as a city and as a Hayward area, suffering from the lack of parks. Because I think we are park-rich. And particularly in this area, you know. And I think, you know, the fact that we increased the acreage to 50 acres, it was 20, you know. And so in a lot of that, most of it, if not all of it, came from the advocacy of many of this room here. But, you know, I... I want to sort of make the, you know, and be clear about, you know, not only this council, but this hardboard. We have vested, I think, a lot in public space and open space. And not just in public and open space, in the environment. I mean, I think our... If you look at our climate action plan, we are I think we're even ahead of our climate action goals and and not and not just by, you know, a lot of years, but I think or not just by a few years, but by a lot of years. And so I think that is something to to be said. And I think a lot of that is because of the of staff and the leadership of the surrounding boards. You know, I, to go to the question that the city manager asked, does this map or does this concept demonstrate whether or not we're on the right track? I would answer that question, yes. And, you know, if you look at the green, I mean, even if you, Ms. Barras, can you bring the map up again?

Yeah.

Or, yeah. Just want to put this in the countdown. Yeah, there you go. Yeah. So, you know, there's, you know, there's the, you know, the There it is. And if you look just north of the tip over there, there's the duck pond. And then if you go to on the other side of the tracks, there's, you know, the shoreline. You know, so, you know, I think. there are plenty of opportunities to grow and to enhance and to mitigate and to respond to a lot of the wildlife environmental concerns that the neighborhood has. So, you know, and I would agree with the general consensus here. You know, yes, we're only looking at large colored, you know, shapes here. And we do need to drill down and we do need to figure out, you know, the details here. But I think just given, you know, what I'm looking at right now and what we've seen, what we've heard and seen conceptually, I think, you know, we're on the right track. The other point I want to be clear, and I don't want to sound like I'm repeating a lot of stuff up here, but is the airport. We are required by FAA to expand the airport. That does not mean we're going to be running planes all the way to the red line over there. We'll probably have the same amount of frequency and of traffic, but just a more modern approach. And, you know, and perhaps a safer airport. And, you know, we're not going to, you know, we'll make sure, you know, I'm pretty confident that, you know... that the folks along that red border there will certainly be safe. But I just want to just point out that, you know, we are required to do this and there are, you know, there's things that we have to do and, you know, and we're going to do that. Now, regarding the development, I did hear a very interesting comment. I guess he left, but there was this idea, this point where he made that moving on the development side along the townhomes, is there a part there that is development, like commercial, and then a part that is recreational? I mean, I didn't see that up here.

The developments 28 acres that's and that's downsized from the 49 acres that it used to be. Okay. And it's not adjacent immediately adjacent to the town. Okay. So, so what we're looking at now, we're welcoming feedback and the exact location would be yet to be true.

okay good because i i that made sense to me i mean i you know i certainly uh would not want you know go from what it is today to now you know buttressed up against you know now a hard a hardened parking lot or commercial property so i'm glad i'm glad we hear that um so you know so there's the development side and i do understand the the the the sort of the compromise, or I don't know, what did you call it? The relationship between building out the development, the economic development part of this project so that we can pay for the right reason. And I get all that. And that's important. I mean, you know, and we need to, you know, that needs to happen. I did hear Councilmember Andrews as to sort of thinking about, you know, what is, how can we sort of calibrate it to a point where you know, we're right at, you know, profitability to pay for, you know, some of the open space stuff. And, you know, if we can really sort of calibrate that, that would be great. But I also, you know, you know, I'm also thinking with an economic development lens and, you know, I think we have trimmed back a lot from this already. And, but, you know, I guess, like I said, we're just looking at shapes right now and I wanna, you know, the more we study this and the more we look at this, does the airport have in the works an economic development analysis going on right now or?

We do, and we are going to bring that to council within the next six months or so.

Great. Just to clarify, and I know that often other people trigger CEQA on us. I don't think I've ever done it on ourselves, but I did hear correctly that, if I heard correctly, that we're not at a point in the planning stage right now to ask for a CEQA? How does that work?

Yeah, just to be clear, CEQA is a disclosure law. So all we before the council can take an action that kind of binds the city in the direction of building something, we have to comply with the disclosure law. And it's very detailed that we go through an initial study and we have to kind of review what's being proposed based on the details of the project. And every CEQA or initial study has a project description and it has to be detailed enough that the biologists can go and analyze something. It's too broad. Like what we're proposing here, they don't know what to analyze. Like, are you going to do this or that? They're going to have a ton of questions and we're like, well, I'm not sure yet. So we have to go far enough along that we can kind of analyze the, the details of the environmental impacts of whatever we're proposing. But we would have to do that, exactly what that action is going to be to trigger that analysis. And then we still need to figure that out. Is it going to be a land use approval that has to be done or is it going to be, so we'll work on that a little bit in terms of what the council, when it takes a certain type of action, we'll have to have done a CEQA analysis to disclose the impacts, the environmental impacts related to that action. So we will do that. And because of the FAA role, that's a federal role, we'll also have to comply with the National Environmental Policy Act, which is NEPA's kind of a federal version of CEQA. So we'll have to do both a federal and state level environmental review.

So let me ask this question. does this item need to leave this committee uh so that we can get a more um detailed report or a plan to trigger nipa and and sequa yes okay all right and i do think we don't have to

Finish your comments, but I'd love to clarify what the infrastructure committee would like those next actions to be, but when you're ready.

Yeah, because there are recommendations here.

Yeah, and we can change those. You can provide a separate direction, but we should clarify just so we know what specific steps we need to take.

Yeah, okay. Okay, and do you want to...

I just wanted to know, is it at 30% conceptual that we can do CEQA, or is it... Do you need more? Because I know that you can do some analysis at the conceptual level.

You know, there's no hard and fast rule about it. It can be a landing approval. It could be a lease approval. It could be, it depends on what the action is. And we'll consult with our attorneys and our planner experts to kind of figure out what action triggers that need for CEQA. You can take certain actions like a non-binding term sheet, for instance. And that's okay. You don't have to have CEQA review. But at some point, when you're taking an action that's kind of binding the city or really focusing on a course of action, then you have to comply with those disclosure laws at that point. And they try to do that. So CEQA's not something you act on by itself. That's being the environmental impacts of the action you're taking are being disclosed through your compliance with CEQA.

So I think I'm hearing it needs to leave the committee to get... Yeah, I think we need...

Sorry.

Welcome. Thank you.

So, absolutely, sequending, but that makes all the sense in the world. But I think the question, at least, my colleagues can correct me if I'm wrong here, but I think part of the question is just what's the current status? So, for instance, if it was going to become a park or, you know, what might we be inheriting? Who's living there? What's the...

I'm not doing my comments yet, but yeah.

Yeah, so just in terms of next steps, that's one of the things I think is not the SQL level environmental, but the just current status.

All right. Okay. The other – so let me talk about hard. So, yes, I absolutely agree. And I heard Mr. Andrade talking about, you know, all of the things that hard needs to consider. So what I – you know, what I was thinking as he was talking about is maybe, you know, before – Well, what I'd like to see is a framework with HARD that really sort of details and outlines you know, it could be as specific as it can be, or it can be a framework. But a framework with a costing in there that we can start talking about. And at least, you know, because right now we're not looking at anything. All we're doing is talking. And so that would be something that I would like to see, you know, first or as part of the first kind of beginning of this. And, you know, Because the other part I was thinking about is timeline. You know, and I have to, you know, Mayor Pro Tem Syrup talked about, you know, we're not building next month and we're not going to, nothing's going to be built next year. You know, and just given that there's CEQA and NEPA, these are lengthy, long, you know, periods of time that are going to happen. So I guess the question is, what is the timeline? I mean, what are we talking here? I mean, you know, let's say a framework with HARD. And then, you know, let's say, do we need to move it out of the committee so that you guys can then begin to put a framework with HARD together, then detail the plan, and then, you know.

That would be very helpful if you can.

All right, yeah. If I could ask, where does negotiations with FAA stand in the middle of this? I mean, don't you have to have something that you can talk to them about, and then whatever they agree to is what, you know, the parameters that we have to deal with, you know, and so we can make plans, but then we should get in whatever that's going to be before we start making hard plans, you know, hardened in place.

That's a great comment, too. We need to have some people to be able to go to the city manager and mention, tell them that we have a balanced plan here. There is economic development to the airport, and we also want to take the advantage of the recently passed legislation that gives us some flexibility in terms of asking for rent for the use of poverty.

And so I was going to ask, I was going to say the same thing, which is that we can also get direction at the same time we're talking to HARD, we're also talking to FAA so that we're sure at the end of the day, we don't want to come to an agreement with HARD and then FAA says, well, we're not okay with that, so we can't involve us. concurrent discussions and negotiations with both entities so that we can, and we're happy to ask FAA, pose the question of like, could we do more open space? Could we, you know, like, and have those, we can have those conversations as we go through this process. But we know, I think, based on our experience, that they're going to want some balancing of fair market value land and open space, because these are new provisions. And so we're going to be taking advantage of this new provision that says that we're going to do something for, you know, low market fair market value. So maybe that's part of the direction here, okay, Mayor, is to kind of pursue those at the same time.

So let me just say this, and I know Council Member Seif and Andrews may want to chime in on this, and then I have one final comment I want to make, but What I'm hearing, and I sort of want to respond directly to Southpaw, is, you know, do I think that this is sort of, you know, sort of the North Star and sort of where we're going? Okay, yes, I think so. There, you know, are there... You know, do we still need to work out details? Yes, I believe that. You know, given what I just heard about FAA, you know, the sooner we can begin, you know, those conversations and discussions with FAA so that we can get a framework out of them so that we can harden our plants with hard. And, you know, we're not going to, you know, we're not going to price gouge hard, right? I think our relationship is good enough where, you know, and our track records are good that, you know, I know you said that FAA won't let us charge zero, but. is a dollar, you know? That's something.

Legislation provides for flexibility, less than fair market value.

Oh, okay. All right. So we will certainly look at that. And, you know, I would like to, you know, I really do want to see this move out of committee just so that it can start this thing, this process in motion. And we will have a plan. And moving it out of committee will, you know, launch, you know, it will continue education. It will continue outreach. It will continue conversation. And, you know, I do want to see, you know, I've said this before publicly, and I'll say it again. I know that the great people of the great township of San Lorenzo have a stake in this. But I also want to see... I did hear a public commenter from the West Winton neighborhood. I forget who it was. There you go. West Winton. You know, I do want to see a lot of outreach south of the airport. West and south. No, east and south. And so, you know, I think... You know, so my, you know, my suggestion to move this out of committee does not, I want to be very clear about that. It does not mean that we're not going to continue our communication and our outreach and our collecting of public comment. This is not the end of it all. This is still, you know, I mean, this is a years-long project that is, you know, that we're going to have plenty of time for input. And so with that said, I just want to end on this. I don't think any of us up here want to get rid of turtles. We all care about the butterflies, the monarch butterfly. And I know both of these council members, and I know there are directors, and I know both staffs. We want to do everything we can to protect and preserve our environment and our wildlife. I mean, it's, that's, uh, it's, it is in a lot of our documents and, and I don't think any of us up here have track records of, of, of destroying that. Uh, and, um, you know, but this is a process and, um, you know, and, uh, I, uh, look forward to, uh, moving forward with this. And, uh, and with that said, um, I am going to stop talking and I'm going to defer to Mayor Pro Tem Simon. Thank you.

So I feel I appreciate the additional clarification here. I think the way that the vote was framed tonight, the agenda is something that I want to move away from. I don't think we're at a place where this committee wants to make a recommendation to the council about this specific site plan, because as we've heard from the community, as we discussed tonight, This isn't recommendation worthy. However, from what I understand, we need some kind of site plan to work off of to actually have negotiations and understand how much green space, open space can we get to work with hard around what will the cost be if it is that amount of open space. And so I feel more comfortable advancing this plan to the full council because we have a lot of time between now and then. With that time, I want to make sure that there is a community survey similar to the one that was conducted in 2021 because this is a new site plan and the community should have the opportunity to weigh in on this. And when I say this, when people say Sam Lorenzo didn't hear about this, everybody here has an obligation tonight. All right. When this survey is launched, we have an obligation to make sure that they hear about it because it's not going to be an excuse six months from now. All right. We're on the same page here. So I'm comfortable advancing it as well with the condition that we have this community survey built in. And I want to feedback from the negotiations with the FAA and with HARD and from the survey incorporated into what's presented to council. I will be opposed to any site plan that looks identical to what we're seeing tonight. My goal is for all of this input and negotiation to shape what is actually realistic so that we can tell the community This is the plan, and I want the community to brace themselves. There may very well be a reality where some of the airport safety area is still there, or some development is still there, but it's going to be different from this, or I'm not supporting it. So I just want to be clear about where I stand on that. So again, I'm happy to also support moving this forward for the purpose of negotiation. I do not support a motion that includes it being considered a recommendation, so I want to make sure it's reflected properly in the minutes. And, you know, I still have some questions that I'm wrestling with that I hope you can provide the council and community answers to. For example, we were able to give the golf course to HART for 45 years without this negotiation on economic development. Where is this requirement coming from now? I don't know if you have an immediate answer to that.

I don't have that. Go ahead.

Council member, so you're asking about the business park specifically?

Well, why do we have to negotiate a portion of development in order to get recreational use when we didn't give it a hard 45 years without any of those requirements? Well, because things change. The FAA rules change and require us to do certain things. Okay. And I think there's this level of specificity that the community wants, because it's the same thing where people still have doubts and skepticism around the airport safety area, for example, right? Like, Can we cite what that regulation is that has changed that's requiring us to do this when we're talking to the community about this? Transparency is where it's coming in. I think as we engage in this next few months before this comes before the full council, we need to do everything in our power to communicate this transparently so that even if the decision is somewhat of a compromise, people at least understand how we arrived there, right? I hear you. Okay, thank you. And then just side notes is, does the city have the power to regulate hours when an aircraft can take off? I know that might scare away some customers, but people are having a hard time sleeping in their homes. Generally speaking, we do not have that power. Can we increase the fines of people that violate our noise ordinance during certain hours?

Interestingly enough, if we change any of it, then... it may have to go away. We have remedies right now. According to the ordinance that the council voted for, first we have to notify them with a letter. Then we can initiate monetary fines. We've done that in the past.

You've given great reports on that too. How do we have the pains that they stop breaking the law? I need to look into that too. Okay. I just wanted to make sure that didn't go unheard. Is my overall direction clear here? And I guess, do my colleagues agree with this assessment of not recommendation, but moving out of the committee so we can begin these conversations and update at least to start here?

I mean, I don't know if semantics matter here, but the fragmentation or what do you call it?

I guess I'm asking to move out of committee, but this is not a recommendation to the full council. I'm moving out of committee on the condition that there's a community survey involved, negotiations begin, and that what's presented to the council is updated based off of community input as well as with negotiations.

Yeah, and it has a little more specificity in terms of answers to the questions Hart has and answers to the questions related to the FAA. There's a little more clarity there. And we'll try to push as much as we can with the FAA, and then we'll come back with more specificity and community feedback to bring that to the council.

Thank you for mentioning that, because I did want to say I would like the posture of the city in this negotiation with the FAA to be around maximizing green space. development section to protect the townhomes up top, right? Like, I want our position to be as much green as possible on this map. Is that a feasible posture for us to enter with?

Yeah, and I mean, I think we'll also run our own numbers. Part of this is some of the viability of the airport fund, and so we'll run the numbers in terms of what the airport fund needs, what FAA needs, try to triangulate to something a little clearer and a little more specific before we bring it to council. And I heard the you know, our director too, a little more analysis on existing conditions. So we all have a little more information before we bring it back. And that will influence our negotiations hard and all that way.

Yeah. So this is the conceptual site plan. The full council has not approved it. And there's months of opportunity for the community to continue to engage with it. I firmly believe that this map is better than the previous one and we have a ways to go, but we're just chipping away at it the way that we can. So that's why I'm comfortable with moving this forward. So I think you had a similar point.

I also wanted to remind people that we do have a public comment period to do a sequel analysis. So that is an opportunity to provide feedback at that time because there will be more information on that analysis. So we can review it as well. I just wanted to commend the staff for hearing the committee's concerns and coming back for the revised plan and also really looking at the recreational use and making sure that it's also looking at an area to incorporate our shoreline plan as well. So I just wanted to also acknowledge the work there because I know there's been some advocacy there as well. And I do agree with coming back with more information around the development and being creative of how we look at that space and landscaping and recreational space in that area as well because sometimes development includes recreational space as well as part of the development so just want to make sure that that is an option depending on what we decide to do with that um and then uh i know that the developer is still engaged right so i'm hoping that the developer is hearing this feedback from the community tonight and And then hopefully we can get an update in making sure that they understand the needs and requirements of this community when they're developing and not just something that benefits them, right? So we can look at something that benefits the city as well. So I'm comfortable moving this forward. And just when we do the outreach to the community, just kind of having a visual timeline that shows the steps, but also the sequence steps as well, just because that would have them more informed of that environmental process and an understanding of when they'll get some deliverables to see what the impacts are and how it would be mitigated. Thank you.

You have what you need. Thank you.

and do you need some kind of formal decision do you need uh do you know both and all that okay okay so just just so i can clarify the the motion so uh my motion is to uh not recommend this plan to the full council but advance this plan to the full council um uh which means that we are updating our conceptual site map to what's being presented here for the purposes as well as hard. And committing to facilitating community surveys similar to what was conducted in 2021 and incorporating feedback from both negotiations and the survey for what's presented to the council in the fall. Does that make sense?

Okay. Okay. I'll second that one. moved by Mayor Pro Tem Syrup, second by Mayor Salinas, and if there are no objections, it will unanimously be answered.

Thanks for meeting.

Thank you. Yes. Thank you everyone for your feedback. Thank you. It's a nice process. And then, Madam City Manager, let's take a five-minute break. We will move on to our next item, which is an update on BART transit-oriented development projects. And I believe... Director Mary is going to kick this off. And we have two representatives from BART here. And I apologize, I forgot your name.

I'm Shannon Dodge.

That's Shannon Dodge and George Falk. Yeah, I'm with the city.

Oh, yeah, George Falk is with us. He's with the City of Haywood, so it's okay.

Yeah. Oh, yeah. Oh, yeah. We want. Yes. Right. Okay. So we got to be nice to him. Okay. Mr. Mary, take it away.

Thank you very much, Mr. Mayor. You basically introduced me. I was very excited about this park transit oriented development that is going to hopefully happen in our downtown. Also, maybe in the future in South Hayward. I am going to bring it over to George Foster, our senior transportation planner, to introduce you to the broader change.

Good evening, Council Infrastructure and Airport Committee. I'm George Foster, senior transportation planner with the city. I'm joined today by Shannon Dodge from VART. will be presenting on transitory and development in Hayward. We also have Taylor Richard from Developmental Services Online and Deputy Director Byron Tang here from Transportation as well. So transit-oriented development, as the name may imply, is higher density mixed-use development adjacent to frequent transit. It helps increase sustainable transit ridership. It helps reduce housing costs. enhance regional quality of life, and strengthen economic competitiveness. By focusing housing and jobs near transit, communities can accommodate new growth while minimizing associated congestion and environmental impacts. And so today on our agenda, we'll be talking about BART's longstanding TOD program, and a very, very early vision for what Hayward Station could be time. And because this is so early in the process, we also have some community input on the overall arching goals and objectives for what people would like to see generally before we even bring in design and then cover what the next steps will be as we move towards that. So before Shannon dives in, I do want to specifically provide a little context for why this is so special for us. Our staff is broadly working on improving our policies around transit-oriented communities. I was just here in April actually talking to you all about it. And so to get the chance to work with Bart on a project that aligns with our vision for development near transit is very exciting. New state laws and regional policies are moving Bay Area cities towards best practices like this. And Hayward CitySAT are striving towards consistency and positioning ourselves for funding, such as providing for set-asides where TOC regulations are required. But even before now, we've already seen the positive impact for early TOD work from BART. Right behind you is City Walk here by Hayward Station. We also have Cadence Apartments down at South Hayward Station. And right now we're seeing the latest iteration of TOD work and are excited that downtown Hayward is a short-term priority and South Hayward is a medium-term priority. So no long-term priorities here in Hayward. So, this TOC will align with our... Sorry, this TOD will align with our TOC values as a city. We're addressing the housing affordability crises. Dense development near transit and downtown businesses with affordable requirements is really exciting. We also in Hayward know that sprawling development patterns in other parts of the region can impact everyone else. We're keenly aware of cut-through traffic, like on the Loop, and how it affects our roads, businesses, children, and air. Reducing BMT congestion and pollution will serve our residents and will also reduce our impact and stressors on other cities. We know how important access to transit is, but also when we talk about accessibility, we're thinking about people whose only option for travel is transit with whatever life realities they have. And so with that, I'd like to hand it over to Shannon Dodge from BART to talk us through the TOD at the Hayward Station.

Thank you, George, and thank you to SEAC for the opportunity to share information with you today. So you're all, I think, familiar with BART as a transit provider, but BART is also one of the largest public landowners in the Bay Area. We own 250 acres of developable land. And 27 out of our 50 stations spread across 22 different cities and counties. Why does BART, a transit agency, do real estate development? Well, you know, in addition to wanting to contribute to lower costs of living for Bay Area residents and to lower GHGs, it's really essential for our ridership development. And this is true before COVID, and it's frankly even more true now post pandemic. We know that people who live close to BART ride BART in greater numbers. A few fundamentals about how we do our transit-oriented development. In early years, BART often did land swaps or we sold the land that we own. But now, BART generally enters into long-term ground leases instead of our land development partners. We have some key policies that guide us. Among those, we have an affordable housing policy with a minimum of 20 percent of the housing at our stations. affordable to lower income households, and then a portfolio goal of 35% of affordable housing across all of our stations. We see that as our primary community benefit. In fact, we have a framework that guides discounting our land up to 30% of its market value for affordability. We also have a station access policy that focuses on how people get to and from our stations. And we're generally looking to support more park station access by walking, biking, and transit to our stations and de-emphasizing driving gradually. And we're, of course, looking for land uses that deliver significant ridership benefits. Next slide, please. So BART's work on transit-oriented development is guided by six board-adopted goals, and these are complete communities, sustainable communities, building our ridership, as I mentioned, creating value, capturing value, providing transportation choices, and then affordability. And for each station where we do transfer into development, we work with that local jurisdiction and community to identify what these goals mean for that particular site and to tailor objectives that fall under these six goals that are customized to local priorities and opportunities and constraints. And the result is a document we call the TOD goals and objectives. And that document informs the proposals that we ultimately will receive from developers who are interested in building at the patient site. So BART staff developed an initial draft of Hayward TOD goals and objectives with input from city staff, and that we ended up sharing with the public last month, as you may be aware. I'll get into that a little bit later. So here in the next slide, you see examples of transit-oriented development at three different BART stations. The top photos show how each site looked before, while the lower photos show completed TODs. And on the left, the Milbury TOD is a very complex project that combines market rate housing, affordable housing, office space, a hotel, and retail space. The San Leandro TOD includes affordable housing, both for families and seniors, as well as replacement parking per park. And then at Balboa Park, Art Station in San Francisco on a relatively small site. This TOD includes affordable rental housing for families with a child care center and retail spaces, nonprofit office space, and a newly constructed art plaza that really improves the rider. So we use this six-step model that you see here to describe the work that we do and how TOD comes to be. It starts with pre-solicitation planning, which is really where we are right now. Then moving into developer solicitation, typically a request for proposals. Our board hopefully selects the developer that our panel recommends. And then it goes into the planning stages, so design, entitlements, negotiating with BARC for the deal terms, and then pre-construction. So that design gets reviewed by the city, gets permitted, and of course the developers need to find financing, which can be quite challenging in today's environment. Then we move into the construction phase and finally occupancy and pre-construction, post-construction, sorry. And for local jurisdictions, of course, projects that are this ambitious do take staff time from multiple departments and teams. But starting with step three, local agency staff time is typically reimbursed through the application fees that you collect from developers. So let's dig into the Hayward Bar Station TOD opportunity. There are three parcels that we've identified for potential development that you see shaded in yellow here. At the north is the block between A and B, east of the tracks, which is currently fenced off. And then adjacent to the station, we would also make available for development the surface parking lot that's west of the tracks, just north of the garage. And finally, that more slender parcel across the street from where we are now that has bus stops could be included in the development area as well. But the bus stops are very well used, and there's also ADA parking there. So those uses would need to be accommodated, which makes that third site a little bit more difficult to build on than the other two. I should note that the total amount of barn rider parking at the station is about 1,450 spaces. At last count earlier in the spring, there were only about 26% of them used, so very underutilized. What can be built on these sites is shaped by the city zoning as well as certain state laws. For example, there's no minimum parking requirement for new housing here at these sites, and there's a maximum of one car parking space for every two apartments. So as I noted earlier, BART staff drafted goals and objectives for TOD at Ayrwood BART station. And before finalizing them, we wanted to sound out the public to see if we got them right. So in May, we created both an online survey and also held two open houses in the station itself. And you can see how those looked. We promoted these very actively with in-station posters, destination signage, so anywhere you were in the Hobart system, you could see the website for this flashing on the destination sign. BART and City of Hayward newsletters featured in. We had paper handouts with QR codes and social media, of course. And then KTBU Fox Mornings on 2 also came out and did a TV spot on May 12th, which was very nice. So we got a really good level of participation. Well over 300 surveys completed and around 400 people participating when you count the folks who showed up in person at the open houses, one in the evening and one afternoon evening and one in that morning. Those who attended in person got to review the draft objectives for TOD under the goals adopted by the bar board and then placed dots by their three favorite priorities, highest priorities, and basically the same thing for the online participants.

If you've answered where they came from, the conference survey can follow.

I do think there was a question about that, but I don't have the data. We asked how often they read BART as well, that sort of thing. And everyone could also provide open-ended comments as well. It's just checking boxes and placing dots. They could put sticky notes on the boards. If you go to the next slide, you can see what those look like. And they could fill in open-ended comments in the online survey. What we heard at the open houses, the objectives that attracted the most support included creating a place that provides a positive first impression of downtown. So downtown is obviously really important to folks here. And then providing affordable housing, no less than 20% of the new homes. Next slide. As well as increasing the share of BART riders who get to the station by means other than driving, reinforcing downtown as a dense transit-oriented center, and finally attracting riders from downtown by improving the station area itself. And then in the online survey, the five objectives that you see here got over 85% support. The most popular one was the very same one that was popular among the in-person attendees. So creating a place that provides that really positive first impression of downtown. That was followed by creating clear connections to the BART station, attracting riders from downtown, reinforcing downtown as a dense transit-oriented center, and finally strengthening the station's role as a hub for buses for pedestrians and cyclists. Next slide so put it all together, the key themes that we heard from our Community engagement were support for a vibrant mixed use transit oriented development at barf. With ground floor amenities with enhanced access and can clear connections to downtown hayward a overall. All of the objectives that we put out in the survey got over 50% support, usually most of them 60, 70%. So we didn't have to cross any of them off or change any of them because they were generally well-linked. And then support for housing density was strong. Support for affordability was also strong, but balanced by some folks having concerns about affordable housing at this particular site. Additional concerns included parking availability, building height and neighborhood scale, earthquake risk along the Hayward Fault and the risk of ground floor retail sitting vacant, which no one wants. So what's next? We'd like the BART Board of Directors to consider approval of these goals and objectives for TOD at Haywood Station. That's tentatively slated for next month, July 9th. And then advancing this project further would involve BART staff drafting and issuing a solicitation for interested developers. Most often that takes a form of a request for proposals. The proposals would be scored by a panel, which could include city representatives. Then BART board would consider a recommendation to enter an exclusive negotiating agreement with the top right developer or developer team. We call that ENA for short. Once we execute that ENA, it starts a negotiating phase that is typically around two years, sometimes extended, but two years initial term and then leading to entitled project by your planning department and a ground lease option with BART. So we don't have a timeline for those last few steps. We're currently evaluating our capacity to decide how soon we could undertake them. I'll wrap up there and like to thank you for your time and interest in this effort. Okay.

All in favor? Thank you. Let's go first.

I'm so happy to see this presentation. I've been wanting to see this presentation for almost 10 years. I'm excited about that. Since I have you here, I wanted to know if there's anything you're doing interim in terms of events at these spaces because I'm looking online and I'm seeing a lot of cool events downtown. Was it World Warm Springs and Rock Ridge? I just want to put it out there that you can do stuff in the interim. You don't have to wait until a TOD development RFP goes out. So just going to put that as a note. I am also interested in hearing more about the bike facilities and what that would look like in a location like this because I've seen kind of mixed results when it comes to bike facilities and I have a feeling that we're going to see more bikes downtown in particular so I just want to see if there's also a way we could have not just bike storage but bike repair and store, if there's a bike store, there's something that's actually ran by BART versus waiting for an operator to run it. Is that something that you all do that's part of BART?

if i address that yeah um yeah so we do have some um bike facilities at our stations that include um bike repair a bike shop um at downtown oakland we have that and also um downtown berkeley there may be others that i'm not thinking of right now um They are not operated by a bar per se. We do have operators that we work with to make them successful. But that is a great idea. We're considering some of our other TODs.

We do have cycle paths. So maybe there's a potential partnership there. I am concerned about making space. So that's why I'm bringing it up. But also it is something that I've heard a lot from the community is that we need more bike repair companies. So that is something I would love to see us do. Also, I was just at MacArthur BART station on Sunday and there was a lot of vacant space and just wanted to see what was the plan there because I don't want that to happen at Delta Mayweather.

Yeah, so the MacArthur bar design was all completed before COVID and I think anticipated a different kind of retail environment than we have today. So it is unfortunate that it's sitting vacant, but I think our developers that we're bringing on now are more cautious and really think through the market clearly and limit the size of the retail space to what they think is marketable.

Have you done any live workspace at the bottom of your TOD developments? No, we haven't yet. Okay. I mean, there might be some people that are interested in that. So I just, again, I don't want any vacant space at the bottom. So if we could see some alternatives of what other people are doing. I think having retail at the bottom works for a high density city. When it's 150,000 folks to 250,000 folks in a city that's still very car-centric, it doesn't fill up as fast. So I would love to see if we can look at some alternatives there. And then you said that you have 27 stations that you're operating. So I know that we are short-term, medium-term, but where are we on the short-term, medium-term list?

Yeah, so this station, downtown Hayward Station, is in the near term list. So we identified a small handful of stations that we wanted to start moving towards initiating TOD in the 2024 to 2028 period. So we're right in the middle of that. Yeah.

like that now yeah and then south hayward is medium term so like what number are we is there a number or um number one number one there's also several stations that have no plans like there's no land that can be developed etc and so there's there's maybe i don't know 15 stations or so that are considered and then um i don't know if you can do this but i've been seeing more

teacher housing, workforce development housing. Is that something that you all would focus on or an RFP or have a special theme in your RFP for?

I mean, I think we're open if there is a school district that would spearhead that. I think teacher housing usually has a really strong partnership with the local school district based on

identify need and any resources that you might have available or be able to access for that type of housing okay all right and then um i was very happy to see the the positive first impressions of downtown was very important at the top of the list it looks like thank you for being at the top of the list have you connected with downtown hayward improvement association about this tod development i'm I can't remember from the staff report.

Yes. Actually, yeah, we, my colleague and I visited a meeting, I think May 12th, actually, wrapping up the engagement and let them know how it went. They've been paying close attention and have been supportive.

Okay. And what was their feedback or response?

It was just, you know, we just let them know how it went. So seemed overall positive. Okay. All right. Thank you.

Thank you very much for this presentation. I want to thank Councillor Andrews. I think back in 23, you worked in the referral together to help accelerate TOD strategic planning. And thank you Mayor Smith for supporting it at the time as well. Also just want to thank city staff. I think the reason why we're having this presentation tonight is because our staff have really stepped up to have these conversations with BART. And I think it's just great to see what healthy interagency relationships can look like. And I'm very grateful that we're on the near term and I was interested in knowing, you know, we have this Connect Bay Area ballot measure. Is BART's real estate plans, are they contingent upon this passing? know i know some stations may face closure if this doesn't pass in november uh would bart still proceed with this real estate development plans i guess i just what's the the long-term vision around development here i mean it's a good question it probably is about one pay grade um but um i would say that you know we do see

TOD as a way of bringing in revenue for BART. Because we prioritize affordable housing, we're not necessarily getting huge amounts of rent revenue on the ground leases, but we hope to develop ridership revenues and more fare box revenue for people using our system more and more, as well as some revenue from the ground leases. So that's the case that we would make for BART. continuing the program, but at the same time, someone like me doesn't help run trains, and if we're cutting the system down to the bare bones,

know yeah maybe not everyone gets to keep their job we'll see yeah okay okay um i agree councilman anthony's around wanting to avoid vacancies i think some examples beyond just retail i like the idea of like a work with space um also there's a real desire from the community to have more meeting spaces so being able to facilitate community or co-working spaces richmond has a building next to the bar station called co-biz that is like a very active community nonprofit hub maybe that's a value you know especially if it's right next to the city hall i can see some nice uh synergy there i saw some designs of the tov development maybe moving the bus terminal to where the parking lot is in the back not the building but the uncovered parking i don't know that's i guess we're too early to look at conceptual plans is that

Yeah, the plans have really come from the developers. I saw that sketch from some years ago. I just saw it when I was preparing for tonight.

It was the first time I'd seen it, so I don't think it's really... Yeah, I think it was just to pitch the idea of what TOE can look like. Okay, got it.

Is it sort of an ADA issue in that the west side of the station doesn't have a level connection to... the station ferries.

That's right. Okay. Thank you for reminding me of the accessibility there. Otherwise, yeah, just great work. I'm happy that this, so next step is going to go before your board to move forward. Correct. Yeah. I'm in alignment with what the community wanted out of the station. I think 20% affordable is reasonable. I think vacancies are really the major concern here and it's not like the community is concerned about that too. So just being creative about what we can put there. I think when we're having conversations with developers, it's going to be important. Yeah. Okay. Well, you did great work.

Thank you. So, yes, thank you for this. So every month or so, every other month or so, I meet, I sit down and I meet with the president of Cal State, the president of Chabot, the superintendent, city manager, and I, and the chamber president. And we sit down and we talk about things. schools, colleges, and universities. And one of the ideas that we have been talking about was, in fact, the president of Cal State East Bay sort of, you know, really stimulated our imaginations around this concept of an education city village. And, you know, and I know what you were showing us is pretty much conceptual, but, you know, there is a, as you can imagine, you know, first of all, here in Hayward, you know, we're a city of schools and colleges and universities. We have students, we have faculty, we have administrators that are, you know, that need affordable places to live. And, you know, if we could, and one of the things that we sort of started to generate, brainstorm, and the main site we were looking at is right over here, just, you know, the Montgomery and B Street over here. is, you know, building this, you know, innovative place, housing, commercial, where you got child care, you know, we were thinking about, you know, live work lofts, artist lofts. And I mean, we're just sort of, you know, brainstorming these big concepts and ideas that we've always seen elsewhere. And so I say all of that, because, you know, When we, you know, when we begin to sort of, when we begin to move forward with this, you know, I would certainly, I think the council and the city would certainly be willing to work with BARC to really develop, you know, a really innovative concept here. I don't think you would have a problem finding people who live there. And, you know, I, and I have to agree, you know, around You know, my mom lives across the street from the Union City Bart's Diction, and there's the commercial places on the ground level over there. I don't know if that's not a Bart-held property. Those aren't Bart-held properties, but... but they're vacant, and there's been one coffee shop that's been moving in and out, and there's been a couple of restaurants moved in and out, small restaurants. But anyways, you know, I don't know. I don't know what the magic sauce is with the ground floor commercial. For a very long time, the groupthink amongst the council and, you know, even... Well, not this council, but around council... former councils and even even staff not this staff um that i mean we had incredible debates about you know letting go ground floor commercial and um either doing 100 residential and ground floor conversations we had up and down mission boulevard they were um they were incredible conversations that we got anyways um I say all of that because I, you know, I'm in. I'm in agreement with this. I like the concept. I think you're, you know, you're certainly going to get a lot of support here and whatever you need from us. I mean, do you need for me or for us to be to go to the board meeting and. pound our fists on the table and aggressively go after the BART directors to build this? Or is it more of a soft touch, are you asking?

I think it's a soft touch. I appreciate it.

Yeah, all right. My mouse not going to do it. Yeah, we're good. No, this is great. I have one more thing to speak.

So thank you for reminding. Yes, can you do public art as part of the requirement for the RFA? So I don't have to keep fighting for this. Yes.

They have a barred art policy. Oh, can you forward the policy to me? Thank you.

And then one last thing. I will go look at some of the developments here in Hayward. Mosaic, they do have art incorporated, but also look at... It's with Paris Baguette. So we have an awesome bakery inside. However... It drove up a lot of complaints about lack of parking, parking in the red, parking in the red zone. So it's just it's one of those things that we really have to think about when we say retail at the bottom. These are the fallout effects that the staff actually deals with after the fact. So it all sounds great until it's actually in action. But please go to Perth Spaghetti and take a pastry while you're there. But do some learning around that area. Thanks.

The other thing too, I know that parking requirements are going to be a lot less. In your other developments, how do you respond to encouraging people to take public transportation? Do you have clipper car programs? That would be the other part I would like to see here.

That's a great question. BART does have a requirement that the transit rights developments adopt what we call transportation demand management measures or TDM. So VARD has a checklist or it's kind of like a menu of options developers can choose from. They have to implement enough of those measures to achieve what would likely get them 20% less driving by their residents and workers compared to a development that didn't take those measures. And the ones that move the needle most, that reduce single occupant vehicles the most are providing less parking, because people don't usually own cars if they don't have anywhere to put them, and providing the clever cars, like you said. Those are very popular and also sometimes the clipper cards are required by affordable housing funding to for the affordable buildings. Through, for instance, the state's affordable housing and sustainable communities program, they. they generally have to give their residents those. And then if we can get the market-ready developers to do the same, that's great. There is a Clipper Bay Pass now that is rolling out where large employers or landlords can buy bulk Clipper cards at a discounted rate. And so that's, by the time a project like this came online and became occupied, that might be more widespread.

Just out of curiosity, how does that work? I mean, you get a Clipper card that's unlimited.

You can write actually all transit systems in the Bay Area for free all month with your card. The reason it's relatively affordable for employers and landlords and so forth to buy and distribute them or sell them to their participants is that some people use them and some people don't. For those who use them, they get a tremendous value. And for those who don't use them, it's no cost to Barb. For someone to have a card they don't use. So it's kind of, you know, if you can predict roughly about how many people use them and how many trips, you can make it work.

And is that how it works? There's a card that, I mean, that's the clinical card, which is an unlimited amount on there? Or is there like a... I could get you more information. If you don't know, that's fine. I'm just kidding.

It's everything I know.

Yeah, no, that's fine. Anyways, okay. Perfect.

I just also wanted to know, do you have any partnerships where you do shuttle service with businesses to get to bar?

We do partner in the sense that we allow shuttles, employer shuttles, other shuttles. educational institution shuttles to use our curbsides and our bus stops within our property to pick up their riders. We haven't, you know, we've met with some providers like, but generally these like commuter shuttles that are not associated with a regular employer or institution, they tend to be very costly per ride. So I've seen pilot projects, but I haven't often seen them

service extended past the pilot i see thank you for that okay great uh can you remind me how many i know that some uh uh like parking is a concern for some of these toe developments i think here we're in a unique position because we actually have a parking structure here and you said we're only using 25 of it currently how many how many spots total do we have in that structure

Um, 1,235. Okay.

So I just want to share, I think we're a little bit okay when it comes to parking for this specific project, but I think, you know, as we look at South Hayward and other projects in the future, we'll have to be careful about that. And then I just wanted to advocate for bike parking as one of the TDM measures I would like to emphasize for these projects. We are distributing 2,000 free bicycles, as you might have heard from George, through our Hayward Rides program. A lot of times folks that are living in smaller dwellings have a hard time storing and stowing their bikes. So having bike parking inside, safe, protected, I think would be a significant benefit that meshes with a lot of the other policies that the city's trying to advance as well.

Yeah, the requirement in the TOD for any new housing would be one bike parking space per unit. Right. So you get to be a pretty big bike group when you have these large buildings.

Great. Thank you. So what I'm hearing is talk to the BART board softly. And we support this. Tell them to hurry up. Softly.

Okay.

Do you have everything you need?

Yes. Thank you so much for the feedback. Really appreciate it, David.

And you guys have everything. Yes. George, now that I know that you work for the city. And you have, okay.

Thank you, Shannon.

Okay. Thank you very much. Appreciate that. Okay. So I will now move on to the next, I hope. Which is a future agenda.

So, the next meeting is going to be on August 26. we have 2 meeting items to bring you. One is a site recommendation and project update for the public safety center. And the other one is corporate needs assessment and a layout that we'll be able to show you. It has to be on August 26th. If you don't mind, we can push it to October.

It's my birthday. How about if we bring you cake? I want to expect cake.

Well, today we moved this one because we're not having...

I'm kidding.

Tuesday. We could look at the other Tuesday.

Yeah, no. We might be able to move it. We could. I'll just... I just want a big cake. Cake. Okay. Oh, I meant a big cake. Sheet cake. I like sheet cake. Flavor. Classy.

Let me give you just more information about closed-loop systems in recycled water. Yeah, just something like the latest and greatest from whatever your research is. Yeah, I also had an idea that I haven't had a chance to talk to Dr. Miriam about, so he might

kick me all the way over there. But maybe we look at the Council Sustainability Commission to pick either one. So just something I had an idea that I had the data centers, the environmental impacts and all that might be a good fit for that committee. So it's not my, I haven't had a chance to return to the world.

Any committee is fine. I can watch. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you, Vivian. Okay. Here we go. ANY COMMITTEE MEMBER STAFF ANNOUNCEMENTS OR REFERRALS? SEEING NONE, MEETING ADJOURNED. THANK YOU.