[{"_1":2,"_87":-5,"_88":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6455352,"mediaKeyId","5843416-b30e820c015c7bc49bb6e710d9ae7eb3","parentId",5843416,"title","Planning Commission recommends denial of rezoning at 900 Calhoun Street after neighbors cite agricultural character","audioSeconds",3655,"startMs",7103000,"endMs",10758000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5843416-b30e820c015c7bc49bb6e710d9ae7eb3&start=7103&end=10758","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5843416-b30e820c015c7bc49bb6e710d9ae7eb3/thumbnail_7103000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6455352/Hayward-City/Alameda-County/California/Planning-Commission-recommends-denial-of-rezoning-at-900-Calhoun-Street-after-neighbors-cite-agricultural-character","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6455352-1c71638c7e52223cdf359a3c1e7b7421/orig.mp4?Expires=1776313262&Signature=ArV2gBEZdvpsHL3E-GrjdTeKwJMfL10JEADH3sNBseQY94naSJ6JoOr~gxM88TGI2Fc39dpycvr6uFPu5yOSGU268lo7dOUoE8magknt~B9oUENT9aR3zZRBVMcqVrtFvVooniaKJ6~Sosvlo-hEZAEP6~2Ve5WbMiadrZzzAky0ZGQlzQL-DfqxFD51KB1QeHAP1eftHKDJPoW2UyBhymf5-of38WV92MTl~0seulqsFan9p0OntW4wOidNr~zUSF9ajdMZvPT0NFBcCoAXN6Wfwr8GFeu4w0ccpq4v8vrRTfZblK0Te709hDyycAXCBUerNluxzuU6USpYk3XAVw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","cityofhayward","date","2025-09-26T06:35:33Z","article","The Hayward Planning Commission voted on Sept. 25 to recommend that the City Council deny a proposed zoning map amendment that would reclassify a 0.94‑acre property at 900 Calhoun Street from Agriculture (A) to Low Density Residential — minimum lot size 10,000 square feet (RLB‑10).

Associate Planner Taylor Richard told the commission the site already contains a two‑story detached residence built in 2013 and an accessory dwelling unit (ADU) permitted in 2021; the applicant, property owner Amand Poyer, requested the rezoning to make the parcel consistent with the city’s Low Density Residential general plan designation and, staff said, to enable a future subdivision that is not possible under the existing Agricultural zoning.

Richard said the site is constrained by topography and geologic hazards: the northeastern corner lies within a seismic landslide zone and an Alquist‑Priolo fault zone bisects part of the parcel. Staff concluded the proposed rezoning is consistent with the city’s General Plan land‑use designation and therefore did not require additional environmental review beyond the 2040 General Plan EIR.

Neighbors and community members, many of them long‑time Calhoun residents, opposed the rezoning during the public comment period. Speakers said the area’s agricultural uses, including horses, goats, chickens and youth 4‑H activities, are long‑standing features of neighborhood life and provide educational and cultural value to multiple generations. Several residents said they had not received formal notice of the application in advance and asked the commission to preserve the parcel’s agricultural character.

Commissioners asked staff and the property owner questions about the intended future use. The owner told the commission he did not intend to build large‑scale housing immediately and that his personal plans were modest; he described the ADU as an existing secondary unit and said he was not proposing an immediate development plan. Commissioners pressed on emergency access, the potential need for fire turnaround and road access for fire apparatus, and the degree to which seismic and slope constraints would permit future lots to be developed.

The Planning Commission debated two central issues: (1) whether rezoning one parcel to conform to the General Plan would reasonably allow subdivision and additional dwelling units given geological constraints; and (2) whether the commission should postpone or deny a rezoning when no concrete site plan or subdivision map was before the commission. Several commissioners emphasized that state law and recent legislative changes limit a city’s ability to deny development consistent with its General Plan; others said that, given neighborhood impacts and the lack of a concrete plan, the council should deny the change or require a broader review.

After deliberation Commissioner Stevens moved to recommend denial to City Council; the motion carried on a roll call that recorded a majority in favor of recommending denial. The clerk recorded the vote as: Goodbody — yes; Hammond — yes; Lowe — yes; Myers — yes; Stevens — yes; Georgov — no (reluctant); Hardie (Chair) — yes. The Planning Commission’s recommendation will be transmitted to the City Council, which has authority to approve, deny or modify the rezoning request.

Staff noted that a City Council‑led general plan amendment remains a separate legislative path if the council wants to reconcile broader land‑use policy in the area. Commissioners and neighbors asked staff to clarify the general plan amendment process and required offsets under current state law (cities proposing to reduce allowed housing capacity locally must identify sites or measures to avoid net loss of housing capacity).","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Hayward Planning Commission Meeting September 25, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","The Planning Commission voted to recommend denial of a request to rezone 900 Calhoun Street from Agricultural to Low Density Residential (RLB‑10) after neighbors and commissioners raised issues about neighborhood character, emergency access and the lack of a concrete development plan.","taxTitle","Hayward City, Alameda County, California","taxId",2907,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6455357,"Hayward Planning Commission recommends denial of conditional use permit for Foothill cannabis dispensary",4980,650000,5630000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5843416-b30e820c015c7bc49bb6e710d9ae7eb3&start=650&end=5630","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5843416-b30e820c015c7bc49bb6e710d9ae7eb3/thumbnail_650000.jpg","/articles/6455357/Hayward-City/Alameda-County/California/Hayward-Planning-Commission-recommends-denial-of-conditional-use-permit-for-Foothill-cannabis-dispensary","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6455357-8e4b233e0c0986975a929d7753a42399/orig.mp4?Expires=1776313262&Signature=BqaIZeZsnpD5m0Xv85BcA0uhnr3Jfkwo5aUrVOMVRQI35RBttbbaers4R2MCMvuIr-35AEr7Zw2h4eK-OaEiBUBrBi3ZMQH28TluFrG0TUobTrdhleEkrfm4t9cjWO~0WhDk1ozP-zw2bEA3YmP~jlpSGm4q-Or60~N-~HjEIBi9mKioGrIXNazWLyngy4yV~hYJALpsxdnB014pqgh3dglzPBmffkwls1Xi11ua9upjw27e0lUytgw~e4V7leham9TeV8GA9Cw03Ia25KlvNGVbb7g5scnz5rc8oHa3NhxymO34LWSWf5fMbcSA79yNqlB7DL~8yt-4HlolSaNWgQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Hayward Planning Commission voted 5–1 (one recusal) on Sept. 25 to recommend that the City Council deny a conditional use permit application to open a commercial cannabis retail dispensary at 21463 Foothill Boulevard.

Staff described the proposal as a request to retenant a vacant, roughly 15,000-square-foot former Walgreens space within a 22,000-square-foot shopping center on a site of about 1.3 acres. Senior Planner Steve Kowalski told commissioners the project met the city’s zoning rules for a retail dispensary and was found to be categorically exempt from CEQA under State CEQA Guidelines section 15301 (existing facilities). The applicant, identified in the staff report as Esther Lopez and Engelbert Sysakas of Green Enterprises Inc. doing business as Fino’s Hayward, was represented in the hearing by retail operations staff from Phenos of Hayward.

Kowalski outlined operational controls proposed in the conditional use permit: daily hours of 9 a.m. to 5 p.m.; no on‑site consumption or delivery; a minimum of three employees per shift; two licensed security guards on site during business hours; interior and exterior IP cameras with monitoring and at least 90 days of retained footage; a professionally monitored alarm; and procedures for storing and disposing cannabis waste and for secure transportation if offered in the future.

Detective Gabriel “Gabby” Wright of the Hayward Police Department described the department’s role in reviewing the security plan and said the proposed measures met HPD standards. Wright explained that cannabis retail requires security features beyond those typically required of liquor or tobacco retailers, including mandatory guards and camera access for police.

Commissioners pressed staff, applicants and security representatives on multiple operational details: whether cameras have battery backup and remote monitoring (respondents said state rules and the applicant’s plan require backup and third‑party monitoring); guard training and licensing (state guard card and, if armed, additional qualifications); whether security footage is searchable for investigations (applicant said footage is indexed and can be provided to police); and traffic and queuing plans for the large retail space (applicants said the model relies on greater floor area, more registers and additional staff to limit dwell time and line spillover). Applicants and their operations manager said they do not plan to provide delivery services at this location.

Public testimony spanned more than three hours. About two dozen speakers supported the application, saying the operator has a long local record, would invest in safety and security, and would create jobs and tax revenue. Supporters included business partners and residents who said the applicant had engaged with neighboring tenants. Opponents — including parents, students, instructors from the adjacent jiu‑jitsu school, neighborhood residents and public‑health and safety advocates — urged denial. They cited safety, traffic and “clustering” concerns (an existing dispensary is one block away in unincorporated Alameda County), proximity to children and youth programs, and the character of the corridor. Several speakers described encounters with crime and congestion on the stretch of Foothill Boulevard and urged the commission to prioritize youth safety and neighborhood character.

During deliberations commissioners referenced: the city’s 2017 cannabis ordinance and a 2020 update that expanded allowable zones and strengthened local controls; staff findings that the proposal complies with zoning and general‑plan policies; and HPD’s review of the security plan. Commissioners divided on whether the protections and conditions proposed would be sufficient to mitigate neighborhood impacts and whether the location — a major thoroughfare and adjacent to a youth martial‑arts studio — was appropriate for a second cannabis retailer in the corridor.

Chair Hardie made the motion to recommend denial to the City Council. After a second and brief procedural discussion, commissioners voted as recorded by the clerk: Goodbody — yes (recommend denial); Hammond — recused; Lowe — yes (reluctantly); Myers — yes; Stevens — yes; Yarkov/Yorgov — no; Hardie (Chair) — yes. The Planning Commission’s recommendation will be forwarded to the City Council for final action.

The staff report and proposed conditions of approval remain part of the public record. If the council elects to proceed with any approval, the CUP would include annual renewal and inspections, HPD access to cameras and the authority to initiate revocation proceedings if the operator generates disproportionate calls for service or otherwise violates conditions.

Commissioner and staff comments at the meeting underlined two continuing lines of inquiry for council review: (1) operational details staff and HPD can enforce (exact camera and monitoring specifications, guard company contracts and training documentation, parole of ID‑scan and queue management systems); and (2) traffic and queuing/ingress‑egress analysis if the council or applicant seek to expand hours or services in the future. The Planning Commission record will be transmitted to the City Council along with the staff recommendation.","After hours of public testimony and staff briefings, the Planning Commission voted to recommend that the City Council deny a conditional use permit for a proposed 15,000 sq ft cannabis retail dispensary at 21463 Foothill Boulevard, citing concerns about location, traffic and proximity to youth-serving uses.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Planning Commission recommends denial of rezoning at 900 Calhoun Street after neighbors cite agricultural character

Hayward Planning Commission recommends denial of conditional use permit for Foothill cannabis dispensary