v. Air conditioning condensate;
vi. Irrigation water;
vii. Landscape irrigation;
viii. Lawn or garden watering;
ix. Planned and unplanned discharges from potable water sources; x. Water line and hydrant flushing;
xi. Individual residential car washing; and
xii. Discharges or flows from emergency fire fighting activities; The Permittees shall identify and describe the categories of discharges listed in Provision C.9.b that they wish to exempt from Prohibition A in periodic submissions to the Executive Officer. For each such category, the Permittees shall identify and describe as necessary and appropriate to the category either documentation that the discharges are not sources of pollutants to receiving waters or circumstances in which they are not found to b e sources of pollutants to receiving waters. Otherwise, the Permittees shall describe control measures to eliminate adverse impacts of such sources, procedures and Performance Standards for their implementation, procedures for notifying the Regional Board of these discharges, and procedures for monitoring and record management. Permittees shall resubmit appropriate revised and/or additional control measures whenever there is a change in the quality of the discharge. For example, the use of recycled water for irrigation shall lead to the implementation of additional control measures in order to reduce chlorine levels before releasing the discharge to the storm drain system. Such submissions shall be deemed to be incorporated into the Management Plan unless disapproved by the Executive Officer or acted on in accordance with Provision C.12 and the NPDES permit regulations.
c. Permit Authorization for Exempted Discharges
i. Discharges of non- stormwater from sources owned or operated by the Permittees are authorized and permitted by this Order, if they are in accordance with the conditions of this Provision and the Management Plan.
ii. The Regional Board may require dischargers of non- stormwater other than the Permittees to apply for and obtain coverage under an NPDES permit and comply with the control measures developed by the Permittees pursuant to this Provision. Non- stormwater discharges that are in compliance with such control measures may be accepted by the Permittees and are not subject to Prohibition A. iii. The Permittees may propose, as part of their annual updates to the Management Plan under Provision C.7 of this Order, additional categories of non- stormwater discharges to be included in the exemption to Prohibition A. Such proposals are subject to approval by the Regional Board in accordance with the NPDES permit regulations.
10. Water Quality-Based Requirements for Specific Pollutants of Concern In accordance with Provision C.1 and Finding 22 of this Order, the Permittees shall implement control programs for pollutants that have the reasonable potential to cause or contribute to exceedances of water quality standards. These control programs shall include the following:
a. Control Program for Copper
The Permittees have submitted a Copper Pollutant Reduction Plan (PRP) that includes a general strategy to monitor the concentration of copper in stormwater runoff and lists BMPs that may be used to reduce copper discharges. The program will further refine the Copper PRP by providing detailed descriptions of activities in each fiscal year. The refined PRP ATTACHMENT III-a
shall be included in the Program's submittal of the Annual Workplan by 100 days of adoption of this Order, and evaluations and results shall be reported in the Annual Reports. b. Control Program for Mercury
The Mercury Pollutant Reduction Plan (Mercury Plan) shall be refined to include all of the following:
i. Development and adoption of policies, procedures, and/or ordinances calling for:
• The reduction of mercury from controllable sources in urban runoff to the maximum extent practicable, including the identification of mercury-containing products used by the Permittees and a schedule for their timely phase out where appropriate; and • Coordination with solid waste management agencies to ensure maximum recycling of fluorescent lights and/or establishment of "take back" programs for the public collection of mercury -containing household products (potentially including thermometers and other gauges, batteries, fluorescent and other lamps, switches, relays, sensors and thermostats);
ii. A schedule for assisting the Regional Board staff in conducting an assessment of the contribution of air pollution sources to mercury in the Permittees' urban runoff (potentially including an identification of significant mercury air emission sources, an inventory of relevant mercury air emissions and a review of options for reducing or eliminating mercury air emissions);
iii. Assessment of the sediment mercury concentrations and percentage of fine material at the base of key watersheds, above the tide line;
iv. A public education, outreach and participation program designed to reach residential, commercial and industrial users or sources of mercury -containing products or emissions; and,
v. Participation with other organizations to encourage the electric light bulb manufacturing industry to reduce mercury associated with the disposal of fluorescent lights through product reformulation.
The Mercury Plan shall be refined and incorporated in the Program's submittal of the Annual Workplan by 100 days of adoption of this order. The Mercury Plan shall refine the schedule for implementation that Permittees are currently working under. To facilitate the development of the actions specified above, the Permittees may coordinate with publicly owned treatment works and other agencies to develop cooperative plans and programs. c. Control Program for Pesticides
To address the impairment of urban streams by diazinon and other pesticides, the Permittees shall continue to implement and refine the previously submitted Diazinon Pollutant Reduction Plan (Pesticide Plan) to address their own use of pesticides including diazinon, other lower priority pesticides no longer in use such as chlordane, dieldrin and DDT, and the use of such pesticides by other sources within their jurisdictions. The Permittees may coordinate with agencies and organizations such as the Bay Area Stormwater Management Agencies Association or the Urban Pesticide Committee. The Pesticide Plan shall include a schedule for implementation and a mechanism for reviewing and amending the plan, as necessary, in subsequent years. The refined Pesticide Plan shall be resubmitted for approval to the Executive Officer by 100 days of adoption of this order.
i. Pesticide Use by Permittees
The Pesticide Plan shall include a program to quantitatively identify each Permittee's pesticide use by preparing a periodically updated inventory of pesticides used by all ATTACHMENT III-a
internal departments, divisions, and other operational units as applicable to each Permittee. Schools and special district operations shall be included in the Pesticide Plan to the full extent of each Permittee's authority. The Permittees shall adopt and verifiably implement policies, procedures, and/or ordinances requiring the minimization of pesticide use and the use of integrated pest management (IPM) techniques in the Permittees' operations if they have not already done so. The policies, procedures, and/or ordinances shall include: 1) commitments to reduce use, phase-out, and ultimately eliminate use of pesticides that cause impairment of surface waters, and 2) commitments to not increase the Permittees' use of organophosphate pesticides without justifying the necessity and minimizing adverse water quality impacts. The Permittees shall implement training programs for their employees who use pesticides, including pesticides available over the counter. These programs shall address pesticide-related surface water toxicity, proper use and disposal of such pesticides, and least toxic methods of pest prevention and control, including IPM. The Pesticide Plan shall be subject to updating via the Permittees' improvement process. ii. Other Pesticide Sources
To address other pesticide users within the Permittees' jurisdictions (including schools and special district operations that are not owned or operated by the Permittees), the Pesticide Plan shall include the following elements:
1. Public education and outreach programs. Such programs shall be designed for residential and commercial pesticide users and pest control operators. These programs shall provide targeted information concerning proper pesticide use and disposal, potential adverse impacts on water quality, and alternative, least toxic methods of pest prevention and control, including IPM. These programs shall also target pesticide retailers to encourage the sale of least toxic alternatives and to facilitate point-of-sale public outreach efforts. These programs may also recognize local least toxic pest management practitioners.
2. Mechanisms to discourage pesticide use at new development sites. Such mechanisms shall encourage the consideration of pest -resistant landscaping and design features, minimization of impervious surfaces, and incorporation of stormwater detention and retention techniques in the design, landscaping, and/or environmental reviews of proposed development projects. Education programs shall target individuals responsible for these reviews and focus on factors affecting water quality impairment.
3. Coordination with household hazardous waste collection agencies. The Permittees shall support, enhance, and help publicize programs for proper pesticide disposal. iii. Other Pesticide Activities
The Permittees shall work with municipal stormwater management agencies in the Bay Area and other parties with interest in or responsibilities for reducing pesticide - related toxicity in surface water (for example, with the Urban Pesticide Committee) to assess which pesticide products, uses and past uses pose the greatest risks to surface water quality. Along with incorporating this information into the programs described above, the Permittees shall encourage US EPA, the California Department of Pesticide Regulation (DPR), and pesticide manufacturers to understand the adverse impacts of pesticides on urban creeks, monitor US EPA and DPR activities related to the registration of diazinon products and uses, and actively encourage US EPA, DPR, and pesticide manufacturers to eliminate, reformulate, or otherwise curtail, to the extent possible, the sale and use of pesticides that pose substantial risks to surface water quality (e.g., when there is a high potential for runoff).
ATTACHMENT III-a
The Program shall also work with the Regional Board and other agencies in developing a TMDL for diazinon in impaired urban creeks. The Program will participate in stakeholder forums and collaborative technical studies necessary to assist the Regional Board in completing the TMDL. These studies may include, but shall not be limited to, additional diazinon monitoring and toxicity testing. d. Control Program for Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) and Dioxin Compounds The Permittees shall work with other municipal stormwater management agencies in the Bay Area to implement a plan to identify, assess, and manage controllable sources of PCBs and dioxin-like compounds found in urban runoff (PCBs/Dioxin Plan). The PCBs/Dioxin Plan shall include actions to:
i. Characterize the representat ive distribution of PCBs and dioxin- like compounds in the urban areas of Alameda County to determine: a) what concentrations and what types of PCBs and dioxin-like compounds are present in urban runoff, b) how such PCBs or dioxin-like compounds are distrib uted in urban areas, and c) whether storm drains or other surface drainage pathways are sources of PCBs or dioxin- like compounds in themselves, or whether there are specific locations within urban watersheds where prior or current uses result in land sourc es contributing to discharges of PCBs or dioxin -like compounds to San Francisco Bay via urban runoff conveyance systems; ii. Provide information to allow calculation of PCBs and dioxin-like compound loads to San Francisco Bay from urban runoff conveyance systems;
iii. Identify control measures and/or management practices to eliminate or reduce discharges of PCBs or dioxin- like compounds conveyed by urban runoff conveyance systems in Alameda County;
iv. Implement actions to eliminate or reduce discharges of PCBs or dioxin-like compounds from urban runoff conveyance systems from controllable sources (if any); and, v. Develop a long-term management plan for eliminating and reducing PCB discharges. vi. Action Plan: The PCBs/Dioxin Plan shall describe s pecific steps to be taken by the Permittees for implementing any emission reduction strategies to the MEP standard.
The Plan shall note the specific actions to be taken, identify the agency(ies) responsible for implementation, and include a timeline for the completion of each action item. The portion of the PCB/Dioxin Plan addressing action areas d.i and d.ii shall be implemented forthwith for PCBs. The workplan that was submitted for PCBs addressing action areas d.i, d.ii, and d.iii, including a schedule f or implementation, shall be refined and submitted, acceptable to the Executive Officer, by June 1, 2003. A workplan addressing areas d.i and d.ii for dioxin- like compounds shall be submitted, acceptable to the Executive Officer, by March 1, 2004. The porti on of the PCB/Dioxin Plan addressing action area d.iv, including a schedule for implementation, shall be submitted, acceptable to the Executive Officer, within one year after adoption of this Order for PCBs and within eighteen months after adoption of this Order for dioxin-like compounds; implementation shall begin no later than one year and six (6) months after adoption of this Order for PCBs and two (2) years after adoption of this Order for dioxin-like compounds, although implementation of early action priorities should take place before that date. The Permittees may coordinate with other stormwater programs and/or other organizations to implement cooperative plans and programs to facilitate implementation of the specified actions.
e. Control Program for Sediment
The Permittees shall conduct an analysis of excess sediment impairment in urban streams and assess management practices that are currently being implemented and additional management practices that will be implemented to prevent or reduce excess sediment ATTACHMENT III-a
impairment in urban creeks, and implement any additional management practices necessary to prevent or reduce excess sediment impairment in urban creeks.
11. Watershed Management
The Permittees shall implement watershed management measures based on identification of relevant watershed characteristics (land imperviousness, conditions of creeks, land uses, etc.) and identification of control measures and other actions in the Management Plan that are appropriately implemented on a watershed basis with the recognition that there may be unique values, problems, goals, and strategies specific to individual watersheds. Watershed management measures also seek to develop and implement the most cost effective approaches to solving identified problems and to coordinate these activities with other related programs. a. The Permittees shall submit to the Regional Board, within a year after adoption of this Order, a report concerning the integration of watershed management activities into the Management Plan. The Program may submit this report on behalf of the Permittees. The report shall, at a minimum:
i. Identify the watersheds that are relevant to each Permittee; ii. Identify key characteristics related to urban runoff in each watershed and program elements related to such characteristics;
iii. Provide a priority listing of watersheds to be assessed and a schedule for conducting such assessments, including: 1) investigating beneficial uses and causes of impairment, 2) reviewing, compiling, and disseminating environmental data, and 3) developing and implementing strategies for controlling adverse impacts of land use on beneficial uses;
iv. Assess each Permittee's implementation of watershed management activities; and, v. Outline steps needed for improvement in addressing priorities within each watershed. b. The Program should also work with Regional Board staff to apply a regulatory strategy that allows the Permittees to find ways to coordinate with other agencies within a specific watershed to protect beneficial uses.
12. Modifications to the Management Plan
It is anticipated that the Management Plan may need to be modified, revised, or amended from time to time to respond to changed conditions and to incorporate more effective approaches to pollutant control. Requests for changes may be initiated by the Executive Officer or by the Permittees. Minor changes may be made with the Executive Officer's approval and will be brought to the Regional Board as information items and the Permittees and interested parties will be notified accordingly. If proposed changes imply a major revision of the Program, the Executive Officer shall bring such changes before the Regional Board as permit amendments and notify the Permittees and interested parties accordingly.
13. Modifications to this Order
This Order may be modified, or alternatively, revoked or reissued, prior to the expiration date as follows:
a. To address significant changed conditions identified in the technical reports required by the Regional Board that were unknown at the time of the issuance of this Order; b. To incorporate applicable requirements of statewide water quality control plans adopted by the State Board or amendments to the Basin Plan approved by the State Board; or c. To comply with any applicable requirements, guid elines, or regulations issued or approved under Section 402(p) of the CWA, if the requirement, guideline, or regulation so issued or approved contains different conditions or additional requirements not provided for in this ATTACHMENT III-a
Order. The Order as modified or reissued under this paragraph shall also contain any other requirements of the CWA then applicable.
14. Each of the Permittees shall comply with all parts of the Standard Provisions contained in Appendix A of this Order.
15. This Order expires on February 19, 2008, five (5) years from the date of adoption of this Order by the Regional Board. The Permittees must file a Report of Waste Discharge in accordance with Title 23, California Code of Regulations, not later than 180 days in advance of such date as application for reissuance of waste discharge requirements.
16. Order Nos. 97-030 and 99-049 are hereby rescinded.
I, Loretta K. Barsamian, Executive Officer, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a full, true, and correct copy of an Order adopted by the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, San Francisco Bay Region, on February 19, 2003.
_______________________________
Loretta K. Barsamian
Executive Officer
APPENDIX A - STANDARD PROVISIONS
APPENDIX B- PROVISION C.3 REQUIREMENTS:
Table 1. Summary of Annual and One-Time Reporting Requirements Table 2. Implementation Schedule
ATTACHMENT A - Alameda Countywide Clean Water Program Stormwater Quality Management Plan - Title Page and Table of Contents
ATTACHMENT B - Watershed Assessment and Monitoring Strategy for Fiscal Years 2002-2008 ATTACHMENT C - Municipalities and Major Open Creeks and Waterbodies in Alameda County Footnotes:
--- (8) ---
Note— Retail Gasoline Outlets: New Development Design Standards for Mitigation of Stormwater Impacts - California Water Quality Control Board, Los Angeles Region, and California Water Quality Control Board, San Diego Region, Technical Report, prepared by Radulescu, Swamikannu, and Hammer, 2001.
--- (9) ---
Note— A discussion of imperviousness based on type of development and time of construction is provided in Heaney, J.B., Pitt, R, and Field, R. Innovative Urban Wet-Weather Flow Management Systems, 1999. USEPA Doc. No. EPA/600/R-99/029 (Chapter 2).
CITY OF HAYWARD
Hayward City Hall
777 B Street
Hayward, CA 94541
www.Hayward-CA.gov
File #: PH 23-017
DATE: April 11, 2023
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Director of Public Works
SUBJECT
Valley Street East of 4th Street to C Street: Adopt a Resolution Vacating Right-of-Way of Valley Street East of 4th Street to C Street Pursuant to the Provisions of California Streets and Highways Code Sections 8320 et. seq.
RECOMMENDATION
That Council conducts a public hearing, considers comments received before or at the hearing, and adopts a resolution (Attachment II) making findings and vacating the right-of-way of Valley Street east of 4th Street to C Street, pursuant to the provisions of California Streets and Highways Code Sections 8320 et seq.
SUMMARY
The Valley Street right-of-way east of 4th Street to C Street is less than 117 feet long and 3,500 square feet in area. This portion of the Valley Street right-of-way has not been used for vehicular travel for an extended period (more than 15 years). Vehicular and pedestrian travel along Valley Street has been rerouted to 4th Street and C Street to improve traffic safety. This traffic diversion is consistent with the City’s General Plan. Approximately 12.5 feet of the street right-of-way to be vacated, at its most north- easterly triangular tip fronts the lot at 1421 C Street and has been used for access to the driveway to the lot. This property (less than 100 square feet) will be offered to the owner of the lot at 1421 C Street by staff with the condition that it be merged with the existing lot for single family residential and RS zoning, consistent with the lot’s current land use and zoning designation.
Except for a small area fronting the lot at 1421 C Street, the right-of-way proposed to be vacated is neither necessary for access to any fronting property, nor useful for street purposes or as a non- motorized transportation facility. Engineering Division staff’s recent inquiries have indicated that no public utility is located within the portion of the Valley Street right-of-way to be vacated except for a street drain inlet and a short length drainpipe. This drainage system will need to be relocated after the street right-of-way is vacated and the property is quit-claimed by the City for merger with adjoining parcel for single family residential land use in a RS Zone.
CITY OF HAYWARD Printed on 4/7/2023Page 1 of 2
powered by Legistar™
File #:PH 23-017
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment I Staff Report
Attachment II Resolution
Attachment III Location Map
CITY OF HAYWARD Printed on 4/7/2023Page 2 of 2
powered by Legistar™
DATE: April 11, 2023
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Director of Public Works
SUBJECT
Adopt a Resolution Vacating Right-of-Way of Valley Street East of 4th Street to C Street Pursuant to the Provisions of California Streets and Highways Code Sections 8320 et. seq.
RECOMMENDATION
That Council conducts a public hearing, considers comments received before or at the hearing, and adopts a resolution (Attachment II) making findings and vacating the right-of- way of Valley Street east of 4th Street to C Street, pursuant to the provisions of California Streets and Highways Code Sections 8320 et seq.
SUMMARY
The Valley Street right-of-way east of 4th Street to C Street is less than 117 feet long and 3,500 square feet in area. This portion of the Valley Street right-of-way has not been used for vehicular travel for an extended period (more than 15 years). Vehicular and pedestrian travel along Valley Street has been rerouted to 4th Street and C Street to improve traffic safety. This traffic diversion is consistent with the City’s General Plan. Approximately 12.5 feet of the street right-of-way to be vacated, at its most north-easterly triangular tip fronts the lot at 1421 C Street and has been used for access to the driveway to the lot. This property (less than 100 square feet) will be offered to the owner of the lot at 1421 C Street by staff with the condition that it be merged with the existing lot for single family residential and RS zoning, consistent with the lot’s current land use and zoning designation.
Except for a small area fronting the lot at 1421 C Street, the right-of-way proposed to be vacated is neither necessary for access to any fronting property, nor useful for street purposes or as a non-motorized transportation facility. Engineering Division staff’s recent inquiries have indicated that no public utility is located within the portion of the Valley Street right-of-way to be vacated except for a street drain inlet and a short length drainpipe. This drainage system will need to be relocated after the street right-of-way is vacated and the property is quit-claimed by the City for merger with adjoining parcel for single family residential land use in a RS Zone.
BACKGROUND
Council may initiate a proceeding under its own initiative as per section 8320 of the California Streets and Highways Code. The notice inviting public comments before or at the time, place and date of the Council Public Hearing were posted on March 16, 2023 and March 31, 2023, published in compliance with the provisions of Sections 8322 and 8323 of the State Streets and Highways Code. The notice included a description of the public street right-of-way to be vacated and a plan showing its location.
Council may adopt a resolution vacating the street right-of-way based on the evidence offered by persons and Staff at the public hearing and after finding that the public street right-of-way described in the notice of hearing is unnecessary for present or prospective public use. The resolution of vacation includes the findings that the right-of-way vacation of Valley Street, east of 4th Street to C Street, is consistent with the City’s General Plan, not used for more than 15 years and is exempt from the provisions of the Surplus Land Act.
The resolution also instructs the City Clerk to file it in public records of the County Clerk of Alameda County with proper certification.
The City Clerk shall cause a certified copy of the resolution of vacation, attested by the clerk under seal, to be recorded without acknowledgement in the office of the Alameda County Recorder’s Office.
DISCUSSION
The City’s General Plan does not prescribe any present or prospective use of the street right-of-way proposed for vacation. It is therefore not necessary to seek recommendations from the City’s Planning Commission. Some entities authorized by the California Public Utilities Commission to locate their public service facilities within public street rights-of- way have reported to the City’s Public Works staff that their public service facilities are not located within the limits of the street right-of-way to be vacated. Any request by a public service agency submitted to the staff before the noticed public hearing date and time for retaining a portion of the street right-of-way or an easement within the public street right- of-way to be vacated for its present or future use will be presented to the Council at the public hearing.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The proposed street right-of-way vacation is categorically exempt from environmental review in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15301, Class 1 (Minor Alteration of Existing Facilities).
ECONOMIC AND FISCAL IMPACT
The owner of the property adjacent to the public street right-of-way to be vacated is interested in acquiring property underlying the current street right-of-way at prevailing market rate. City staff will explore the possible sale of this property after the street right-of- way is vacated.
SUSTAINABILITY FEATURES
After vacation of the street right-of-way, the underlying property can be offered for use consistent with the City’s zoning and land use regulations.
Prepared by: Kathy Garcia, Deputy Director of Public Works Mo Sharma, Senior Civil Engineer
Recommended by: Alex Ameri, Director of Public Works
Approved by:
Kelly McAdoo, City Manager
ATT ACHMENT II
HAYWARD CITY COUNCIL
RESOLUTION NO. 23-____
Introduced by Council Member __________
RESOLUTION VACATING THE RIGHT-OF-WAY OF VALLEY STREET EAST OF 4th STREET TO C STREET
WHEREAS, the right-of-way of Valley Street, between 4th Street and C Street, has not been used for street purposes for more than fifteen years after steel barriers were placed east of 4th Street and pedestrian and vehicular traffic was relocated on existing nearby streets for safety reasons; and
WHEREAS, the City’s Director of Public Works has requested the City Council to vacate the portion of Valley Street right-of-way no longer used for street purposes as provided for in Section 8320 of the Streets and Highways code; and
WHEREAS, notices of public hearing were published in the Daily Review, a newspaper of general circulation in Hayward and posted on-site as per the Streets and Highways Code Sections 8322 and 8323 respectively on March 17 and March 31, 2023; and WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing on April 11, 2023, pursuant to Section 8324 of the California Streets and Highways Code to consider vacation of a portion of street right-of-way of Valley Street no longer used for street purposes east of 4th Street to C Street, except for approximately 12.5 feet across the frontage of the lot at 1421 C Street.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Hayward as follows:
1. City Council does hereby find that a portion of street right-of-way of Valley Street, east of 4 th Street to C Street is no longer needed for street purposes east of 4 th Street to C with the provision that its portions shall be offered for merger with adjoining parcels subject to their current land use and zoning; and
2. City Council does hereby determine that the vacation of Valley Street right-of-way, east of 4th Street to C Street is exempt from the provisions of the Surplus Land Act:
and
3. City Council does hereby vacate a portion of street right -of-way of Valley Street, east of 4th Street to C Street with the provision that its portions shall be offered for merger with adjoining parcels subject to their current land use and zoning; and
4. Reference is hereby made to the map and description of the right-of-way vacated, attached hereto as Exhibits A, and on file in the office of the City Clerk; and
ATT ACHMENT II
5. City Clerk is authorized and directed to cause a certified copy of this resolution to be recorded in the office of the Alameda County Recorder, and from and after the date of this resolution is recorded, the right of way vacated herein shall no longer constitute a street or highway.
IN COUNCIL, HAYWARD, CALIFORNIA _________________________ ADOPTED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
MAYOR:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ATTEST: ______________________________________
City Clerk of the City of Hayward
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_________________________________________
City Attorney of the City of Hayward
CITY OF HAYWARD
Hayward City Hall
777 B Street
Hayward, CA 94541
www.Hayward-CA.gov
File #: PH 23-019
DATE: April 11, 2023
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Assistant City Manager
SUBJECT
Hayward Hangars Airport Hangar Project TEFRA Hearing: Tax and Equity Fiscal Responsibility Act Hearing as Required by the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, and Adoption of a Resolution Approving the Issuance of Revenue Bonds by the Public Finance Authority in an Amount Not-to-Exceed $5,512,000 to Finance or Refinance the Construction, Furnishing and Equipping of an Aircraft Storage Hangar Project Located at 20995 Skywest Drive, Hayward, California
RECOMMENDATION
That Council:
1. Conducts a public hearing to consider the issuance by the Public Finance Authority (the "Authority") of its exempt facility airport revenue bonds under Section 142(a)(1) of the Internal Revenue Code (the "Code"), in one or more tax-exempt or taxable series (the "Bonds"), to assist in the financing or refinancing of an aircraft storage hangar project located at 20995 Skywest Drive, Hayward, California (as more particularly defined below, the "Project"); and
2. Adopts a resolution (Attachment II) approving the issuance of the Bonds by the Authority for the benefit of the developer, Hayward Hangars, LLC (the "Borrower"), to provide for the financing of the Project, such adoption being necessary for the purposes of satisfying the requirements of the Code and the statute under which the Authority is created.
SUMMARY
The Council has been asked by the Borrower to conduct a public hearing for purposes of satisfying the applicable requirements of the Code in connection with the proposed issuance by the Authority of the Bonds. The Bonds will be used to assist in the financing of all or a portion of the costs of: (i) the construction, furnishing and equipping of an approximately 25,900 square foot aircraft storage hangar, consisting of twelve (12) box hangar units, to be located at the Hayward Executive Airport, 20995 Skywest Drive, Hayward, California (the "Airport") in the City of Hayward, California (the "City"); (ii) refinancing certain outstanding lines of credit, loans and promissory notes of the Borrower, which financed and refinanced other airport-related facilities at the Airport; and (iii) paying costs of issuance CITY OF HAYWARD Printed on 4/7/2023Page 1 of 2
powered by Legistar™
File #:PH 23-019
related to the Bonds (collectively, the "Project"). The box hangar units will be designed to accommodate general aviation aircraft and aviation-related businesses.
In furtherance of the Project description above, the airport hangars are a vital part of the Airport. In addition to the hangars in the Project, there are currently 206 City-owned hangars at the Airport, most of which are T-hangars. The total also includes several City-owned 60’ x 60’ box hangars, along with two (2) large hangars owned by private parties that offer “footprint" leases for airplanes. All of the City-owned hangars are fully occupied. There are also 15 large hangar units (ranging from 5,000 to 12,000 square feet) that cater to owners of larger corporate jets. According to Airport management, there are currently 461 aircraft based at the Airport and 192 names on the waiting lists for City-owned hangars. The Airport benefits from its convenient location in the Bay Area, in which many affluent owners of general aviation (“GA”) aircraft are based, but which suffers from a shortage of hangars and desirable airports for GA aircraft.
This project would help facilitate the construction of much needed hangars at the Hayward Airport. The City bears no responsibility for repayment of these tax exempt bonds and simply acts as a conduit to facilitate the public hearing for issuance of the bonds.
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment I Staff Report
Attachment II Resolution
CITY OF HAYWARD Printed on 4/7/2023Page 2 of 2
powered by Legistar™
DATE: April 11, 2023
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Assistant City Manager
SUBJECT: Hayward Hangars Airport Hangar Project TEFRA Hearing: Tax and Equity Fiscal Responsibility Act Hearing as Required by the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, and Adoption of a Resolution Approving the Issuance of Revenue Bonds by the Public Finance Authority in an Amount Not -to-Exceed $5,512,000 to Finance or Refinance the Construction, Furnishing and Equipping of an Aircraft Storage Hangar Project Located at 20995 Skywest Drive, Hayward, California
RECOMMENDATION
That Council:
1. Conducts a public hearing to consider the issuance by the Public Finance Authority (the "Authority") of its exempt facility airport revenue bonds under Section 142(a)(1) of the Internal Revenue Code (the "Code"), in one or more tax-exempt or taxable series (the "Bonds"), to assist in the financing or refinancing of an aircraft storage hangar project located at 20995 Skywest Drive, Hayward, California (as more particularly defined below, the "Project"); and
2. Adopts a resolution (Attachment II) approving the issuance of the Bonds by the Authority for the benefit of the developer, Hayward Hangars, LLC (the "Borrower"), to provide for the financing of the Project, such adoption being necessary for the purposes of satisfying the requirements of the Code and the statute under which the Authority is created.
SUMMARY
The Council has been asked by the Borrower to conduct a public hearing for purposes of satisfying the applicable requirements of the Code in connection with the proposed issuance by the Authority of the Bonds. The Bonds will be used to assist in the financing of all or a portion of the costs of: (i) the construction, furnishing and equipping of an approximately 25,900 square foot aircraft storage hangar, consisting of twelve (12) box hangar units, to be located at the Hayward Executive Airport, 20995 Skywest Drive,
Hayward, California (the "Airport") in the City of Hayward, California (the "City"); (ii) refinancing certain outstanding lines of credit, loans and promissory notes of the Borrower, which financed and refinanced other airport-related facilities at the Airport; and (iii) paying costs of issuance related to the Bonds (collectively, the "Project"). The box hangar units will be designed to accommodate general aviation aircraft and aviation-related businesses.
In furtherance of the Project description above, the airport hangars are a vital part of the Airport. In addition to the hangars in the Project, there are currently 206 City-owned hangars at the Airport, most of which are T-hangars. The total also includes several City- owned 60’ x 60’ box hangars, along with two (2) large hangars owned by private parties that offer “footprint" leases for airplanes. All of the City-owned hangars are fully occupied.
There are also 15 large hangar units (ranging from 5,000 to 12,000 square feet) that cater to owners of larger corporate jets. According to Airport management, there are currently 461 aircraft based at the Airport and 192 names on the waiting lists for City-owned hangars. The Airport benefits from its convenient location in the Bay Area, in which many affluent owners of general aviation (“GA”) aircraft are based, but which suffers from a shortage of hangars and desirable airports for GA aircraft.
This project would help facilitate the construction of much ne eded hangars at the Hayward Airport. The City bears no responsibility for repayment of these tax exempt bonds and simply acts as a conduit to facilitate the public hearing for issuance of the bonds.
BACKGROUND
In furtherance of the Project description above, the airport hangars are a vital part of the Airport. In addition to the hangars in th e Project, there are currently 206 City -owned hangars at the Airport, most of which are T -hangars. The total also include s several City - owned 60’ x 60’ box hangars, along with two (2) large hangars owned by private parties that offer “footprint" leases for airplanes. All of the City-owned hangars are fully occupied. There are also 15 large hangar units (ranging from 5,000 to 12,000 square feet) that cater to owners of larger corporate jets. According to Airport management, there are currently 461 aircraft based at the Airport and 192 names on the waiting lists for City-owned hangars. The Airport benefits from its convenient location in the Bay Area, in which many affluent owners of general aviation (“GA”) aircraft are based, but which suffers from a shortage of hangars and desirable airports for GA aircraft. The City is twenty -five (25) miles southeast of San Francisco, twenty-six (26) miles north of San Jose, and fourteen (14) miles south of Oakland.
The Airport offers two parallel runways, the longest of which is 5,694 feet long, and is a controlled field with a localizer system. Only a very small number of GA aircraft are based at San Francisco International Airport (“SFO”), and both SFO and Oakland airports are focused primarily on commercial traffic. Although Half Moon Bay Airport has one 5,000 foot runway, it lacks a control tower, and suffers from heavy fog. Pilo ts of even the smallest airplanes appreciate the extra margin of safety on takeoff and landing provided by a longer runway.
Other general aviation focused airports in the area have significantly shorter runways, and consequently cannot accommodate as many types of aircraft. Specifically, (i) the runways at
San Carlos and Palo Alto Airports are 2,600 and 2,500 feet long, respectively; (ii) the longer of the two runways at Reid -Hillview Airport is only 3,101 feet. In addition, Reid -Hillview Airport is scheduled to close in 2031, and a ban on the sale of leaded fuel at this airport took effect on January 1, 2022. Total operations (takeoffs and landings) at the Airport increased to 130,172 last year from 104,218 in 2020 and 115,094 in 2019
The Authority is the joint powers commission under Section 66.0304 of the Wisconsin Statutes (the “Statute”) and was formed upon execution of an Amended and Restated Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement Relating to the Public Finance Authority, dated September 28, 2010 among four Wisconsin Counties (Adams, Bayfield, Marathon, and Waupaca) and the City of Lancaster, Wisconsin (collectively, the “Members”). Pursuant to the Statute, the Authority is a unit of government and a body corporate and politic separate and distinct from, and independent of, the State of Wisconsin and the Members. The Authority was established by local governments, primarily for local governments, for the public purpose of providing local governments a means to efficiently and reliably finance projects that benefit local governments and nonprofit organizations and other eligible private borrowers in the State of Wisconsin and throughout the country.
The Authority has all of the powers necessary or convenient to any of the purposes under the Statute, i ncluding the power to issue bonds, notes or other obligations or refunding obligations to finance or refinance a project, make loans to, lease property from or to, and enter into agreements with a participant or other entity in connection with financing a project. The proceeds of bonds issued by the Authority may be used for a project in the State of Wisconsin or any other state or territory of the United States, or outside the United States if a participating borrower is incorporated and maintains its prin cipal place of business in, the United States or its territories. The Statute defines “project” as any capital improvement, purchase of receivables, property, assets, commodities, bonds or other revenue streams or related assets, working capital program, o r liability or other insurance program, located within or outside of the State of Wisconsin.
DISCUSSION
The Bonds will be issued in both tax -exempt and taxable series, in an aggregate principal amount not to exceed $5,512,000, of which the tax -exempt portion is in an amount not to exceed $3,937,500. This transaction is structured as a private placement of securities to finance or refinance the Project. See the discussion above under Summary and Background for more information regarding the Project.
The City’s Role in the Project
For all or a portion of the Bonds to qualify as tax -exempt bonds, the City must conduct a TEFRA hearing that provides members of the community an opportunity to speak in favor of or against the use of tax-exempt bonds for the financing of the Project. Prior to this hearing, reasonable notice must be provided to the members of the community. The Notice for this TEFRA hearing was published March 31, 2023. Following the close of the TEFRA Hearing, an
“applicable elected representative” of the governmental unit hosting the Project must provide its approval of the issuance of the Bonds to finance the Project.
In addition, the City approval by resolution of the Bonds satisfies the requirements of the statute under which the Authority is created.
ECONOMIC IMPACT
The Borrower anticipates that most of the tenants in the 12 new box hangar units will relocate to the Airport from other airports and therefore increase activity at the Airport.
They are also likely to patronize retail establishments in the vicinity of the Airport.
FISCAL IMPACT
The Bonds to be issued by the Authority for the Project will be the sole responsibility of the Borrower; the City will have no financial, legal, moral obligation, liability , or responsibility for the Project or the repayment of the Bonds. All financing documents with respect to the issuance of the Bonds will contain clear disclaimers that the Bonds are not obligations of the City or the State of California but are to be paid for solely from funds provided by the Borrower.
STRATEGIC ROADMAP
While this item does not relate dire ctly to any specific Strategic Roadmap Priority, it does serve the overall goal of the Council of enhancing economic development opportunities within the City.
PUBLIC CONTACT
Public noticing requirements related to TEFRA public hearings were strictly adhered to and followed. The public hearing notice was published in the Daily Review c/o Bay Area News Group – East Bay on March 31, 2023. Notice of this hearing was also published on the City’s website in March 2023.
NEXT STEPS
Staff recommends that the Council conducts the TEFRA Hearing and adopts the resolution in favor of the issuance of the Bonds by the Authority.
Prepared by and Recommended by: Dustin Claussen, Assistant City Manager
Approved by:
Kelly McAdoo, City Manager
ATTACHMENT II
RESOLUTION APPROVING THE ISSUANCE OF NOT TO EXCEED $5,512,000 OF
PUBLIC FINANCE AUTHO RITY INDUSTRIAL REVE NUE BONDS (HAYWARD HANGARS PROJECT), SE RIES 2023 FOR THE BE NEFIT OF HAYWARD
HANGARS, LLC
WHEREAS, the City Council (the "City Council") of the City of Hayward, California (the "City") met in Hayward, California, at 7:00 p.m. on the 11th day of April, 2023; and
WHEREAS, Hayward Hangars, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company (the "Borrower"), has requested that the Public Finance Authority (the "Authority") issue its Industrial Revenue Bonds (Hayward Hangars Project), Series 2023, in one or more tax - exempt or taxable series, in an aggregate principal amount not to exceed $5,512,000 (the "Bonds"), of which the tax-exempt portion is in an amount not to exceed $3,937,500; and
WHEREAS, the proceeds of the Bonds will be loaned to the Borrower and used by the Borrower to finance all or a portion of the costs of ( i) the construction, furnishing and equipping of an approximately 25,900 square foot aircraft s torage hangar, consisting of twelve (12) box hangar units, to be located at the Hayward Executive Airport, 20995 Skywest Drive, Hayward, California (the "Airport") in the City of Hayward, California (the "City"); (ii) refinancing certain outstanding lines of credit, loans and promissory notes of the Borrower, which financed and refinanced other airport-related facilities at the Airport; and (iii) paying costs of issuance related to the Bonds (collectively, the "Project"); and
WHEREAS, the Project will be initially principally used, owned, operated and/or managed by the Borrower; and
WHEREAS, Section 147(f) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the "Code") requires that any bonds issued by the Authority for the Project may only be issued after approval of the plan of financing by the City Council following a public hearing with respect to such plan; and
WHEREAS, the statute under which the Authority is created (the "Act") requires that any bonds issued by the Authority to finance the Project ma y only be issued after approval of the financing of the Project by the City Council; and
WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing with respect to the issuance of the Bonds, the proceeds of which will be used to finance the Project; and WHEREAS, the Borrower will agree to repay the principal, premium, if any, and interest on the Bonds and the City will have no liability whatsoever for the payment of principal of, premium, if any, or interest on the Bonds, and the Bonds will not affect the City's debt ratios or legal debt limit and the City will not incur any liability for repayment of the Bonds by approving the Bonds for purposes of Section 147(f) of the Code; and
ATTACHMENT II
WHEREAS, because no taxes or other revenues of the City are pledged to pay the Bonds, the staff of the City has made no financial analysis of the Bonds, the Borrower or the Project; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that approval of the issuance of the Bonds is solely to satisfy the requirements of Section 147(f) of the Code and the Act and shall in no event constitute an endorsement of the Bonds or the Project or the creditworthiness of the Borrower, nor shall such approval in any event be construed to obligate the City for the payment of the principal of or premium or interest on the Bonds or for the performance of any pledge, mortgage or obligation or agreement of any kind whatsoever which may be undertaken by the Authority, or to constitute the Bonds or any of the agreements or obligations of the Authority an indebtedness of the City, within the meaning of any constitutional or statutory provision whatsoever;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED , by the City Council of the City of Hayward as follows:
Section 1. The City Council hereby approves the issuance of the Bonds by the Authority for the purposes of financing the Project (Hayward Hangars Project). It is the purpose and intent of the City Council that this Resolution constitute approval of the issuance of the Bonds by the Authority, for the purposes of: (a) Section 147(f) of the Co de by the applicable elected representative of the governmental unit having jurisdiction over the area in which the Project is located, in accordance with said Section 147(f), and (b) the Act.
Section 2. The officers of the City Council are hereby authoriz ed and directed, jointly and severally, to do any and all things and to execute and deliver any and all documents, certificates and other instruments which they deem necessary or advisable in order to carry out, give effect to and comply with the terms and intent of this Resolution and the financing transaction approved hereby. Any actions heretofore taken by such officers are hereby ratified and approved.
Section 3. The City Council expressly conditions its approval of this Resolution on its understanding that the City shall have no obligation whatsoever to pay any principal, interest, fees or any other costs associated with the Authority's issuance of the Bonds for the financing of the Project.
Section 4. This Resolution shall take effect from and after it s passage and approval.
ATTACHMENT II
IN COUNCIL, HAYWARD, CALIFORNIA April 11, 2023
ADOPTED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
MAYOR:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ATTEST: ______________________________________
City Clerk of the City of Hayward
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
___________________________________________
City Attorney of the City of Hayward