Attachment V Written Public Correspondence — Hayward City Council, April 21, 2026

Written Public Correspondence
Business Friendly Hayward Project
Attachment V
September 25, 2025
Good evening Commissioners,
My name is Lesley Urista, owner of Puesto Market at 226 Jackson Street. I’m here regarding
Hayward Municipal Code Section 10-1.2759, which prevents new off-sale alcohol businesses within 500 feet of another.

Because my store is about 140 feet from a liquor store, I cannot move forward with my Type 20 Beer and Wine license application. The same denial happened in 2012 under a previous owner.

Since then, Hayward has grown by nearly 15,000 residents, and community needs have changed.

Puesto Market is not a liquor store. We are a family-owned grocery store, and my goal is to responsibly serve our customers and even partner with local wineries to highlight regional products.

I respectfully ask the Commission to consider updating this code so it better reflects today’s Hayward balancing safeguards while also supporting small businesses like mine. Thank you Sincerely,
--
Lesley Urista-Mendez. CFO
Puesto Markets. Inc
Correspondence Chain 1
From: Galvez, Janet
To: Elizabeth Blanton; Sachiko Riddle; ; Paul Nguyen; Daniel Mao Cc: Sidles, Philip
Subject: RE: Hayward Business Friendly Hayward Project
Date: Friday, January 9, 2026 1:21:28 PM
Attachments: image001.png
CAUTION:This is an external email. Do not click on links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe.

Thank you, Elizabeth!
As always, I really appreciate your detailed and thoughtful responses. It has truly been a pleasure collaborating with you over the years.

Over the past few months, Prologis has been actively engaging with various stakeholders in Hayward. As part of that effort, we are reintroducing PLD to the City with the goal of being an active, long-term community member and owner. Most recently we attended District 2’s Annual Holiday Food & Toy Drive in December with a truck load of toys for the First Presbyterian Church, Glad Tiding Church, La Familia and Eden Youth.

Given the magnitude of our portfolio in Hayward and our ongoing focus on innovation, it’s important for us to stay apprised of proposed changes affecting the industrial zoning districts.So Yes, we would very much welcome the opportunity to participate in a focus group or community meeting tailored to industrial business owners and developers, particularly to review the specific changes being proposed to the Industrial District use table. That forum would be extremely helpful, and we appreciate you offering this opportunity.

P.S. Hi Lucy and Paul!
Thank you,
Janet
From: Elizabeth Blanton <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, January 9, 2026 12:41 PM
To: Galvez, Janet >
Cc: Sachiko Riddle <[email protected]>; Sidles, Philip < >; ; Paul Nguyen <[email protected]>; Daniel Mao
<[email protected]>
Subject: RE: Hayward Business Friendly Hayward Project
*EXTERNAL EMAIL*
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of Prologis. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Correspondence Chain 2
Hi Janet,
Happy New Year!
Yes, the Planning Commission work session is still scheduled for January 22, and we now also have a work session with the Council scheduled for the following week on January 27. The agenda packet for the Planning Commission work session should be published next week on the 15 th, and I’ll be sure to forward it to you when it goes out. The Council agenda packet should be published by January 23. While not on the calendar yet, we’re shooting to have final adoption hearings for the project in March or April.

Yes – your understanding is correct. What is being proposed is that moving forward, data centers would only be allowed in the General Industrial (IG) zoning district with approval of a CUP. They no longer would be allowed in other industrial or commercial districts, though existing and previously approved data centers would be “grandfathered” in.

To date, outreach to the business community has included an online survey, a meeting with the Downtown Hayward Improvement Association, an article in the STACK Extra citywide e- newsletter, as well as informal conversations about the project with businesses who contact the Planning Division about potential projects. For example, a few months ago, a data center project contact the City that was considering locations in the IP zoning district reached out to the City.

Once their inquiry was forwarded to Planning, I immediately let them know of the proposed zoning changes that were being considered and the approximate timing of when the new changes would go into effect. (Perhaps you are involved with this project and that’s how you became aware of the proposed changes?)
That said, I’m happy to set up a focus group or community meeting that is more tailored to our Industrial business owners and developers so we can review the specific changes proposed to the Industrial District use table. Let me know if you think this would be helpful. I’m copying Lucy Lopez from the Hayward Chamber and Paul Nguyen from Economic Development who can assist in getting the word out about such a focus group should we move forward with one.

Again, thanks for engaging on this.

Elizabeth
Elizabeth Blanton (she/her)
Senior Planner
Phone 510-583-4206 | Email
[email protected]
777 B Street, Hayward, CA 94544
Permit Center | E-Permits Portal | E-Permits Portal Help Center From: Galvez, Janet
Sent: Wednesday, January 7, 2026 10:33 AM
To: Elizabeth Blanton <[email protected]> Cc: Sachiko Riddle <[email protected]>; Sidles, Philip > Subject: RE: Hayward Business Friendly Hayward Project
CAUTION:This is an external email. Do not click on links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe.

Hi Elizabeth,
Happy New Year! I hope you’re doing well. I wanted to follow up on the note below and check whether the Planning Commission workshop is still tentatively scheduled for January 22? We’ve heard there may be some proposed updates to the industrial regulations. Our understanding is that, once adopted, data centers may only be permitted with approval of a CUP in the General Industrial (IG) zoning district, which would mean they would no longer be allowed in the IP zone?
Based on the information published to date, there appears to be limited detail available on this topic. At the August PC workshop, staff noted that outreach to industrial stakeholders had not been conducted, as the changes were not expected to impact industrial uses. However, the potential removal of data centers from the IP zone feels like a meaningful change.

Will staff be publishing any additional information or analysis regarding this proposed change ahead of the PC workshop to allow stakeholders an opportunity to review and provide comment? Thank you very much for your time and help, I really appreciate it! Janet

From: Elizabeth Blanton <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2025 2:00 PM
To: Galvez, Janet >
Cc: Sachiko Riddle <[email protected]>
Subject: RE: Hayward Business Friendly Hayward Project
*EXTERNAL EMAIL*
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of Prologis. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Hi Janet,
Good to hear from you. We will add you to our mailing list. As of now, our next meeting is a Planning Commission workshop that is tentatively scheduled for January 22. The project webpage can be found here: https://www.hayward-ca.gov/your- government/departments/planning-division/business-friendly-hayward-project.

In the meantime, let me know if you have any questions or comments on the project.

Elizabeth
Elizabeth Blanton (she/her)
Senior Planner
Phone 510-583-4206 | Email
[email protected]
777 B Street, Hayward, CA 94544
Permit Center | E-Permits Portal | E-Permits Portal Help Center Please note: City Hall will close non-essential services during the week of Monday November 24, through November 28, 2025
. Inspections will not be scheduled during this time and will resume upon staff’s return to City Hall. Petitions, application submittals with required payment and resubmittals received by Wednesday, November 19, 2025 will be processed prior to the business closure; however, submittals/payments received between November 20 thru November 28, will be processed when offices reopen on Monday, December 1.

Submit your building plans early, building code is changing! New 2025 California Building Codes go in effect January 1, 2026.

From: Galvez, Janet >
Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2025 2:53 PM
To: Elizabeth Blanton <[email protected]> Subject: Hayward Business Friendly Hayward Project
CAUTION:This is an external email. Do not click on links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe.

Hi Elizabeth,
Hope you are well, can you add me to your distribution list for this initiative. Thank you! Janet Galvez | VP, Investment Officer

Pier 1, Bay 1 | San Francisco | California | 94111 | United States of America Direct | Mobile |
www.prologis.com | Follow us on LinkedIn and Facebook
The information transmitted, including any attachments, is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited, and all liability arising therefrom is disclaimed. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer.
signature for Galvez, Janet

From: Kelly < >
Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2026 7:31 PM
To: Elizabeth Blanton <[email protected]>; Planning Division <[email protected]>
Cc: Sara Buizer <[email protected]>;
Francisco Zermeno <[email protected]>; Julie Roche <[email protected]>
Subject: Mercury News: PG&E Forecasts 975 MW of Hayward Data Centers, enough for 700,000 homes
CAUTION:This is an external email. Do not click on links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe.

Dear Ms. Blanton,
Could you forward the Mercury News data center story and the BAAQMD Diesel Free Initiative to the Hayward Planning Commission? The Eden Landing data center will have 28 diesel generators (77 MW).
— Kelly
Mercury News: San Jose races to become Bay Area’s data center capital — PG&E customers could pay the price
City touts revenue from ‘AI revolution’
By Ethan Baron
December 21, 2025
https://www.mercurynews.com/2025/12/21/san-jose-races-to-become-bay-areas-data- center-capital-pge-customers-could-pay-the-price/
• In San Jose, PG&E has requests to supply electricity to 11 projects totaling 1,630 megawatts of capacity. This is enough capacity for 1.2 million homes, more than three times the number of housing units in San Jose... (around 330,000 households)I • In Hayward, PG&E has requests for four projects totaling 975 megawatts, enough for 700,000 homes. (Hayward only has 50,000 households or 14x fewer households than the proposed PG&E data center pipeline.)
Correspondence Chain 3
• [San Jose's] new 99-megawatt data center fully ramped up and running would provide an estimated $3.5 to $6.4 million annually in new property tax and utility user tax... ” a March memo to the City Council said.

Hayward Forecasts a $9 million/year Windfall from 77-MW Eden Landing • "[Hayward's] Utility User’s Tax alone is expected to bring in around $5,400,000 per year once all of the servers are up and running in 2029. The total tax benefit is estimated to be around $9,000,000 per year. " (This is Hayward's forecasted incremental revenue (property tax, sales/use tax on equipment, utility users tax, etc.) from the 77-MW STACK project.) https://haywardherald.substack.com/p/city- administration-in-historic-disarray
• Hayward's $9 million per year total tax benefit from a single 77-MW data center, nearly twice as much as the approximately $5 million a year of incremental revenue from San Jose's 99-MW data center. Did Hayward prepare a detailed forecast for expected revenue from the new Eden Landing data center similar to San Jose's forecast?
https://sanjose.legistar.com/View.ashx?M=F&ID=13933623&GUID=595A271F- 15B6-47D9-BC2C-1E2F8B39F806
BAAQMD's Initiative signed by a county supervisor

Pier 1, Bay 1, S an Francisco, C alifornia 94 111 Un ited Stat es Mai n +1 41 5. 394 .90 0 0 w w w.prologis.com 1 January 22, 2026
City of Hayward Planning Commission
Attn: City Clerk
777 B. Street
Hayward, CA 94541
Email: [email protected]
Re: Agenda Item No. 2: Work Session: Proposed Municipal Code and Zoning Map Revisions Related to the Business-Friendly Hayward Project Honorable Planning Commissioners:

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the City of Hayward’s (“City’s”) proposed amendments to the Zoning Code and Zoning Map as part of the Business-Friendly Hayward Project (“Proposed Amendments”). Founded and still deeply rooted in the Bay Area, Prologis is a global and local leader in logistics, data center, energy, and mobility real estate, and a long- standing owner and operator of industrial real estate in Hayward. For over 40 years, Prologis has partnered with the City to deliver three million square feet of logistics and industrial facilities in 37 buildings. In 2024, Prologis’s holdings in the City yielded $8.8 million in property taxes, $440 million in property investment (with a direct impact of $528 million and an indirect impact of $306 million), and 4,550 direct, indirect, and induced jobs. Prologis also has a strong track record in its commitment to sustainability, innovation, and economic vitality. In 2025, Prologis reached over one gigawatt (“GW”) of installed solar and energy storage and set an ambitious goal to achieve net zero across its value chain by 2040, with 195 million square feet of sustainably certified space already in place.

Prologis has been following Hayward’s current fiscal challenges and supports the City’s strategic initiative to attract new investment and strengthen the local economy. We appreciate the City’s efforts to modernize and streamline its zoning framework in a manner that supports economic vitality, environmental stewardship, and compatibility with surrounding uses. We are concerned, however, that the Proposed Amendments related to industrially zoned properties and data centers (“Proposed Industrial Amendments”) will impede—not facilitate—new businesses and economic investment in the City. In that spirit, we respectfully offer the following observations regarding the proposed changes affecting data center uses in industrial zoning districts, which are more thoroughly discussed in the attached detailed comments. • The proposed prohibition of data centers in the IP (Industrial Park) district, and limitation of such use exclusively to the IG (Industrial General) district, could unintentionally conflict with the Business-Friendly Hayward Project’s stated objectives by constraining investment in the City’s existing underutilized industrial areas and reducing flexibility for emerging forms of industrial and technology-related infrastructure.

Correspondence Chain 4
Pier 1, Bay 1, S an Francisco, C alifornia 94 111 Un ited Stat es Mai n +1 41 5. 394 .90 0 0 w w w.prologis.com 2 • Data centers increasingly are treated by Bay Area jurisdictions as a form of modern industrial infrastructure that should coexist with other industrial and R&D uses, subject to appropriate standards. Many IP-zoned areas in Hayward already are characterized by industrial activity, substantial separation from sensitive receptors, and proximity to existing electrical infrastructure, making IP districts suitable locations for data centers. • Existing electrical infrastructure necessary to support data center development is located predominantly within the City’s IP-zoned areas, whereas IG-zoned areas largely lack necessary electrical infrastructure. As a result, the Proposed Industrial Amendments could result in a de facto prohibition of data centers in the City. • Concerns related to operational characteristics, compatibility with nearby uses, and public engagement could be addressed through targeted performance standards, discretionary site plan review, and required environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), rather than through a categorical prohibition within existing industrial areas. Many Bay Area cities have taken this approach. • In addition to local land use approvals, data center facilities are subject to multiple layers of state and regional regulatory oversight and permitting processes that impose strict limits on emissions, noise, and environmental impacts.
• From a fiscal and infrastructure perspective, data centers provide net benefits to local jurisdictions, including property tax revenue, utility users tax revenue, and privately funded upgrades to power and grid infrastructure that provide improved grid reliability at no cost to residents.

For these reasons, we respectfully encourage the Planning Commission to consider revisions to the Proposed Amendments that would: (a) continue to allow data centers in both IP and IG districts, (b) provide clear and objective performance standards to address compatibility, environmental, and design considerations, and (c) require discretionary Major Site Plan Review or conditional approval only when performance standards cannot be met.

Finally, we appreciate the City’s intent to continue stakeholder engagement and welcome the opportunity for additional outreach and dialogue, particularly given that the data center provisions were not included in earlier drafts of the Business-Friendly Hayward amendments.

Additional engagement will help ensure that any final zoning changes are well-calibrated to Hayward’s economic development goals while also addressing community concerns.

Thank you for your time and consideration. We look forward to continuing collaboration with City staff, the Planning Commission, and the City Council as this process moves forward.

Respectfully,
Prologis
Enclosure: Prologis Comments on Proposed Industrial Amendments Pier 1, Bay 1, S an Francisco, C alifornia 94 111 Un ited Stat es Mai n +1 41 5. 394 .90 0 0 w w w.prologis.com 3 Comments on Proposed Industrial Amendments
A. The Proposed Industrial Amendments Will Impede the Objectives of the Business- Friendly Hayward Project
The City’s website describes the Business-Friendly Hayward Project as “a strategic initiative designed to make it easier for businesses to locate and thrive in the City’s commercial and mixed-use areas, while also working to revitalize vacant and underused properties” with an aim of creating “a supportive environment for local businesses, attract[ing] new investment, and strengthen[ing] the local economy.”1 While many of the Proposed Amendments are thoughtfully designed to advance these objectives, the Proposed Industrial Amendments may not fully support the City’s strategic goals and instead appear to go beyond what is necessary to address legitimate concerns regarding data centers. As detailed below, there are more targeted, less burdensome approaches that could address these concerns effectively while continuing to encourage economic development and investment, along with fiscal stability, in Hayward.

As explained in the Planning Commission Staff Report for the January 22, 2026, meeting (“Staff Report”), under the City’s current Zoning Code, the City has treated data centers as an “office” use that is principally permitted in many commercial and industrial zoning districts, subject to Site Plan Review2 (structures greater than 5,000 sf), Major Site Plan Review3 (projects of 10 acres or more), and compliance with the City’s Industrial Design Guidelines. The Staff Report identifies three primary concerns with data center development: “operational characteristics,” “potential for impacts to sensitive receptors,” and a desire for public hearings to be required for any data center project. (Staff Report, pp. 7-8.) The staff recommendation is to (1) create a new definition of “data center”; (2) prohibit data centers in all zones except the IG zoning district; and (3) require a conditional use permit (“CUP”) with the associated public hearing process for all data centers.

Notably, the proposal to limit data centers to the IG district fails to account for the location of electrical infrastructure necessary to support data center development. Most existing PG&E infrastructure is located south of Highway 92, in the IP district. PG&E staff has informed Prologis that PG&E currently does not have sufficient electrical infrastructure in the IG zoned area to support data centers in the near term. By restricting data centers to the IG district, the City will undermine its own economic development objectives.

Prologis supports the City’s effort to clarify how data centers will be treated in the Zoning Code; however, we do not support prohibition of data centers in the IP zoning district.

Instead, many of the City’s concerns regarding the appropriate location and development standards for data centers can be addressed through performance standards and the environmental review process, as discussed below.
1 https://www.hayward-ca.gov/your-government/departments/planning-division/business-friendly-hayward-project 2 Hayward Municipal Code (“HMC”), § 10-1.1605(A).
3 HMC, § 10-1.1605(B).

Pier 1, Bay 1, S an Francisco, C alifornia 94 111 Un ited Stat es Mai n +1 41 5. 394 .90 0 0 w w w.prologis.com 4 B. Economic and Community Benefits of Data Center Development The rapid growth of cloud computing, artificial intelligence, and other data-driven industries has made data centers essential to modern economic vitality, particularly in the Bay Area, where global technology innovation is developed and scaled. As a centrally located Bay Area city, Hayward plays an important role in this innovative ecosystem. Prohibiting data centers in the IP zone would limit Hayward’s opportunity to participate in securing locally based digital infrastructure needed to support emerging technologies and remain competitive.

Data centers also create a wide range of jobs, from construction and skilled trades to long-term operations and specialized information technology roles. Across California, the industry has attracted significant investment and driven economic growth by supporting related sectors such as construction, telecommunications, power infrastructure, and advanced manufacturing.

Direct Fiscal Benefits
• City Tax Revenues: Construction and operation of a single medium-scale data center in Hayward could produce between $3 – 5.5 million in annual tax revenue for the City.

These revenues would support not only the City, but also the Hayward Unified School District and the Hayward Recreation and Park District. Because data centers house so much equipment that is refreshed frequently, they also generate a significant amount of tax revenue from the sales and use tax on the purchase of new data center equipment that is refreshed on a five-year schedule.
• Utility Users Tax (“UUT”): The City’s UTT imposes a 5.5 percent tax on utilities such as electricity and gas.4 The UUT represents the City’s third-largest revenue source and a major component of the City’s public safety funding. The City’s 2025-26 budget projects that revenues from the UUT will account for $27 million, representing 12.5 percent of the City’s total annual revenue. A single 99-MW data center would pay a UTT of approximately $5.7 million a year, reflecting over a 20 percent increase in the City’s existing annual total UTT revenue from a single project. • Impact Fees: New development of a data center would be subject to the City’s impact fees (e.g. traffic and park impact fees).5
Indirect Economic Benefits
• Grid Infrastructure Improvements: Many of the concerns often expressed about the impact of data centers on power availability and pricing are inapplicable to most Bay Area data centers. PG&E increasingly is shifting responsibility to fund electrical infrastructure to data center developers and operators with upfront payments and updated tariffs to ensure that PG&E residential and business customers do not become responsible for the cost to expand the electrical infrastructure. To accommodate anticipated data center and other demand growth in the Bay Area, including Hayward, it is anticipated that PG&E would expand and modernize its transmission infrastructure, further supporting regional power reliability and affordability. Anticipated data center projects would help 4 https://www.hayward-ca.gov/your-government/programs/utility-users-tax-uut 5 https://www.hayward-ca.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/Adopted-FY-2026-Master-Fee-Schedule-10-14.pdf Pier 1, Bay 1, S an Francisco, C alifornia 94 111 Un ited Stat es Mai n +1 41 5. 394 .90 0 0 w w w.prologis.com 5 fund electrical grid resiliency and expandable electrical infrastructure to better accommodate electrical load growth in the City and the broader Bay Area. In fact, PG&E estimates average household rates could be reduced as data center load comes online.6 • Construction & Operational Jobs: In the year of peak construction, the total number of supported jobs for a medium-scale data center could surpass 400. Once construction is completed, total jobs supported by a medium-scale data center would remain stable at approximately 105. The average annual pay and benefits for these jobs is about $193,000 per year, which is almost twice the average annual pay and benefits for private jobs in Alameda County ($96,590).
• Support for Existing Industrial Facilities: Data center development supports significant investment in infrastructure upgrades, which brings additional power capacity to existing industrial markets. This development could spur additional manufacturing, R&D, and logistics activity in the City.
• Supporting Local Universities: Higher education institutions will need to integrate advanced technologies to meet the changing needs of their students and faculty and to support research across a variety of scientific, medical, and technological disciplines.

This technological need, in turn, will require universities and colleges to secure availability of data center infrastructure.

The Proposed Industrial Amendments, if adopted, will put Hayward at an economic disadvantage by directing data center development—as well as R&D and advanced manufacturing facilities (which increasingly rely upon geographically proximate data centers)—to other jurisdictions in the Bay Area, along with the associated tax revenues, jobs, and other community benefits.

Nearby cities (San Jose, Santa Clara, Milpitas, Fremont, Pittsburg) are accommodating data center development through the use of performance standards. Hayward risks diverging from the Bay Area industrial market if it adopts the restrictive approach outlined in the Proposed Industrial Amendments.

C. Existing Regulatory Standards Addressing Environmental Impacts of Data Center Development
Many concerns often expressed regarding impacts of data centers are overstated when applied to small and mid-sized data center development in the context of California’s existing regulatory and infrastructure environment. In addition to requiring local land use permits, most data centers with over 50 MW of emergency backup power generation require California Energy Commission (“CEC”) approval of the generators. The CEC has exclusive jurisdiction over “thermal power plants” (including diesel and natural gas generators) over 50 MW. Projects between 50 and 100 MW are authorized through the CEC’s Small Power Plant Exemption (“SPPE”) process. The CEC can grant an SPPE only if it finds that the proposed facility will not create a substantial adverse impact on the environment or energy resources, as demonstrated by a CEQA document prepared by the CEC. If the SPPE is approved, the project developer still must secure any other local, state, and federal permits required to construct and operate the project.
6 https://www.pge.com/en/newsroom/currents/future-of-energy/how-data-centers-like-amazon-s-can-lower- electricity-bills.html
Pier 1, Bay 1, S an Francisco, C alifornia 94 111 Un ited Stat es Mai n +1 41 5. 394 .90 0 0 w w w.prologis.com 6 The CEC routinely incorporates mitigation measures into its CEQA document ensuring that all impacts are less than significant. Using these measures, for the 15 data centers it has evaluated since 2019, the CEC has been able to make the finding that the data center project will not result in significant environmental impacts (including those to sensitive receptors). • Sensitive Receptors:
o Zoning & Design Standards: As discussed above, placement of data centers within existing industrial areas significantly addresses concerns regarding proximity of such uses to residential and other sensitive receptors. Many concerns pertaining to proximity of sensitive receptors can be addressed through engineering and design standards pertaining to building mass, orientation, mechanical screening, and location of loading and service areas.
o Air Quality/GHG: Data centers require emergency back-up generators to ensure consistent power supply during a power outage, disruption, or instability in the electric grid. Many types of facilities require back-up generators, including hospitals, schools and universities, water treatment plants, R&D facilities, distribution centers, and grocery stores (e.g., food refrigeration). The Bay Area Air District’s (“Air District’s”) Authority to Construct and the California Air Resources Board’s (“CARB’s”) Airborne Toxic Control Measures (“ATCM”) limit each engine to no more than 50 hours annually for reliability purposes (i.e., testing and maintenance). In California, data centers use Tier IV generators (e.g., best available control technology that reduces emissions), and either use 100 percent renewable electricity or participate in a program that reduces greenhouse gas (“GHG”) emissions to net zero. This requirement results in development of new renewable energy projects that will serve all users in California. o Noise: The City’s General Plan provides exterior noise limits based on land use categories. Industrial manufacturing and utilities, for example, are limited to a maximum level of exterior noise of 75 CNEL.7 Hayward Municipal Code Chapter 4, Sections 4-1.03.1, and 4-1.03.4, sets forth noise regulations applicable to commercial and industrial properties and limits operational noise levels at any point outside of the commercial and industrial property plane to 70 dBA Leq (HMC, § Section 4-1.03.1(b)). Through the use of standard engineering and design methods (described above), data centers can meet the above noise standards.
• Water Use: Criticisms of data center water usage for cooling equipment often are based on outdated or inaccurate information. Solutions such as air cooling closed-loop water systems do not require daily water consumption.
o A potential design approach for data centers is the use of an air-cooling system that does not require a continuous draw of water. Instead, it operates on a closed- loop system that is filled once during setup. Virtually no water is evaporated or discharged, thus there is no need to continuously feed the cooling system with 7 CNEL refers to Community Noise Equivalent Level measurements, a weighted average of sound levels gathered throughout a 24-hour period.

Pier 1, Bay 1, S an Francisco, C alifornia 94 111 Un ited Stat es Mai n +1 41 5. 394 .90 0 0 w w w.prologis.com 7 water. We are confident that this system can be adapted to meet the needs of all customer types.
o Hybrid cooling would be the exception rather than the rule and would only be pursued at the customer’s request. In such cases, the system can use recycled water where available. Preliminary analysis indicates that a hybrid design would require water consumption equivalent to the annual usage of fewer than 200 households, or approximately one large apartment building. o For a 99MW data center with a closed-loop cooling system, projected annual water use is 1-2 AFY . For comparison, a dwelling consumes approximately 0.3 to

0.5 AF of water per year. Therefore 500 dwelling units (the trigger for preparation of a Water Supply Assessment) would consume approximately 150 to 250 AFY of potable water.8
o For context, during the 2021/2022 fiscal year, the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission supplied the City with approximately 15,736 AF of potable water.9 • Trips: Data centers produce very few vehicle and truck trips compared to other industrial uses, reducing noise, roadway utilization, and air quality impacts to residents along roadways used to access industrial properties.

D. Proposed Zoning Code Solutions to Address Data Center Development The Proposed Industrial Amendments, if adopted, would prohibit development of data centers within the IP district despite the appropriateness of this district for data center uses based on the presence of existing industrial uses and electrical infrastructure, adjacent Light Industrial buffer areas, and geographic isolation from zones with higher concentrations of sensitive receptors. We recognize the City’s interest in ensuring appropriate public oversight and compatibility for data center development. Allowing data centers in IP zoning districts subject to clear, objective performance standards and discretionary site plan review, would provide the City with greater predictability, enforceability, and public transparency than a categorical zoning prohibition, while still advancing the Business-Friendly Hayward Project’s economic objectives.

1. Data Centers Should Remain Permitted in the IP, Industrial Park District.

The Proposed Industrial Amendments would prohibit data centers in all zones except IG zones, thereby eliminating the use on IP zoned properties. As explained below, data centers should be permitted in both IG and IP zoning districts.

IP zoned properties are located in three primary areas of the City: (1) along the north- westernmost portion of the City bordering the Bay, (2) either side of CA-92’s approach to the Hayward-San Mateo Bridge, and (3) a triangular area within the southernmost portion of the City 8 Department of Water Resources (DWR). Guidebook for Implementation of Senate Bill 610 and Senate Bill 221 of 2001. California Department of Water Resources. October 8, 2003. Accessed on: May 7, 2020. Accessed online at:
https://water.ca.gov/LegacyFiles/pubs/use/sb_610_sb_221_guidebook/guideboo k.pdf 9 Bay Area Water Supply & Conservation Agency (BAWSCA). Annual Survey, Fiscal Year 2021-22, BAWSCA.

March 2023. Accessed on: March 13, 2024. Accessed online at:
https://bawsca.org/uploads/userfiles/files/Annual%20Survey_FY21- 22_FINALv2.pdf Pier 1, Bay 1, S an Francisco, C alifornia 94 111 Un ited Stat es Mai n +1 41 5. 394 .90 0 0 w w w.prologis.com 8 bordered by Industrial Parkway to the west, railroad tracks (BART and freight) to the east, and Whipple Road to the south.

We have not identified any IP-zoned parcel in the City that is directly adjacent to residential-zoned property. IP zones either share the same geographic characteristics as IG zones, or in some respects are farther away from residential, commercial, and mixed-use zones. Even in the southeast portion of the City, where existing residential development borders the eastern side of the railroad tracks, associated right-of-way, and BART maintenance facility, and existing industrial development borders the west side of the tracks, there is a buffer of approximately 600 to over 1000 feet of separation between the two zones.

The City’s IP zone “is intended to provide areas for high technology, research and development, and industrial activities” and allows a “variety of industrial, manufacturing, and high technology uses.” Given data centers often support or are collocated with each of these uses, prohibiting data centers within the IP zoning districts will have negative impact on all industrial uses and may disincentive investment in the City’s existing IP-zoned areas overall.

Other jurisdictions are not taking the same approach, particularly given the increasing need for data centers to be developed alongside industrial uses due to the increasing demand for AI and investment. At a minimum, we urge the Planning Commission to modify the proposed use table to identify data centers as either principally permitted, subject to Major Site Plan Review, or conditionally permitted in both IP and IG districts.

2. Performance Standards Would Effectively Address Data Center Concerns.

The Proposed Industrial Amendments propose requiring a CUP for all data centers, regardless of size or location, as a means of ensuring any data center project would be subject to a public hearing process. As a practical matter, many data center facilities will already trigger a public hearing under the existing Zoning Code based on acreage, because projects over 10 acres require Major Site Plan Review by the Planning Commission (subject to appeal to the City Council),10 and industrial parcels tend to be larger than parcels in other zoning districts.

As a discretionary approval, Major Site Plan Review would be subject to CEQA review, which would require identification and mitigation of any impacts associated with adverse environmental impacts.

Other Bay Area cities are instead utilizing performance standards for evaluating data center development. Adoption of specific performance standards would directly address the City’s concerns, with a CUP only being triggered for requests to waive or exceed such performance standards.
10 HMC, §§ 10-1.1605; 10-1.3075.

From: BC4AD
To: CityClerk; Elizabeth Blanton; Sachiko Riddle
Subject: Re: Planning Commission meeting - WS 26-002
Date: Thursday, January 22, 2026 9:41:22 PM
Attachments: 8E721ADA-56FE-40A2-9871-C8A67D045EAA.png
CAUTION:This is an external email. Do not click on links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe.

And finally,
Data centers are a danger to public health & safety because the FCC admitted it has no EMF studies concerning data centers nor any planned.

Correspondence Chain 5

On Thu, Jan 22, 2026 at 9:08 PM BC4AD < > wrote:

To follow up on a recent comment by a commissioner regarding Data centers,

This is what Larry Ellison said recently in a recent earnings call:

Are we seriously going to allow this in the City of Hayward moving forward? These data centers require massive amounts of energy.

The US needs to spend trillions on its grid and power capacity before it can afford to spend trillions on data centers.
- By 2028, a 44 GW power shortfall is projected
- That’s the equivalent of ~44 nuclear reactors
- Or ~70 gas power plants.

Residents cannot be subsidizing this massive buildout.

Best,
John
On Thu, Jan 22, 2026 at 8:57

PM BC4AD wrote:

Dear Planning Commission & staff,
I am not truly sure what we are trying to accomplish with the ACU. This seems to be a radical approach to patchwork the city again. Where are the aesthetic standards? The city is currently dilapidated & we are still not addressing the foundation. We need to implement comprehensive design standards. How will ACUs impact neighbors in residential areas? We as a coalition don’t want sudden increase in traffic in residential areas destroying our quiet peace & enjoyment. More traffic means more noise, more wear & tear on roads etc.

The only way to activate vacant commercial properties is to implement a vacancy tax.

With regards to data centers, I have previously written to the city council about the AI bubble. If the city is considering of approving more data centers, then they need to ask for the maximum community benefits such as facade improvement to finally address the blight. Residents should not be subsidizing data centers via strained water resources & electrical grid. Every time they unveil another mega-project, it’s the same story:
billionaires building empires, politicians chasing control, while we're told to pay for it & clap.

Why can France build at least aesthetically pleasing data centers? Yet we’re allowing ugly monstrosities.

A lawyer for Microsoft recently said: “nobody really wants a data center in their backyard, I don’t want a data center in my backyard, data centers don’t really bring a lot of jobs”. - Norton Rose Fulbright meeting.

Best,
John
BC4AD
From: Julie Machado MFT
To: Sachiko Riddle; Elizabeth Blanton
Cc: Mark Salinas; Frank Goulart
Subject: Re: Question about Rezoning Letter
Date: Friday, January 23, 2026 3:55:39 PM
Attachments: image.png
CAUTION:This is an external email. Do not click on links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe.

Thank you, Sachiko!
I appreciate your prompt and clear response.

BTW, my very favorite cat ever, was named Sachiko ("Satchie" for short). She is no longer with us. I'll add a picture of her after my signature.

Warmly,
Julie Machado, LMFT
Lic. MFT 27937
22248 Main St.

Hayward CA 94541
(voicemail, no texts)
(regular email)
(secure email)
Pronouns: She/Her/Hers
Correspondence Chain 6
The information contained in this transmission is privileged and confidential and/or protected health information (PHI) and may be subject to protection under the law, including the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, as amended (HIPAA).

This transmission is
intended for the sole use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified that any use, dissemination, distribution, printing or copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please contact the sender at (510) 581-7850 immediately and delete this email and any attachments from any computer.

From: Sachiko Riddle <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, January 23, 2026 10:25 AM
To: Julie Machado MFT ; Elizabeth Blanton
<[email protected]>
Cc: Mark Salinas <[email protected]>; Frank Goulart Subject: RE: Question about Rezoning Letter
Hello,
Yes, your understanding of the new zoning is correct. The proposed CO-R district, which is what the RO district would become, allows for office uses by right. The legal status of your

use would not be impacted by this zoning change.

Please let us know if you have any other questions.

City Hall will close non-essential services during the week of Monday December 22, through January 2, 2026. Inspections will not be scheduled during this time and will resume upon staff’s return to City Hall. Petitions, application submittals with required payment and resubmittals received by Wednesday, December 17 will be processed prior to the business closure; however, submittals/payments received between December 18 thru January 2, will be processed when offices reopen on Monday, January 5, 2026. Plans submitted prior to December 19, 2025, will be reviewed under the 2022 California Building Codes. Due to the City closure, plans submitted December 20, 2025, or later will be reviewed under the *NEW* 2025 California Building Codes.

From: Julie Machado MFT
Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2026 7:20 PM
To: Elizabeth Blanton <[email protected]>; Sachiko Riddle <[email protected]>
Cc: Mark Salinas <[email protected]>; Frank Goulart Subject: Re: Question about Rezoning Letter
CAUTION:This is an external email. Do not click on links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe.

Adding a corrected email for Sachiko.

Julie
From: Julie Machado MFT

Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2026 7:18 PM
To: [email protected] <[email protected]>; sachiko.riddle@hayward <sachiko.riddle@hayward>
Cc: [email protected] <[email protected]>; Frank Goulart Subject: Question about Rezoning Letter
Hello,
We recieved your letter of January 15 regarding the proposed re-zoning of our property at 22248 Main Street.

Am I correct that the new zoning will still allow usage as professional office space, which is what the building has been used for, for approximately 30 years? I don't think it's relevant here, but I will also point out that this particular property is on the City's Historic Properties list, in case you are unaware of it.

I would prefer a response in writing via email. But if you feel you need to talk with me, my cell is .

Please advise.

Thank you,
Julie Machado, LMFT
Lic. MFT 27937
22248 Main St.

Hayward CA 94541
(voicemail only, no texts)
(regular email)
(secure email)
Pronouns: She/Her/Hers
The information contained in this transmission is privileged and confidential and/or protected health information (PHI) and may be subject to protection under the law, including the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, as amended (HIPAA).

From: Miriam Lens
To: Sara Buizer; Jeremy Lochirco; Elizabeth Blanton; Sachiko Riddle Subject: FW: City Council Agenda Item No. 2: Work Session: Proposed Municipal Code and Zoning Map Revisions Related to the Business-Friendly Hayward Project
Date: Tuesday, January 27, 2026 8:35:35 AM
Attachments: Letter to Planning Commission_Agenda Item No.2 (1.22.2026).pdf FYI
From: Galvez, Janet
Sent: Monday, January 26, 2026 10:59 PM
To: List-Mayor-Council <[email protected]> Cc: Bell, Courtney ; Sidles, Philip ; Surdin-OLeary,
Danielle ; Harandi, Ali ; Tarpin, Claudia
; Thakral, Samidha ; Xu, Miao
Subject: City Council Agenda Item No. 2: Work Session: Proposed Municipal Code and Zoning Map Revisions Related to the Business-Friendly Hayward Project CAUTION:This is an external email. Do not click on links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe.

Dear Mayor and Councilmembers,
On behalf of Prologis, thank you for your continued leadership as the City considers updates to its zoning code and broader economic development strategy. For over 40 years, Prologis has invested in Hayward by supporting jobs, generating significant tax revenue, and advancing sustainable industrial development. We support the Business-Friendly Hayward initiative, particularly its focus on strengthening the City's fiscal health, attracting new investment while advancing sustainability and environmental stewardship in order to position Hayward for long-term resilience.

We write to share the letter Prologis submitted to the Planning Commission last week regarding proposed zoning changes affecting industrial and data center uses. We are concerned that the proposed prohibition of data centers in the Industrial Park zoning district will unintentionally work against the goals set forth in the Business-Friendly Hayward initiative. Given Council’s central role in shaping the City’s climate, economic, and land use policies, we wanted to ensure you had visibility into our perspective as this discussion continues.

At the outset, we want to emphasize that modern data centers can be planned and regulated in a manner consistent with Hayward’s sustainability and climate action goals.

Correspondence Chain 7
When subject to clear, objective performance standards, data centers can function as climate-supportive infrastructure that enables electrification, supports renewable energy integration, strengthens grid reliability, and reduces vehicle trips. In addition, locating data centers within established industrial areas, combined with enforceable performance standards, buffering, and CEQA review, provides a more precise and equitable approach than broad zoning exclusions, while ensuring that environmental and community impacts are appropriately addressed.

In addition to these sustainability benefits, data center uses represent a significant fiscal and economic opportunity for Hayward. For these reasons, we respectfully encourage the City Council to consider a balanced approach that continues to allow data centers in both IP and IG zoning districts, subject to clear, objective performance standards. Such an approach would advance Hayward’s economic development objectives while remaining aligned with the City’s sustainability priorities.

We welcome continued dialogue with City staff, Councilmembers, and stakeholders to ensure that any final zoning framework reflects Hayward’s leadership in climate responsibility while providing clarity to attract businesses and support economic stability.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Janet Galvez | VP, Investment Officer
Pier 1, Bay 1 | San Francisco | California | 94111 | United States of America Direct | Mobile |
www.prologis.com | Follow us on LinkedIn and Twitter
The information transmitted, including any attachments, is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited, and all liability arising therefrom is disclaimed. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer.
signature for Galvez, Janet

From: Alisha Khan
To: List-Planning Commission; ; ; ;
; ;
Cc: Jeremy Lochirco; Elizabeth Blanton; Sachiko Riddle
Subject: FW: ACU and empty buildings
Date: Friday, January 30, 2026 12:55:13 PM
Good afternoon, Planning Commissioners,
Please see the email below from Peggy Guernsey regarding ACUs and vacant commercial buildings. This comment relates to the Business Friendly Project and is being forwarded for your awareness.

Thank you,
Alisha Khan | Senior Secretary
Planning Division
P 510-583-4205 | [email protected]
-----Original Message-----
From: Peggy Guernsey
Sent: Friday, January 30, 2026 12:10 PM
To: Alisha Khan <[email protected]>
Subject: ACU and empty buildings
CAUTION:This is an external email. Do not click on links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe.

Hi Alisha,
Please direct the Planning Commission to not pass ACU into residential zoning and housing areas.

We have hundreds of empty buildings where these vendors can start their businesses off the street, inside, with cleaning supplies and laws, electric, gas, table and chairs off sidewalks, and streets.

My street is horribly impacted by ADUs lack of parking for the 10+new cars.

We are a single family home street,
surrounded by apts, 2/3/4/5 plexus. Our homes are mostly 1 car short driveways,garages that the lack for parking is severely blocking Paratransit drop off of disabled residents. Paratransit must park in the middle of the street and we must walk down slope into the gutter to get home.

The apts, condos you are approving do NOT have shopping centers, many closed and moved out, to support these new residents, So they go to Union City, Fremont to shop.

Please stop ACU in Hayward until all our empty buildings are full!!!!!!!!!!!! Peggy Guernsey
25236 Delmar Ave
Hayward, CA 94542-1806
Correspondence Chain 8
From: Puesto Markets. INC
To: Leigha Schmidt; Elizabeth Blanton; Sachiko Riddle; ; List-Planning Commission; Jeremy Lochirco; Angela Andrews; Ray Bonilla; Daniel Goldstein; George Syrop; Francisco Zermeno; Julie Roche; Mark Salinas Subject: Request for Guidance and Reconsideration Regarding Municipal Code Section 10-1.110 Date: Monday, February 2, 2026 6:12:47 PM
CAUTION:This is an external email. Do not click on links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe.

Good evening City Planning Division, Commissioners, City Council Members, and Mayor, My name is Lesley Urista, and I am the owner of Puesto Market, located at 226 Jackson St., Hayward, CA 94544. I am writing to respectfully follow up on our previous conversations regarding potential changes to Municipal Code Section 10-1.110.

As discussed, my application for a Conditional Use Permit (UP-25-0020) to sell beer and wine was denied due to the presence of a liquor store located across the street. I understand the reasoning behind this decision; however, I strongly believe that liquor stores should not be categorized under the same municipal code as full-service grocery stores.

These are fundamentally different business models, serving different community needs.

Had these uses been distinguished separately, I believe my application could have been considered more favorably.

I have spoken directly with the liquor store owner, and we are in full agreement that our businesses are not the same. They are also supportive of my continued efforts to advocate for this distinction.

Additionally, with the recent closure of Walgreens and the upcoming closure of Safeway in our area, the community is losing essential grocery access. Given these changes, I would like to ask whether my application could be reconsidered. I would also like to note that the business located next door at 230 Jackson St., Hayward, CA 94544 has been leased to a Latin pharmacy with no rights to sell alcohol, and any previously associated liquor license will not be utilized at that location.

At this time, I am seeking guidance on what steps I can take next. I understand the basis for the original denial, but I believe it is appropriate to reevaluate this policy especially during a time when many local businesses are struggling to remain open and the population has grown significantly since the last amendment to this municipal code.

As a small business owner, I am doing everything I can to keep my doors open. In this type of business, any additional revenue makes a meaningful difference. I sincerely appreciate your time, consideration, and any guidance you can provide as I continue to pursue this matter.

Correspondence Chain 9
Thank you for your attention.

Sincerely,
Lesley Urista
Owner, Puesto Market
226 Jackson St.

Hayward, CA 94544

From: Sachiko Riddle
To: Ben Goulart; Elizabeth Blanton
Cc:

Subject: RE: rezoning our neighborhood?
Date: Monday, February 9, 2026 8:16:56 AM
Attachments: image001.png
image002.png
Hello,
No, the existing businesses will not be impacted by this change. Their business license is still valid and they will be able to continue operating. They will renew as normal at the end of 2026 with no changes to their status.

Thank you,
Sachiko
Sachiko Riddle (she/her)
Assistant Planner
Phone 510-583-4209| Email [email protected] 777 B Street, Hayward, CA 94544
Permit Center | E-Permits Portal | E-Permits Portal Help Center Please note: City Hall will close non-essential services during the week of Monday December 22, through January 2, 2026. Inspections will not be scheduled during this time and will resume upon staff’s return to City Hall. Petitions, application submittals with required payment and resubmittals received by Wednesday, December 17 will be processed prior to the business closure; however, submittals/payments received between December 18 thru January 2, will be processed when offices reopen on Monday, January 5, 2026. Plans submitted prior to December 19, 2025, will be reviewed under the 2022 California Building Codes. Due to the City closure, plans submitted December 20, 2025, or later will be reviewed under the *NEW* 2025 California Building Codes.

From: Ben Goulart < >
Sent: Saturday, February 7, 2026 9:08 AM
To: Elizabeth Blanton <[email protected]> Cc: Sachiko Riddle <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: rezoning our neighborhood?
CAUTION:This is an external email. Do not click on links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe.

Correspondence Chain 10
Thank you for all the information, the clarity was helpful. It seems Google has a completely different

description

what

Hayward's

"Commercial/

Office

Residential"

will

look

like,

and
I

glad

the

city

not

implementing

any

that.

One

question

have

whether

existing
businesses

operating

"normal"

business,

landscape

contractor,

dentist

or
counseling

office,

need

upgrade

"commercial"

status?

business

usual

with
the

change?
Thanks,
On

Fri,

Feb

2026

3:09 PM

Elizabeth

Blanton

<[email protected]>
wrote:

Hi Ben,
It

was

nice

chatting

with

you

just

now.

Thanks

again

for

reaching

out

about

the

proposed
rezoning

your

property

and

immediate

neighborhood

from

“Residential

Office”

to
“Commercial

Office-Residential”

part

the
Business

Friendly

Hayward

Project.

discussed,

the

proposed

rezoning

effort

consolidate

two

the

City’s

zoning
districts

that

are

very

similar

each

other

–

the

“Residential

Office”

District

and

the
“Commercial

Office”

District.

Both

districts

allow

mix

office

and

residential

uses,

and

so
will

the

newly

proposed

district,

shown

the

attached

chart,

which

was

included

the
mailer

sent

all

affected

properties.

other

types

commercial

businesses,

retail

stores,

restaurants,

auto

service

uses
will

allowed

part

these

changes.

Additionally,

there

are

changes

the

allowed
density

intensity

development,

meaning

that

future

development

will

still

subject

to
the

same

development

rules

for

dwelling

units

per

acre,

building

heights,

front

and

side
setbacks,

and

parking

standards

that

are

place

today.

result,

the

future

character

the
neighborhood

will

remain

the

same.

hope

you’ll

join

for

our

virtual

meeting

discuss

the

proposed

rezonings

on
Thursday,
February 12 at 10:00 a.m.

You

can

join

the

meeting

using

this

link:
https://bit.ly/3NmPLHo.
(Since

have

your

now,

I’ll

also

forward

you

calendar

invitation,

which

you

can

re-
forward

you

see

fit.)
Additionally,

your

neighborhood

group

meets

regularly

and

would

project

co-lead,
Sachiko

Riddle,

and

attend

future

meeting

yours

discuss

this

project

further,

we’d

be
happy

–

just

let

know

when.

Thanks

and

have

good

weekend,
Elizabeth
Elizabeth Blanton (she/her)
Senior Planner
Phone 510-583-4206 | Email [email protected] 777 B Street, Hayward, CA 94544
Permit Center | E-Permits Portal | E-Permits Portal Help Center ----------
On Thu, Feb 5, 2026 at 3:31
PM, Ben Goulart <[email protected]> wrote:

CAUTION:This is an external email. Do not click on links or open attachments

unless you know the content is safe.
** Please note I was the past president of the Prospect Hill Neighborhood Association, not the current president of the North Main Prospect Neighborhood Association.** My bad, and sorry for the confusion, I should have done my due diligence. I am triggered by this rezoning plan because past rezoning of west Hayward years ago ushered in the crazy powerplant. I will be meeting with the NMPHA to talk shop about moving forward, as nobody knows that we are getting commercial office zoning that will crush the residential feel of our community.

Ben Goulart
Past President, Prospect Hill Neighborhood Association
On Thu, Feb 5, 2026 at 12:47
PM Ben Goulart < > wrote:

Hi George, I live at 22244 Main Street, and have lived in this neighborhood for 35 years. As the president of the Prospect Hill Neighborhood Association, we are all unhappy with the city's new plans to rezone our neighborhood. I see that zoning changes will bring significant changes to our neighborhood. What I saw is that you are changing our residential neighborhood from "office/residential" to "commercial office/residential" and this is what google says could be the fall out from doing that:

Rezoning a neighborhood from "office/residential" to "commercial office/residential" significantly increases development potential, likely leading to
higher traffic volume, increased noise, light pollution, and more intense, higher-density construction. While this change may increase property values, it can also decrease privacy and quiet enjoyment, as commercial uses like retail or service businesses are introduced alongside homes.

Significant changes to expect include:

Increased Traffic and Noise: The introduction of commercial businesses often brings higher volumes of traffic, including customers, delivery trucks, and, potentially, increased noise pollution.

Greater Density and Height: The new designation may permit taller or larger buildings, potentially altering the neighborhood's aesthetic and reducing privacy for existing homes.

Shift in Commercial Character: The area may see a mix of retail, services,

or office spaces, making it more of a mixed-use or "walkable" corridor, which can be positive for convenience but less peaceful for residents.

Higher Property Values (and Taxes): Commercial-zoned land is generally more valuable than purely residential land, which can lead to higher property assessments and increased property taxes for homeowners.

Infrastructure Changes: Increased density might necessitate improvements to utilities (water, sewer) to accommodate larger commercial, as opposed to residential, demands.

Overall, this rezoning moves a neighborhood from a blend of work-live to a more intense, mixed-use commercial environment, which can bring both economic benefits and disruptions to daily life.
*We are not happy about this and formally request a denial of zoning changes.

Please contact me asap so we can talk about this project as we are looking into hiring a lawyer to take up this case if this action is pursued.

Ben
Goulart
President, Prospect Hill Neighborhood Association
--
Benjamin Goulart
The Waterfall Guy

2/13/2026
City of Hayward
Department of Planning and Development
777 B Street
Hayward, CA 94541
Attention: Elizabeth Blanton, Senior Planner: [email protected] Sachiko Riddle, Associate Planner: [email protected] Re: Supply Chain Federation Comments on “Business-Friendly Hayward” Zoning Update
Elizabeth Blanton and Sachiko Riddle,
On behalf of the Supply Chain Federation (SCF) and California Trucking Association (CTA), we appreciate the opportunity to provide comments on the City of Hayward’s proposed zoning updates under the “Business-Friendly Hayward” initiative. We support the City’s goal of modernizing zoning regulations and strengthening economic development.

However, several proposed changes to industrial use definitions and permitting requirements raise concerns regarding unintended impacts on investment certainty, leasing flexibility, and Hayward’s overall competitiveness.

The Supply Chain Federation is a national trade association representing companies involved in goods movement, logistics, distribution, industrial real estate, and related infrastructure across the United States. Our membership includes Third-Party Logistics (3PL) providers, warehouse operators, last-mile delivery companies, developers, ports, and transportation providers that collectively support local and regional economies through job creation, tax revenue, and efficient movement of goods. We engage regularly with state and local governments on land-use, infrastructure, and regulatory policies that directly affect supply chain operations and industrial competitiveness.

The California Trucking Association is the nation’s largest statewide trade association representing the trucking industry. Established in 1934, CTA supports the companies and professionals that keep California’s economy moving. Our carrier membership ranges from individual owner-operators to small family-owned for-hire fleets, to the world's largest international carriers. A vital and indispensable component of the state’s economic health, nearly 80 percent of California communities rely exclusively on trucks for essential goods, and the industry hauls 90 percent of all manufactured tonnage statewide.

Correspondence Chain 11
Truck Terminal Definition and Treatment of Last Mile and 3PL Uses The proposal to expand the definition of “Truck Terminal” to include Last Mile delivery and Third-Party Logistics (3PL) operations represents a significant policy shift. As proposed, these uses would no longer be permitted in the Industrial Park (IP) zoning district and would also require a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) in the General Industrial (IG) district.

Last Mile and 3PL operations are integral components of modern supply chains and operate across a wide range of building types and scales. Treating these business models as a distinct land-use category—rather than addressing operational intensity through objective performance standards—risks over-regulating lower-intensity facilities and materially limiting future leasing flexibility for both logistics providers and property owners.

This approach could discourage investment and reduce the adaptability of industrial properties to evolving market needs.

We encourage the City to distinguish between land-use classification and operational intensity. Many potential impacts associated with logistics activity—such as truck frequency or hours of operation—can be more effectively addressed through clear, objective standards rather than reclassification into more restrictive use categories.

Data Centers
We are also concerned with the proposal to remove data centers as a permitted use in the IP zoning district and would also require a CUP in the IG district. IP-zoned sites are often uniquely suited for data center development due to existing power infrastructure and site characteristics. Eliminating the data center use could negatively affect IP-zoned land values and weaken Hayward’s ability to compete for technology-related investment.

Data centers represent significant long-term capital investment and contribute to local employment and the tax base. Eliminating data centers as an allowable use, or requiring discretionary approvals may lengthen project timelines, increase entitlement risk, and complicate financing, making Hayward less competitive relative to neighboring jurisdictions that continue to allow these uses by right in comparable zones.

Legal Non-Conforming Uses and Business Impacts
By eliminating the Last Mile and 3PL use in the IP zoned area, any existing business that plans to relocate or expand within the City of Hayward would be prevented from doing so.

This could lead to businesses leaving the City of Hayward, increased building vacancy, and the reduction in property values due to the limited pool of businesses that are allowed in operate in these areas of the City.

Investment Certainty and Conditional Use Permits
Across both proposals, the increased reliance on Conditional Use Permits introduces additional time, cost, and political uncertainty into the development and leasing process.

For property owners, tenants, and lenders, entitlement risk is a material consideration that directly affects feasibility and investment decisions—particularly for speculative development or adaptive reuse of existing industrial buildings.

Regional Competitiveness and Policy Alignment
Hayward operates within a highly competitive regional industrial real estate market. Even modest increases in regulatory uncertainty can shift investment to nearby jurisdictions that offer clearer and more predictable zoning frameworks. Restrictive policies do not eliminate demand for logistics or technology uses; rather, they risk displacing that activity—and associated economic benefits—elsewhere.

We also encourage the City to evaluate whether the proposed changes are fully aligned with adopted General Plan goals related to industrial land preservation, job growth, and economic competitiveness.

Conclusion
While we appreciate the City’s effort to modernize its zoning framework, we respectfully urge reconsideration of the proposed treatment of Last Mile, 3PL, and data center uses.

Retaining by-right status for these uses in appropriate industrial districts—or addressing concerns through objective, performance-based standards—would better support the City’s stated business-friendly objectives while preserving predictability and flexibility for industrial stakeholders.

Thank you for your consideration and welcome the opportunity to meet with you to discuss our concerns. If you have any questions, please contact Sarah Wiltfong at Sincerely,
Sarah Wiltfong
Chief Advocacy & Policy Officer
Supply Chain Federation
Nick Chiappe
Director of Government and Regulatory Affairs
California Trucking Association
CC: Mayor Salinas and City Council Members

575 Market Street, Suite 400 | San Francisco, CA 94105 P: | | www.naiopsfba.org
February 17, 2026
The Honorable Mark Salinas
Mayor, City of Hayward
Members of the City Council
City of Hayward
777 B Street
Hayward, CA 94541
Dear Mayor Salinas and Members of the City Council:

On behalf of the NAIOP San Francisco Bay Area Chapter, the Commercial Real Estate Development Association representing over 750 developers, owners, investors, and service providers throughout the region, I am writing to share concerns regarding proposed amendments to the City’s industrial zoning regulations as part of the Business-Friendly Hayward initiative.

We appreciate and support the City’s stated goal of strengthening economic development and improving regulatory clarity. However, several of the proposed changes affecting industrial districts may unintentionally introduce new limitations that appear inconsistent with those objectives.

The draft revisions would broaden the definition of “Truck Terminal” to include Last Mile and Third-Party Logistics (3PL) operations and remove these uses as permitted-by-right in the IP zoning district, instead requiring a Conditional Use Permit in the IG district. Last Mile and 3PL facilities are now essential components of modern supply chains and are commonly accommodated in industrial zones throughout the Bay Area. Subjecting these uses to discretionary approval would reduce flexibility for existing and future industrial properties, introduce uncertainty into leasing decisions, and make it more difficult for owners and tenants to respond to evolving logistics demands.

The proposed treatment of data centers raises similar concerns. The draft update would remove data centers as a by-right use in the IP district and instead require a Conditional Use Permit in the IG district. Many IP-zoned properties are well suited for data center development due to their location, building configuration, and access to power infrastructure. Requiring discretionary approval where none is currently required may negatively affect land values, complicate site selection decisions, and reduce Hayward’s competitiveness relative to neighboring jurisdictions actively seeking to attract advanced industrial and technology uses.

We understand that these concepts were initially presented without direct outreach to industrial property owners or operators. We appreciate staff’s subsequent willingness to convene a virtual stakeholder session and view that as a constructive opportunity for meaningful engagement with the commercial real estate community.

Correspondence Chain 12
575 Market Street, Suite 400 | San Francisco, CA 94105 P: | | www.naiopsfba.org
Industrial land remains a cornerstone of Hayward’s economic base and a critical component of the region’s goods movement and employment ecosystem. As the City finalizes its zoning updates, we respectfully urge a balanced approach that preserves predictability within industrial districts while advancing broader economic development goals.

Thank you for your consideration and for your continued commitment to Hayward’s long-term economic vitality.

Sincerely,
Al
ison Trejo, CAE
Executive Director, NAIOP San Francisco Bay Area Chapter

From: Richard Poolis
To: Elizabeth Blanton
Subject: Truck Terminal Feedback
Date: Thursday, February 19, 2026 11:33:24 AM
CAUTION:This is an external email. Do not click on links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe.

Hi Elizabeth,
First of all thanks for hosting the industrial round table today to solicit feedback on the industrial use definitions. The City of Hayward has always been really good at making their zoning rules clear to owners/developers especially compared to other 880 Cities. So I commend the City for that.

I was able to provide some verbal response but wanted to document and send in writing my thoughts around the Truck Terminal definition.
- Concern is some ‘industrial labels’ like 3pl and last mile delivery included in the Truck Terminal definition
- 3pl / last mile delivery is a business model not a land use o Many 3PL operators
§ Store goods long term
§ Use racking
§ Fulfill orders
§ Function as traditional warehouses
- As written - the inclusion of 3PL in the truck terminal definition may unintentionally capture traditional warehouse users whose primary activity is storage and distribution rather than freight movement (which is what I think the City is trying to carve out) -
Incidental storage needs clarification
o ‘storage of cargo is incidental to the primary function of…” § Maybe look to define incidental
· By time
· By floor area
· By revenue
· Bu operational intent
- Dock door threshold not enough on its own as drafted o Many legitimate warehouses have 10-40 doors but operate as storage and distribution facilities.
o Operational characteristics should control
- Redefine Truck Terminal by throughput metrics o I think the City is focused on traffic impacts so focus on defining this o Another focus point could be throughput volume
Thank you and happy to chat further or take part in any other focused conversations, Regards,
Richard
Correspondence Chain 13
Richard Poolis
Director of Development
Northern California, Seattle, Texas
First Industrial Realty Trust (NYSE:FR)
3620 Happy Valley Road, Suite 201
Lafayette, CA 94549
Disclaimer
The information contained in this communication from the sender is confidential. It is intended solely for use by the recipient and others authorized to receive it. If you are not the recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking action in relation of the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.

This email has been scanned for viruses and malware, and may have been automatically archived by Mimecast Ltd, an innovator in Software as a Service (SaaS) for business. Providing a safer and more useful place for your human generated data. Specializing in; Security, archiving and compliance. To find out more Click Here
.

From: Sidles, Philip
To: Elizabeth Blanton; Sachiko Riddle
Cc: Bell, Courtney; Surdin-OLeary, Danielle; Galvez, Janet Subject: RE: Business Friendly Hayward Project - Follow up from last week"s Industrial Businesses Focus Group Date: Tuesday, February 24, 2026 11:44:58 AM
Attachments: image001.png
CAUTION:This is an external email. Do not click on links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe.

Good Morning Elizabeth and Sachiko,
Thank you again for hosting the Industrial outreach call. It was great to see such strong engagement - with roughly 70 participants, it’s clear there is a lot of interest in the City of Hayward and these proposed changes.

With the large group and all of us providing feedback, we didn’t get a clear picture of what the City is hoping to achieve with the proposed changes to the truck terminal definition. We want to make sure we have a clear grasp of your priorities and the specific impacts you’re trying to address so that we can be constructive partners in identifying workable solutions.

We’d like to schedule a smaller working session with your team to better understand your objectives and the policy direction you’re considering.

The Prologis team brings a unique perspective to this discussion, as we are both a developer and a long-term owner, and we develop across multiple product types — including traditional industrial and data centers. That vantage point allows us to think holistically about operational impacts, tenant demand, long-term land use strategy, and how definitions may influence real-world project feasibility over time. We believe that perspective could be helpful as you refine the proposal.

We are happy to share examples from around the Bay Area that may help address the concerns you’re targeting while also keeping the zoning framework attractive to investment.

In general, we encourage maintaining maximum use flexibility across the industrial zones. A flexible framework helps ensure that industrial areas can adapt to evolving business needs and changing market conditions over time. When allowable uses are narrowly defined, it can increase vacancy risk and slow reinvestment in existing properties. Over the long term, flexibility supports continued modernization of industrial buildings and infrastructure, helping the City sustain a strong employment base and economic resilience. Similarly, while Conditional Use Permits (CUPs) may be appropriate in certain cases, added uncertainty in process and timing can unintentionally discourage reinvestment.

Please let us know your availability over the next two weeks, and we will coordinate a time that works for everyone.

Correspondence Chain 14
Thanks again!
Phil
Philip Sidles | Director, Entitlements

Pier 1, Bay 1 | San Francisco | California | 94111 | United States of America Direct | Mobile |
www.prologis.com | Follow us on LinkedIn and Facebook
The information transmitted, including any attachments, is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited, and all liability arising therefrom is disclaimed. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. signature for Sidles, Philip
From: Elizabeth Blanton <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, February 23, 2026 2:54 PM
To: Elizabeth Blanton <[email protected]>; Sachiko Riddle <[email protected]>
Cc:

Subject: Business Friendly Hayward Project - Follow up from last week's Industrial Businesses Focus Group
*EXTERNAL EMAIL*
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of Prologis. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Hi all,
Thanks again for joining us at our Industrial Businesses Focus Group last week for the Business Friendly Hayward Project. As promised, for those of you who weren’t able to hang on the line with us to discuss the updates to our proposed data center regulations based on recent Council direction, we will be holding a second meeting to provide this update. If you’d like to participate, please indicate your availability in this Doodle poll by Wednesday at noon. For those who are interested, I’ll follow up with a calendar invitation and Microsoft Teams link based on the date/time that works for most people.

In addition, Sachiko and I will be workshopping the definitions of “truck terminal” and “last mile delivery” based on all of your feedback and will follow up when we have new proposed language to share. Thanks to those of you who have already provided suggested language. If you have

suggestions which you have not already shared, please send them our way.

Again, thanks for your engagement on this project. Let us know if you have any additional thoughts or questions.

Elizabeth
Elizabeth Blanton
Senior Planner

Planning Division
City of Hayward | 777 B Street, Hayward, CA 94541
O: (510) 583-4206 | E: [email protected] Permit Center | E-Permits Portal | E-Permits Portal Help Center From: Sachiko Riddle
To: Greg Pearson; Elizabeth Blanton
Subject: RE: Business Friendly Hayward Project - Update on Truck Terminal/Last Mile Delivery Definitions Date: Monday, March 9, 2026 8:58:50 AM
Attachments: image001.png
Hello,
We are keeping our current definition of truck terminal which does not include 3PL in the description. I will forward you the meeting invite for tomorrow.

Thank you,
Sachiko
Sachiko Riddle (she/her)
Assistant Planner
Phone 510-583-4209| Email [email protected] 777 B Street, Hayward, CA 94544
Permit Center | E-Permits Portal | E-Permits Portal Help Center From: Greg Pearson >
Sent: Friday, March 6, 2026 2:36 PM
To: Elizabeth Blanton <[email protected]>; Sachiko Riddle <[email protected]>
Subject: RE: Business Friendly Hayward Project - Update on Truck Terminal/Last Mile Delivery Definitions
CAUTION:This is an external email. Do not click on links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe.

Thanks – I would love to be included in the call for the 10th.

To that end, is the 3PL bit also off the table?
GP
Greg Pearson
Fortress Investment Group
11611 San Vicente Blvd
10th Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90049
M: (US) / M: (UK)
Correspondence Chain 15
[email protected]
From:

Elizabeth Blanton <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, March 6, 2026 2:32 PM
To: Elizabeth Blanton <[email protected]>; Sachiko Riddle <[email protected]>
Subject: Business Friendly Hayward Project - Update on Truck Terminal/Last Mile Delivery Definitions Hi all, Over the past couple of weeks, Sachiko and I have been working with internal staff and several of you to refine our draft definitions for “Truck Terminal” and “Last Mile Delivery. ” During this process, something has become clear – it’s

Hi all,
Over the past couple of weeks, Sachiko and I have been working with internal staff and several of you to refine our draft definitions for “Truck Terminal” and “Last Mile Delivery.” During this process, something has become clear – it’s going to take us more time to get this right.

As a result, we’ve made the decision to remove our revised definition for Truck Terminal from the Business Friendly Hayward Project [hayward-ca.gov]
that will be going forward to Planning
Commission and City Council for final approval next month. Instead, the existing definition, as well as our existing policies for processing these types of uses will remain in place, unchanged.

At the end of the day, the purpose of this project is to make our regulations clearer, and more business friendly. We’ve heard loud and clear from you all that our proposed revised definition is not achieving that objective, so it’s an easy decision to not move forward with the proposed language.

For those of you that would like to continue working with us on drafting new definitions, we will still hold our planned meeting next week on 3/10 at 10:30 a.m. We’ll use this time to continue taking input on what thresholds and terminology any new definitions should include if the City decides to move forward with revising these definitions in the future. If you have further input that you have not already shared with us, we encourage you to join us.

As always, don’t hesitate to reach out if you have any questions, Elizabeth
Elizabeth Blanton
Senior Planner

Planning Division
City of Hayward | 777 B Street, Hayward, CA 94541
O: (510) 583-4206 | E: [email protected] Permit Center [hayward-ca.gov] | E-Permits Portal [haywardca-energovpub.tylerhost.net] | E-Permits Portal Help Center [hayward-ca.gov]
The Fortress Compliance Department prohibits all Fortress personnel from communicating about Fortress related business over text message. Fortress employees are only permitted to communicate about Fortress business on Fortress email, Microsoft Teams, Bloomberg and, if pre-approved by the Fortress Compliance Department, WhatsApp.

From: Elizabeth Blanton
To: "Nathan Downs"
Cc: Naomi Powell; NoMa Prospect Neighborhood Association; Sachiko Riddle Subject: RE: The Real NoMa Prospect Neighborhood Assoc
Date: Thursday, March 19, 2026 10:38:00 AM
Attachments: image002.png
image003.png
image004.png
image005.png
image006.png
image007.png
image009.png
Thank you! We’ll forward along to our admin team along with your email addresses to make sure you are all noticed about projects in/near this boundary.

And thanks for the kind words – it was a pleasure meeting with you all last night. Your thoughtfulness and care for your neighborhood is inspiring.

Elizabeth
Elizabeth Blanton
Senior Planner | Planning Division
City of Hayward | 777 B Street, Hayward, CA 94541
O: (510) 583-4206 | E: [email protected] Permit Center | E-Permits Portal | E-Permits Portal Help Center From: Nathan Downs < >
Sent: Thursday, March 19, 2026 7:00 AM
To: Elizabeth Blanton <[email protected]> Cc: Naomi Powell ; NoMa Prospect Neighborhood Association ; Sachiko Riddle <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: The Real NoMa Prospect Neighborhood Assoc
CAUTION:This is an external email. Do not click on links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe.

Good morning. With all of the criticisms and frustrations around government these days it's refreshing to have open and collaborative experiences like last night. Thank You.

Here is our footprint:

Correspondence Chain 16
On Wed, Mar 11, 2026 at 3:12 PM Elizabeth Blanton <[email protected]> wrote:

Perfect – that will work great for the space. Thanks!
Elizabeth Blanton
Senior Planner | Planning Division
City of Hayward | 777 B Street, Hayward, CA 94541
O: (510) 583-4206 | E: [email protected] Permit Center | E-Permits Portal | E-Permits Portal Help Center From: Naomi Powell < >
Sent: Wednesday, March 11, 2026 1:59 PM
To: Elizabeth Blanton <[email protected]> Cc: Nathan Downs < >; NoMa Prospect Neighborhood Association >; Sachiko Riddle <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: The Real NoMa Prospect Neighborhood Assoc
CAUTION:This is an external email. Do not click on links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe.

Hi Elizabeth,
We deeply appreciate the conference space at City Hall! We should have no more than 8 - 10 people.

Naomi

On Wed, Mar 11, 2026 at 11:49 AM Elizabeth Blanton <[email protected]> wrote:

Hi Naomi,
No problem – I reserved us Conference Room 1C in City Hall on Wednesday, March 18 at 7pm. When
members of your group arrive, let the Security Guard know that you have a meeting with Elizabeth Blanton and Sachiko Riddle in Conference Room 1C, and they will direct you to the correct place.

Do you have a sense of how many people we should be expecting? Thanks,
Elizabeth
Elizabeth Blanton
Senior Planner | Planning Division
City of Hayward | 777 B Street, Hayward, CA 94541
O: (510) 583-4206 | E: [email protected] Permit Center | E-Permits Portal | E-Permits Portal Help Center From: Naomi Powell < >
Sent: Wednesday, March 11, 2026 11:06 AM
To: Elizabeth Blanton <[email protected]> Cc: Nathan Downs < >; NoMa Prospect Neighborhood Association < Sachiko Riddle <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: The Real NoMa Prospect Neighborhood Assoc
CAUTION:This is an external email. Do not click on links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe.

Hello Elizabeth,
Thank you for the update and clarification to the proposed rezoning, we look forward to discussing in depth! Might a conference room be available at City Hall we could use? If not, let's plan to meet at Buffalo Bill's on B St.

All the best,
Naomi
On Wed, Mar 11, 2026 at 10:01 AM Elizabeth Blanton <[email protected]> wrote:

Hi Nathan,
See attached for a chart showing the two options that staff is considering for the Residential Office (RO) zoning district:

Option 1: RO zoning remains, but office uses are allowed by right, instead of having to go through a use permit process. Also, outdoor recreational uses would now be prohibited.

Option 2: The RO district is combined with the Commercial Office (CO) district to create a new district: Commercial Office – Residential (CO-R). This new district would mean that additional uses would be allowed by right in your neighborhood, including offices, personal services (hair and nail salons, for example), plant nurseries, and low-barrier navigation centers for the homeless.

Option 2 is what the City initially proposed, as seen in the mailers that were sent out in January.

However, given feedback that we’ve received to date, staff created Option 1, which wouldn’t result in a rezoning at all, but rather would make it easier to open an office. At this point, staff is leaning toward Option 1, but we are curious to learn your Neighborhood Association’s preferences/thoughts on the two choices, and to hear if you recommend any further revisions to either option.

Once you have a location determined for the dinner/meeting next week, let us know where we should meet you. Looking forward to our discussion. Thanks again for your engagement on this project.

Elizabeth
Elizabeth Blanton
Senior Planner | Planning Division
City of Hayward | 777 B Street, Hayward, CA 94541
O: (510) 583-4206 | E: [email protected] Permit Center | E-Permits Portal | E-Permits Portal Help Center From: Nathan Downs <
Sent: Monday, February 23, 2026 4:10 PM
To: Elizabeth Blanton <[email protected]> Cc: NoMa Prospect Neighborhood Association < >; Naomi Powell >; Sachiko Riddle <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: The Real NoMa Prospect Neighborhood Assoc
CAUTION:This is an external email. Do not click on links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe.

Sounds great, thanks for the update Liz!
On Mon, Feb 23, 2026 at 3:30 PM Elizabeth Blanton <[email protected]> wrote:

Hi Nathan,
We’re working on some revisions to the materials that we’ve already sent you based on some feedback received to date. We’ll make sure to send these to you at least a week before the March 18 meeting.

Thanks,
Elizabeth
Elizabeth Blanton
Senior Planner | Planning Division
City of Hayward | 777 B Street, Hayward, CA 94541
O: (510) 583-4206 | E: [email protected] Permit Center | E-Permits Portal | E-Permits Portal Help Center From: Nathan Downs < >
Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2026 9:10 AM
To: Elizabeth Blanton <[email protected]> Cc: NoMa Prospect Neighborhood Association < ; Naomi Powell < >; Sachiko Riddle <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: The Real NoMa Prospect Neighborhood Assoc
CAUTION:This is an external email. Do not click on links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe.

Excellent, we look forward to meeting you and Sachiko. Question: are there any materials we could share with the board and/or community in advance? If so this could help us hit the ground running and make the best use of our time. Thanks! On Thu, Feb 19, 2026 at 8:35 AM Elizabeth Blanton <[email protected]> wrote:

Hi Nathan,
Yes, Wednesday, March 18 at 7:00 p.m. works for us. Let us know the location when it’s selected.

Looking forward to meeting your group.

Cc: NoMa Prospect Neighborhood Association ; Naomi Powell >; Sachiko Riddle <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: The Real NoMa Prospect Neighborhood Assoc
CAUTION:This is an external email. Do not click on links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe.

Yes, it’s the third Wednesday of the month @7. Does next month work for you? On Tue, Feb 17, 2026 at 11:49 AM Elizabeth Blanton <[email protected]> wrote:

Hi Nathan,
Thanks for reaching out. Unfortunately, we can’t make this Wednesday work, but we’d love to meet with your group. Let us know if we can get on your calendar for your March meeting or perhaps if we can find a date to touch base in between.

Elizabeth
Elizabeth Blanton (she/her)
Senior Planner
Phone 510-583-4206 | Email [email protected] 777 B Street, Hayward, CA 94544
Permit Center | E-Permits Portal | E-Permits Portal Help Center From: NoMa Prospect Neighborhood Association
Sent: Sunday, February 15, 2026 9:04 AM
To: Elizabeth Blanton <[email protected]>; Naomi Powell <
Subject: The Real NoMa Prospect Neighborhood Assoc
CAUTION:This is an external email. Do not click on links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe.

Hi Elizabeth,
Anyhow - we DO live on Main Street and we ARE very connected to our community. We were unable to make the zoning zoom last week but we'd love to have you and Sachiko join us at our monthly board meeting. People from the city join us on a very regular basis.

We typically choose a new restaurant each month and have a meal while discussing how we can make our neighborhood better. I'd describe the energy as laid back and thoughtful.

Our next meeting is in the downtown area this Wednesday at 7pm, restaurant TBD. We did Storybook last month. Are you available to join?
Kindly,
Nathan Downs
--
North Main & Prospect Hill Neighborhood Association
Join Our Facebook Group
President: Naomi Powell
Vice President: Nathan Downs
Treasurer: Jackie Orr
Safety & Services: Carlos Gonzalez
Hazel Garden Lead: Chris Orr
Communication & Membership: Lenae Crowder
Secretary: Vacant
Member at Large: Nathan Williams

From: Elizabeth Blanton
To: "Sidles, Philip"; Sachiko Riddle
Cc: "Bell, Courtney"
Subject: RE: Business Friendly Hayward Project - Follow-Up from Data Center discussion Date: Friday, March 27, 2026 8:35:00 AM
Attachments: image003.png
image005.png
image006.png
image007.png
image001.png
Hi Phil and Courtney,
Thanks for your patience on this. After discussing internally, we agree and have amended the draft Code to reflect a two tier system for Data Centers:

1. Data Centers 50+ MW: Major Conditional Use Permit (requiring Council approval)

2. Data Centers <50 MW: Conditional Use Permit (requiring Planning Commission approval) We didn’t think it was appropriate/necessary to create a class of ancillary data centers that are allowed by right for a few reasons:

As a land use, they would be allowed by right currently, and we’ve never seen this type of ancillary data center in Hayward to date.

If the generators are diesel powered, they very likely will still require a use permit for hazardous materials.

Under the new regulations, if a data center came in that was determined by staff to be ancillary to a primary use AND didn’t trigger the need for additional use permit review based on the amount of hazardous materials on site, we could process it under the permitting process required for the primary use.

I’m off for the rest of today, but if you’d like to chat further, let me know, and we can set up a time next week. The draft regs are currently going through an internal review process, but once the staff report and attachments are published for the 4/9 Planning Commission hearing, I’ll be sure to forward to you for your review.

Elizabeth
Elizabeth Blanton
Senior Planner | Planning Division
City of Hayward | 777 B Street, Hayward, CA 94541
O: (510) 583-4206 | E: [email protected] Permit Center | E-Permits Portal | E-Permits Portal Help Center From: Elizabeth Blanton
Sent: Wednesday, March 18, 2026 5:12 PM
To: 'Sidles, Philip' < >; Sachiko Riddle <[email protected]> Cc: Bell, Courtney < >
Correspondence Chain 17
Subject: RE: Business Friendly Hayward Project - Follow-Up from Data Center discussion Hi Phil,
Thanks for reaching out. We are still discussing internally. I’ll get back to you asap.

Elizabeth
Elizabeth Blanton
Senior Planner | Planning Division
City of Hayward | 777 B Street, Hayward, CA 94541
O: (510) 583-4206 | E: [email protected] Permit Center | E-Permits Portal | E-Permits Portal Help Center From: Sidles, Philip < com>
Sent: Wednesday, March 18, 2026 2:26 PM
To: Elizabeth Blanton <[email protected]>; Sachiko Riddle <Sachiko.Riddle@hayward- ca.gov>
Cc: Bell, Courtney < >
Subject: RE: Business Friendly Hayward Project - Follow-Up from Data Center discussion CAUTION:This is an external email. Do not click on links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe.

Good Afternoon Elizabeth/Sachiko,
We wanted to check-in to see if you had any questions about these suggestions.

We’re happy to hop on a quick call to talk through it, and we can give some examples of what we’re building-out in other industrial buildings where Data Center and R&D/MFG uses are being placed in the same building. We can’t talk about the tenant and exact locations, but can talk about the business and build-out that these zoning suggestions would help facilitate during permitting.

The information transmitted, including any attachments, is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited, and all liability arising therefrom is disclaimed. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer.
signature for Sidles, Philip
From: Bell, Courtney < >
Sent: Friday, March 13, 2026 4:56 PM
To: Elizabeth Blanton <[email protected]>; Sachiko Riddle <sachiko.riddle@hayward- ca.gov>
Cc: Sidles, Philip < >; Galvez, Janet <j >; Surdin-OLeary, Danielle < >
Subject: Business Friendly Hayward Project - Follow-Up from Data Center discussion Elizabeth & Sachiko,
To follow-up on our discussions on the Data Center zoning, we’ve put together the attached redline to your zoning code that we think will meet industry trends, and create a pathway for the City Council to review large data center projects.

As we discussed, there is value to provide different permit pathways for different sizes of data centers. Large projects would go through the Major CUP process at City Council, others may
qualify for a regular CUP, while the smallest data centers could be permitted by right.

Providing an easier permit pathway for small scale projects that may occur in conjunction with an advanced manufacturing or R&D use in industrial zones could help attract and retain “high tech” users to Hayward in line with the goals of the Business-Friendly Hayward Project.

Our proposal aligns with examples we've seen in neighboring jurisdictions as well as existing State/CEC regulations. We also took some time to think through how a data center project would work through Hayward's Industrial Design Guidelines so you will see suggested edits in some areas, for example, how to tie into the Major Site Plan Review process if needed.

Given the timeframes for the zoning updates, we thought this redline format would be the

most efficient way to get our thoughts over to you to review. We would be happy to walk through it on a call next week to provide further context. Let us know times that work for you, we can make ourselves available first thing Monday/Tuesday next week.

Correspondence Chain 18

From: Ricardo Badilla
To: Elizabeth Blanton
Subject: Support for Expanding Church Access in Hayward Date: Wednesday, April 15, 2026 7:42:44 PM
CAUTION:This is an external email. Do not click on links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe.

Dear Elizabeth,
I hope you are doing well.

I am writing to express my strong support for churches and faith-based organizations having greater access to operate within the City of Hayward, particularly in commercial areas.

Churches play a vital role in our community. Beyond religious services, they provide support systems for families, mentorship for youth, counseling, food distribution, and a sense of unity that strengthens neighborhoods. In many cases, they serve as a resource for individuals who may not otherwise have access to guidance or assistance.

Given the positive impact churches have, I believe it is important to revisit and reduce any unnecessary restrictions that limit their ability to operate or expand within the city. Allowing more flexibility in zoning and permitting would help these organizations continue to serve and uplift the community.

I respectfully encourage the City to consider policies that support and welcome churches as valuable contributors to Hayward’s social and community well-being.

Thank you for your time and for the work you do for our city. I would be happy to support this effort further if needed.

Thank you
Ricardo badilla
Ricardo

Hayward City CouncilApril 21, 2026

Hayward City Council
April 21, 2026