City Explores Business-Friendly Policies

Hayward Seeks To Remove Business Barriers

On August 28, the Hayward Planning Commission discussed a new initiative to make Hayward, specifically Downtown, more amenable to businesses. Called the Business Friendly Hayward Project, the goal is to “make it easier for businesses to open in the city and thrive here,” according to City Staff. Some ideas include streamlining entitlement and permitting processes and activating vacant and underused properties in Downtown.

Although activating vacant properties are out of the City’s direct control, the hope is to make it easier and more enticing for business owners to open shop in Hayward. The focus is primarily on the retail and service sector—think salons, studios, and small-scale retail—rather than industrial businesses, which received updates a few years ago. This was the first work session on the subject which will result in multiple changes to Municipal Code.

The Lay Of The Land

The City conducted multiple levels of outreach and research in order to develop their recommendations. They surveyed businesses and the general public on what the barriers to opening a business are and what the public would like to see more of in Downtown Hayward, specifically. The City also commissioned a Commercial Assessment of Downtown by Metrovation Retail Resources Consulting to conduct a SWOT analysis of our Downtown.

Businesses Feel Okay, But Have Issues

The survey for Hayward businesses was mostly focused on how they felt about the City’s permitting processes, how accessible information they need is, and what challenges they face when interacting with the City. Although the overall rating for the City’s permitting processes was about 3.4/5, the top challenges were with length of approval times and lack of communication, followed by inconsistent enforcement.

The businesses were also asked what types of businesses they would like to see in Hayward, and the majority chose Restaurants and Dining, followed by Retail and Entertainment and the Arts.

Older Respondents Like Castro Valley and Pleasanton

The survey given to the community was not limited to Hayward. According to the website, the survey covered 22 different Bay Area zip codes while Hayward only includes 4 standard zip codes. Despite this, almost half of respondents said they shopped in Hayward on a weekly basis.

The survey also skewed heavily toward older people, with 2/3rds being 45 and older and 1/3rd being 60+. Respondents were asked where they enjoyed shopping outsde of Hayward, and the majority said Castro Valley (50) followed by Pleasanton (49), with Dublin (32), Livermore (28), and Fremont (26) rounding out the top 5. The respondents were generally unsatisfied with the variety of businesses in Hayward, but 71% indicated they would spend more time and money in Hayward if it had more local businesses, events, and night life.

Downtown Hayward’s Strengths And Weaknesses

The analysis of Downtown Hayward highlighted first and foremost that it has a lot of potential. However the weaknesses are parking accessibility, traffic circulation, and overall aesthetics, according to the report, which should be addressed to “unlock the full potential” of Downtown. Remedies include using code enforcement to require fencing for large vacant lots—like the lot on A and Main—and requiring maintenance and trash removal from the owner.

For traffic, the report highlighted parking accessibility—meaning that parking is available, but it is difficult or confusing to get to. It cited one-way streets and a lack of on-street parking availability—due to unenforced time limits—as well as the unhelpful location of some parking lots as reasons why they are not used more frequently. Imagine parking in the theater parking garage to go to a business on the other side of Foothill, as an example.

It also highlighted a perception—not a reality—of a lack of safety. The report spent a lot of time hinting that unhoused and low-income people may be a part of the perception issue. They specifically highlighted the upcoming project at St. Regis as something that may help. It also pointed to The Peace Haven, a nonprofit free grocery store, as a potential contributor to the issue. “[It] may also inadvertently contribute to less positive perceptions of the Downtown and can be a concern for any business (especially retail) considering a nearby location, such as the former CVS building,” the report said.

Who Lives And Shops Downtown

The report was, at times, at odds with itself, however. It stressed that more shoppers from outside of Hayward were needed to sustain new businesses—hence the parking concerns—but also said, “more housing is needed to provide a stronger base of shoppers for businesses.” At the same time, the report analyzed the residents that already live nearby—within a mile of the downtown Lucky—and highlighted some groups that make up the majority of residents.

The idea is, presumably, to showcase what the purchasing habits of local residents would be to guide what kind of businesses they would be most likely to support.

Significant Singles

The largest group within a quarter mile—and in the top 3 up to a mile out—are “Significant Singles” which are “diversely aged singles earning mid-scale incomes and supporting active, city-oriented lifestyles.” They prefer trendy dining options, boutique fitness studios, music venues and gaming lounges, technology retailers, and small convenient grocery stores.

Flourishing Families

The largest group within half a mile—and probably the largest group overall—is “Flourishing Families” which are “affluent, middle-aged families and couples with prosperous incomes and active lifestyles.” They prefer things like upscale family friendly restaurants and breweries, family-friendly entertainment centers, specialty retail like children’s clothing and book stores, and home and garden stores.

Family Union

The last group, which was the largest within a mile—and the third-largest group overall—was “Family Union” which are “middle-income, middle-aged families living in homes supported by solid blue-collar occupations.” They prefer things like family-friendly casual dining, everyday necessities like grocery stores, affordable fashion, home improvement stores, auto services and essentials, and more affordable specialty stores like craft stores and pet supply stores.

Generally speaking, Staff highlighted that there is an oversupply of auto dealers and furniture stores, but enough demand for full-service restaurants, ethnic grocery stores, clothing stores, stationary stores, and more in the downtown area. Though the full report gives a lot of detail as to how much demand there is for these services and what the barriers may be.

What’s The City Gonna Do About It?

The City is hoping to address all of this in a few different ways. Firstly, they’re looking to simplify the permitting process for temporary uses, built-in outdoor dining, and small-scale live entertainment. Currently any live entertainment requires a so-called Cabaret Permit thanks to a 2013 City Council ruling supported by then-Mayor Michael Sweeney and then-Councilmembers Mark Salinas, Barbara Halliday, and Al Mendall—Councilmember Zermeno was the lone vote against it at the time. This has made it prohibitively difficult to have live entertainment in Hayward, even something as small as a karaoke bar requires significant extra permitting and expense.

They’re also hoping to reduce other use permits for desirable uses like establishments selling beer/wine, custom manufacturing uses, pet services, small health clubs, and small-scale educational facilities—like tutoring centers.

Other ideas include establishing “entertainment zones” in specific areas that relax requirements for alcohol use—potentially allowing drinking in public in certain areas. They’re also considering allowing Accessory Commercial Units (ACUs), which are small-scale commercial units attached to housing—kind of like what you often see on corners in Berkeley neighborhoods. They also hope to consolidate and reorganize the codes to make them easier to understand and follow.

Planning Commission Generally Supportive

The Planning Commission was generally supportive of the changes proposed by Staff. One of the unanimously supported ideas was streamlining and reducing the barriers for permitting. Staff shared that Conditional Use Permits (CUPs) take at least 6 months and cost at least $6,000, whereas Administrative Use Permits (AUPs) take at least 3 months and cost at least $2,000. “These permitting costs and timeframes are, frankly, a dealbreaker,” Staff said. And the Commissioners agreed.

Staff also pointed out, during questions from the Commissioners, that the costs and timeframes are minimums—often the process takes longer than expected and costs more than the initial deposits listed above. The times and costs are a minimum and frequently run over that if the business doesn’t neatly fit into a category.

Desire To Keep Control

Despite wanting to make it easier to start businesses, some Commissioners wanted to make sure that there are still ways to stop things if needed. “I am very concerned about which things become by-right,” Commissioner Lowe said. “What the community would like to see is what we want to have built, not just have the developers run amok—not that that’s happening.”

She then asked about what permits would be shifted to AUPs and if the Commission would be able to control that in some way. “How involved would we be in that process?” Commissioner Lowe asked. Staff said that any changes would be decided by the City Council.

Thanks for reading Hayward Herald! This post is public so feel free to share it.

Commissioner Meyers was also concerned about things that become by-right, something he has complained about in the past. However, he generally felt that it was a good direction to go. “[I’m] leaning towards being more lenient on some of these things,” he said, “I think that’s a positive direction to go.”

Not Sold On Parklets

One of the ideas to enhance the Downtown streetscape that Staff proposed is so-called “parklets” which are sidewalk extensions that provide more space and amenities for people using the street. However, they usually come at the cost of some street parking. The idea of losing parking did not seem to sit well with many on the Planning Commission.

Commissioner Lowe said, “What makes you think it’s a good fit for Hayward?” She was concerned about losing sidewalk space and parking on both sides of B street. Staff explained that it also means outdoor dining space, but that there is a permitting process that needs to be followed right now which makes it cost-prohibitive to even try temporary structures.

“Outdoor dining really contributes to an active atmosphere,” Staff said, “[It’s been] successful in Hayward, as well.” They pointed to Casa del Toro as an example and insisted that ADA requirements would still need to be met for the sidewalks.

Commissioner Meyers was unconvinced, however, and pointed to the report discussing parking issues—he worried that parklets may exacerbate the issue. However, as we explained above, the report mostly focused on how difficult the parking was to access. Nevertheless, he pushed for a need to “mitigate the parking Downtown” going so far as to question the empty lot on C and Main. When Staff told him it was owned by the City he said, “Well then let’s pave it.”

Planning Staff also seemed convinced that parking was a limited resource and in need of protection, despite the report highlighting accessibility. Chair Hardy was also against parklets. “I am not a fan of parklets,” she said. “I am a fan of outdoor dining.” She explained that she feels that parklets are aligned with gentrification. “However, I fell outdoor dining does not feel the same way.”

ACUs Frowned On Because Of Confusion

Commissioner Meyers spoke against Accessory Commercial Units (ACUs), seemingly because of how street vendors may make use of them. “We have a lot of vendors in our streets,” he said, “and what I’m wondering and I’m hoping doesn’t happen is we now just have vendors attached to the houses everywhere.”

During his later comments, Commissioner Meyers attempted to clarify his position on ACUs and street vendors. “I know it’s a different thing,” he said, “but I feel like it’s got a relation to it.”

Commissioner Goodbody also spoke against ACUs for a similar reason. “It seems inconsistent,” she said, “with some of the efforts with the food vendor policy… if we’re just talking about utilizing the ACUs for food-related activities.”

Commissioner Haman expressed concern about how ACUs might affect the communities they are built in. He specifically cited foot traffic, parking, and noise and smells that “might be not so desirable in a residential neighborhood.” However, at this point Staff showed that they lacked clarity internally about what ACUs should be for and where they should be.

The Staff presentation suggested that ACUs would mostly be in the Mission Corridor and Downtown areas—places already having a mix of housing and businesses. However, later in the meeting she said that parking shouldn’t be an issue because they are only meant to serve hyper-local neighborhoods—though she then said that Staff don’t want ACUs in “a very stand-alone single-family neighborhood.”

But right afterward, Planning Manager Lochirco pivoted the other direction. “[ACUs are] really intended to serve the people that live in that neighborhood,” he said, which more brought to mind the idea of a corner store in a residential neighborhood. He pointed out that store space is an equity issue and it builds neighborhood feel and walkability—things very desirable in single-family neighborhoods where amenities are only accessible by car.

The unclear presentation of ACUs caused Commissioner Lowe to speak against ACUs by right out of fear that they would cannibalize existing storefronts, especially those that continue to be vacant in the mixed-use developments along Mission Blvd. The idea of them being located Downtown caused her to worry that it could “disincentivize creating a brick and mortar business in the Downtown area,” she said.

Chair Hardy was open about her confusion around the purpose of ACUs, whether they were to draw in business or provide neighborhood amenities. She expressly supported the latter, but admitted “[I’m] not sure if I’m all the way there with it just yet.”

Who Is This For?

Some Commissioners had differing views about who these changes are meant to serve. As detailed above, different outreach efforts highlighted and reached very different populations: business owners, local shoppers, and out of town visitors. At the same time, different Commissioners prioritized different groups, as well.

Commissioner Haman expressed concern about blighted and vacant properties so that it could draw people from outside the City. This appeared to be because he felt that people within Hayward already couldn’t afford things downtown, as he pushed for better paying jobs in Hayward.

Commissioner Meyers felt similarly about the blight, but took to hear the comparisons to other cities. Positioning himself as a “past resident of Pleasanton” he expressed support for Hayward aiming to be more like Downtown Pleasanton, which he spoke very highly of. However this didn’t sit well with some other Commissioners.

Commissioner Lowe said, “I hope… that Hayward keeps our vibe and doesn’t try to be another city. I like our vibe, that’s one of the reasons I’m here.” She continued, “Don’t lose sight of [who we are as a community]. I wouldn’t want to be come any other city.”

Chair Hardy agreed, noting that compared to the cities highlighted in the survey—Castro Valley, Pleasanton, Dublin, Livermore—Hayward is very different. “Why are we comparing ourselves to some places I see as really demographically different?” she asked. “I want us to be us.” She also grappled with the potentially competing demands of businesses that serve our community as opposed to lure in out of town visitors.

Commissioner Meyers took a moment to clarify his position that he doesn’t want Hayward to be Pleasanton. “I want to mirror the community involvement that happens,” he said. He spoke about people in Pleasanton always being Downtown and talking about events there—he highlighted the street fairs, trunk or treat, and Juneteenth events in Hayward—and framed them as “great things that are really Pleasanton community-esque.”