By BenIndy, July 19, 2024

On June 25, 2024, the Solano County Board of Supervisors directed County staff to prepare a report on the proposed “Rezoning of 17,500 acres of Land in East Solano County to Allow the Development of a New Community” Initiative, aka California Forever’s East Solano Plan.

The report, as outlined in Elections Code section 9111, was to address several specific impacts, including “fiscal impacts, consistency with county plans, effects on land use and infrastructure, and impacts on the community’s ability to attract business,” among other topics requested by the Board of Supervisors.

The report landed today. It’s 98 pages long. And it’s a beast.

Here it is, stored on our server for your review: Rezoning of 17,500 acres of Land in East Solano County to Allow the Development of a New Community Elections Code 9111 Report. Read it, print it, study it. There’s a lot to look at.

But before we start reading, let’s first acknowledge the tremendous volume of time, energy, expertise, and resources that went into this stunningly robust report. Given the circumstances, County Staff and consultants appear to have considered a wide variety of concerns as fully as they could given the time constraints, and done a phenomenal job trying to fit a year (at least) of work into less than a month. (CA Forever’s own impact report, which produced a far rosier outlook on the development’s impacts on Solano, apparently took 6 months to put together.)

We’re astounded and grateful. Solano should be astounded and grateful. This is a level of service that speaks not just to the importance of the issue, and how high the stakes are for our collective future, but also to the qualities that demonstrate that in Solano, local governance is built on the foundation of transparency, accountability, and respect for its constituents.

Transparency, accountability, and respect. Kudos are owed to County Staff and leaders.

However, given the length and complexity of the beast, it is unlikely it will be widely read, at least in its entirety.

For that reason, the BenIndy is publishing the report’s executive summary in full, without commentary. It’s just below.

We will also be posting a few more takeaways in the coming days, which will most definitely include plenty of commentary. We’re soliciting commentary from various folks and welcome commentary from Solano residents. (benindy @ mngl . ca).

We will also be  looking at how Benicia City Staff chose to answer questions the County put to them about anticipated impacts, so we can consider how Benicia City Staff and leadership are choosing to tackle the issue. We hope to share some of  the responses produced by other cities as well.

Once more, you can view the full report here: Rezoning of 17,500 acres of Land in East Solano County to Allow the Development of a New Community Elections Code 9111 Report.

This summary has been modified for formatting purposes only. Items that were bolded in the report are bolded in this post.

Buckle in.

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS

On June 25, 2024, the Solano County Board of Supervisors accepted the Registrar of Voters’ certificate of sufficiency that the proponents of the “Rezoning of 17,500 acres of land in East Solano to allow the Development of a New Community” (also known as California Forever) Initiative gathered sufficient valid signatures to qualify the proposed Initiative for the ballot and directed staff to return with a report on the impact of the proposed Initiative as specified in Elections Code section 9111. A summary of those impacts is below.

1.    The Initiative’s Fiscal Impacts

The presumed fiscal impacts of the proposed Initiative for the New Community in Solano County are detailed as follows:

Fiscal Deficits

Solano County:

• Phase 1: An estimated annual fiscal deficit of $5.9 million. (Table 3-12 in Section 3.7)
• Buildout: An estimated annual fiscal deficit of $103.1 million. (Table 3-12 in Section 3.7)

Montezuma Fire Protection District (MFPD):

• Phase 1: An estimated annual fiscal deficit of $6.5 million. (Table 3-13 in Section 3.7)
• Buildout: An estimated annual fiscal deficit of $88.8 million. (Table 3-13 in Section 3.7)

These deficits indicate that the annual expenses incurred to serve the New Community will exceed the annual revenues generated by it.

Offset Strategies

Community Facilities District (CFD):

To offset the annual fiscal deficits, a CFD may be formed to fund both County and MFPD ongoing service expenses and operations/maintenance costs. However, the use of a CFD will reduce the capacity to fund infrastructure due to the limit on total CFD capacity based on home value and would equate to an annual CFD tax of $1,955 per single family unit and $977 per multi-family unit. CFD’s also create future risks to the County during economic downturns if housing development significantly slows and assessments fail to cover costs of debt payment

Financial Feasibility/Summary

The financial analysis indicates that the total gross one-time burdens, including infrastructure and public facilities costs, range from $6.4 billion for Phase 1 to $49.1 billion at Buildout. The net burdens can be reduced with the use of initial CFD bond proceeds, down to $6.0 billion for Phase 1 and $45.9 billion at Buildout.

The proposed Initiative for the New Community lacks a detailed Fiscal Impact Analysis and confirmed funding mechanisms. The County conducted a preliminary fiscal analysis, focusing on the General Fund and Fire District’s General Fund, but excluded other funds such as schools, cemeteries, libraries, parks, and water agencies. Because of the specific nature/purpose of these funds, they will need separate and specific evaluation.

Revenue assumptions are based on “affordable housing” correlating to household incomes at 125 percent of Solano County’s median household income. Comparisons were made with cities like Daly City, Berkeley, Redondo Beach and Santa Monica for Phase 1, and San Francisco, Long Beach, and Oakland for Buildout.

Due to limited information and a 30-day analysis period, the preliminary fiscal impact assessment is not comprehensive and does not cover Countywide services or full financial impacts.

It is important to note that in order to estimate recurring fiscal impacts, rough approximations related to project median household income and residential unit average values were based on stated goals and language throughout the proposed Initiative emphasizing “middle-class homes” and “more good paying jobs”. For the purposes of this analysis, the following assumptions were used:

Assumptions:

• Median household income: $110,000 (roughly 125 percent of Countywide median household income)
• Average residential unit value: $425,000

The analysis indicates significant fiscal deficits for Solano County and the Fire District. Strategies such as forming a Community Facilities District (CFD) to pass costs to homeowners could offset some deficits but limit infrastructure funding. Rapid population growth will necessitate substantial infrastructure without a clear funding plan. Other financing methods like an Enhanced Infrastructure Financing District (EIFD) are not possible.

A detailed analysis of infrastructure needs (e.g., community buildings, law enforcement and fire stations, libraries, health facilities) is necessary for a complete funding plan. Overall, the project’s financial feasibility is doubtful due to high infrastructure and public service costs, leading to substantial annual deficits without clear revenue sources.

2.    Its effect on the internal consistency of the County’s General and Specific Plans, including the housing element, the consistency between planning and zoning, and the limitations on County actions under Section 65008 of the Government Code and Chapters 4.2 (commencing with Section 65913) and 4.3 (commencing with Section 65915) of Division 1 of Title 7 of the Government Code.

The proposed Initiative impacts the internal consistency of the Solano County General Plan in several significant ways. Here are the main points:

Conflicts with the General Plan

1. Redesignation of Agricultural Land:
   • The Initiative proposes to convert approximately 17,500 acres of agricultural land to urbanized uses, which directly conflicts with the General Plan’s emphasis on preserving agricultural lands and directing urban growth towards existing cities. The General Plan encourages urban development within or adjacent to incorporated cities where public services and infrastructure are already available.
2. Increased Development Capacity:
   • The proposed Initiative dramatically increases the development capacity within the unincorporated areas of the County by allowing a minimum of 160,000 new dwelling units and 90,000,000 square feet of non-residential development. This is a substantial increase compared to the current General Plan projections for 2030.
3. Housing Element Inconsistencies:
   • The proposed Initiative may require updates to the recently certified Housing Element, in the next cycle, to address the increased development capacity as a result of the New Community and ensure consistency with the new amendments to the General Plan. It would result in the County needing to plan for a higher number of residential units, potentially conflicting with the current Housing Element goals, which prioritize rural residential development and agricultural use in non-urban areas.
4. Infrastructure and Services:
   • The Initiative’s proposal to develop urbanized areas in the unincorporated area on largely agricultural lands poses significant challenges for infrastructure and services. The General Plan currently focuses on areas where services can be readily provided, whereas the proposed Initiative places new development in areas that do not have necessary infrastructure.

Amendments to the General Plan

1. Text, Policy, and Figure Changes:
   • The proposed Initiative includes numerous amendments to the General Plan in order to enable the New Community. These changes are extensive and create a need for a comprehensive update to ensure all elements of the General Plan are consistent.
2. Specific Amendments:
   • Specific long-term policies held by the County, such as those related to urban development patterns, the preservation of agricultural lands, and land use designations, are fundamental throughout all elements of the existing General Plan and would be directly impacted by the proposed Initiative.

3. General Plan Goals and Policies:
   • The proposed Initiative alters several fundamental goals and policies of the General Plan. For example, the General Plan’s goal to prioritize infill development and direct new growth towards existing communities is at odds with the proposed Initiative’s approach to developing large new urban areas in rural regions. All elements of the existing General Plan would require assessment and likely revision in order to ensure consistency and adequacy as required by State law.

Summary

The proposed Initiative introduces substantial changes to the Solano County General Plan, creating significant inconsistencies with existing goals, policies, and land use designations, particularly those related to urban growth direction, agricultural land preservation, and infrastructure planning. These inconsistencies would necessitate a comprehensive update to the General Plan to address the new urban development patterns, infrastructure needs, and housing capacities proposed by the Initiative.

3.     Its effect on the use of land, the impact on the availability and location of housing, and the ability of the county to meet its regional housing needs.

The proposed Initiative has significant effects on land use within Solano County. Here are the key points:

Conversion of Agricultural Land

1. Agricultural Land to Urban Use:
   • The Initiative proposes converting approximately 17,500 acres of agricultural land, including Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, and Farmland of Statewide Importance, to urban uses. This conversion would lead to a substantial decrease in agricultural land available in Solano County, affecting the agricultural economy, agricultural jobs and reducing agricultural production by an estimated $6.7 million annually.

New Zoning Districts and Land Use Designations

1. Creation of New Zoning Districts:
   • The proposed Initiative establishes new zoning districts, including Commercial Mixed Use (CMU), Industry & Technology (IT), Maker & Manufacturing (MM), Neighborhood Mixed Use (NMU), Open Space (OS), and Travis Compatible Infrastructure (TCI). These new districts introduce a variety of urban uses to previously agricultural areas.

2. New Land Use Designations:
   • The proposed Initiative introduces three new land use designations: New Community, Rio Vista Parkland, and Travis Security Zone. The New Community designation would facilitate a mixed use development with residential, commercial, and industrial areas. The Rio Vista Parkland designation is intended to create an open space buffer, while the Travis Security Zone is intended to restrict certain types of development near Travis Air Force Base.

Increased Development Capacity

1. Residential and Nonresidential Development:
   • The proposed Initiative increases the development capacity significantly, allowing for a minimum of 160,000 new dwelling units and 90,000,000 square feet of non-residential development. This represents a substantial shift from the current General Plan, which focuses on preserving agricultural lands and limiting urban sprawl.

Availability and Location of Housing

1. Housing Element Goals:
   • The County’s Housing Element prioritizes the development of single-family homes and accessory residential uses to agriculture within unincorporated areas and multifamily housing within incorporated cities. The proposed Initiative conflicts with these goals by promoting extensive residential development at high densities on agricultural lands.
2. Identified Sites for Residential Development:
   • The Housing Element identifies vacant and underutilized sites near Vacaville, Fairfield, and Vallejo as appropriate for residential development to meet the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA). The proposed Initiative area does not align with these identified sites, further conflicting with the Housing Element and is a missed opportunity to focus growth and development in urban areas that are better served to receive these uses.

Ability to Meet Regional Housing Needs

1. Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA):
   • Solano County’s current RHNA allocation is 315 units for the 2023-2031 planning period, with specific targets for very low, low, moderate, and above-moderate income tiers. The Initiative proposes a development capacity of 20,000 to 160,000 dwelling units, far exceeding the current total RHNA allocation; however, with no commitment to provide resulting required very low and low income housing units.

2. Impact on Future RHNA Allocation:
   • The significant increase in potential housing development in the New Community could result in a higher RHNA allocation for the next cycle, forcing the County to plan for more residential units within unincorporated lands unequipped to handle intense development, which may lead to direct and indirect effects on existing undeveloped lands.

3.  Conflict with Housing Element Goals:

• The proposed residential developments are not expected to constitute accessory uses to agriculture or rural residential development, thus conflicting with the Housing Element goals aimed at preserving agricultural areas and promoting rural residential development.

Summary

The proposed Initiative would ministerially transform a substantial portion of Solano County’s agricultural land into urbanized areas, introduce new zoning districts, and significantly increase residential and nonresidential development capacity. This would create conflicts with the current Housing Element goals, misalign with identified sites for residential development, and potentially impact the County’s ability to meet its regional housing needs in future planning cycles.

4. Its impact on funding for infrastructure of all types, including, but not limited to, transportation, schools, parks, and open space. The report may also discuss whether the measure would be likely to result in increased infrastructure costs or savings, including the costs of infrastructure maintenance, to current residents and businesses.

The proposed Initiative has significant impacts on funding for infrastructure, including transportation, schools, parks, and open space, as well as on the associated costs of infrastructure maintenance for current residents and businesses. Here are the key points:

Infrastructure Funding

     Community Facilities District (CFD) Bond Proceeds:

• Phase 1: Net bond proceeds available to fund infrastructure are estimated to be $405 million which would equate to an annual CFD tax of $2,380 per single family unit and $1,346 per multi-family unit.
• Buildout: Net bond proceeds available are estimated to be $3.2 billion.

     Development Impact Fees:

• Public Facility Fee (PFF): Phase 1 obligation is $144 million, increasing to $1.24 billion at Buildout.
• School Facilities Fees: Estimated at $128 million for Phase 1 and $1.09 billion for Buildout.

3. Total One-Time Burdens:

• Phase 1: Gross one-time burden is $6.4 billion, reduced to $6.0 billion after use of initial CFD bond proceeds.
• Buildout: Gross one-time burden is $49.1 billion, reduced to $45.9 billion after use of initial CFD bond proceeds.

Infrastructure Costs and Maintenance

1. Transportation Infrastructure:
   • Phase 1: Estimated transportation improvement costs outside the development area are approximately $2.2 billion. Internal road construction costs are an additional $1.5 billion for Phase 1.
   • Buildout: Costs are estimated at $17.6 billion. Internal road construction costs are an additional $12.2 billion for Buildout.
   • Failure to mitigate these impacts would lead to increased traffic congestion, decreased roadway safety, and higher maintenance costs.
2. Schools:
   • Phase 1 is estimated to require six K-8 schools and two high schools at an estimated cost of $743 million and Buildout is estimated to require substantially higher number of school facilities costing $5.9 billion for Buildout.
3. Parks and Recreation:
   • Total park and related amenity costs are estimated at $165 million for Phase 1 and $1.32 billion for Buildout.
4. Public Safety:
   • Estimated cost for two public safety stations is $72 million for Phase 1 and $576 million for Buildout.
5. Water and Sewer Systems:
   • Construction of water treatment plants and distribution pipelines is estimated at $354.6 million.
   • Wastewater conveyance and treatment is estimated at $996 million.
   • Additional $100 million estimated for recycled water distribution system.

Impact on Current Residents and Businesses

1. Fiscal Deficits:
   • The proposed Initiative is projected to create significant fiscal deficits for both the County and the Fire District. The County’s annual deficit is estimated at $5.9 million for Phase 1 and $103.1 million at Buildout, while the Fire District’s annual deficit is $6.5 million for Phase 1 and $88.8 million at Buildout. These deficits necessitate the formation of CFDs to mitigate these deficits, which in turn limit the available CFD capacity to fund infrastructure. The estimated annual special tax revenue from CFDs can support bond issues totaling $476 million for Phase 1 and $3.2 billion for Buildout.
2. Maintenance Costs:
   • Increased infrastructure will lead to higher maintenance costs, which could strain the County’s budget and impact services for current residents and businesses. This includes roads, bridges, and public facilities.
3. Within the Proposed Initiative New Community Area:
   • There are four distinct parcels of land “islands” that are not included within the boundaries of the New Community but are surrounded by it that create significant challenges and risks, which include inefficiencies in service delivery, land use planning issues, community integration difficulties, and stringent environmental considerations. The four “islands” consist of 1) an existing established agricultural fertilizer and soil amendment producer; 2) the Delta Conservation Camp #8 which is a joint facility operated by CDCR and CAL FIRE to house incarcerated crews to support fire suppression and conservation projects; 3) 150 acres dedicated to mitigation purposes; and 4) agricultural residential homesteads.

Summary

The proposed Initiative entails substantial infrastructure development and associated funding challenges. Significant investment is required for transportation, schools, parks, public safety, and water systems without any clear indication of where these funds will originate in the proposed Initiative. These investments are necessary to support the New Community but will also lead to increased fiscal burdens and maintenance costs for Solano County, affecting current residents and businesses. The formation of CFDs and reliance on development impact fees will be critical in managing these financial impacts, but they also limit the funds available for other infrastructure needs.

5. Its impact on the community’s ability to attract and retain business and employment

The proposed Initiative has notable impacts on the community’s ability to attract and retain businesses and employment. Here are the key points:

Job Creation and Employment

1. Job Creation:
   • The proposed Initiative may result in 94,000 jobs at Buildout, including construction jobs. This would significantly increase employment opportunities within the County during buildout with permanent jobs remaining after buildout.
   • The New Community is expected to provide some “good paying” jobs, defined as those that pay at least 125 percent of the average wage in Solano County. This focus on higher wages is intended to attract a skilled workforce and support local economic development.
2. Employment Types:
   • Jobs are anticipated to span various sectors, including manufacturing, production, technology, industrial research, healthcare, and education.

Business Attraction

1. Commercial and Industrial Space:
   • The proposed Initiative proposes up to 90 million square feet of non-residential development, providing substantial space for new businesses and industries.
   • By offering a mix of residential, commercial, and industrial zones, the proposed Initiative aims to create a balanced community that can attract diverse business activities.
2. Incentives for Businesses:
   • The development of infrastructure and amenities, such as parks, schools, and public services, is designed to make the area attractive for businesses looking for a wellserviced location.

Challenges and Considerations

1. Fiscal Deficits:
   • The proposed Initiative is projected to create significant annual fiscal deficits for both Solano County and the MFPD, which may necessitate additional funding mechanisms that could affect businesses indirectly. The annual deficit is estimated at $5.9 million for Phase 1 and $103.1 million at Buildout for the County, and $6.5 million for Phase 1 and $88.8 million at Buildout for the Fire District.
2. Infrastructure and Services:
   • Adequate provision of infrastructure and public services is crucial. The proposed Initiative’s reliance on CFDs and other financing tools to fund infrastructure may be premature because many of those tools will be limited or unavailable. Further, ongoing maintenance and upgrades could pose challenges if fiscal deficits persist.

3. Potential Relocation of Residents:
   • The development of the New Community might lead to existing residents moving from incorporated cities to the new development area, which could impact the economic dynamics of existing urban centers in Solano County. This shift could result in a redistribution of economic activity and a potentially adverse effect to businesses in existing urban areas.

Summary

The proposed Initiative aims to establish a new, sustainable community in Solano County while simultaneously addressing various critical needs and concerns of the County’s residents and businesses. However, the potential fiscal deficits and the need for sustainable infrastructure funding pose challenges that need careful management to ensure long-term success.

6. Impact on the uses of vacant parcels of land

The proposed Initiative significantly affects the uses of vacant parcels of land. Here are the main points:

Conversion of Agricultural Lands

1. Reduction in Agricultural Land:
   • The proposed Initiative would result in the conversion of approximately 17,500 acres of agricultural land, including Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, and Farmland of Statewide Importance, to urbanized uses. This conversion would significantly reduce the amount of agricultural land in Solano County and change the agricultural ecosystem by substantively reducing grazing lands and dryland farming in Solano County.
2. Value of Agricultural Land:
   • The potential annual gross value of agricultural production within the New Community area is estimated to be $5.1 million. The total annual agricultural economic productivity, including direct, indirect, and induced impacts, is estimated to be $6.7 million. The loss of these productive agricultural lands would result in substantial economic impacts.

New Land Use Designations

1. Open Space Designation:

• The Initiative proposes creating a new Open Space zoning designation, which includes recreational open space, agricultural uses, and ancillary retail and visitor-serving facilities. This designation excludes traditional urban uses like residential, school, industrial, and manufacturing uses.

The proposed Initiative includes the implementation of the Rio Vista Parkland, a 712-acre open space buffer, and requires the New Community to provide at least 4,000 acres of open space.

Vacant Land Conversion

1. Decrease in Vacant Land:

• Most of the proposed Initiative area is currently used for agricultural purposes, including grazing and small grain farming. The implementation of the proposed Initiative would convert these “vacant” lands to urbanized uses, decreasing the amount of agricultural land within the County.

Ecosystem Services and Environmental Impact

1. Loss of Ecosystem Services:
   • • The conversion of agricultural lands to urban uses would result in the loss of ecosystem services provided by these lands, which are valued at over $11 million annually. These services include climate change adaptation, biodiversity maintenance, water regulation, erosion prevention, wildfire mitigation, and aesthetic benefits.
     • The proposed Initiative removes the land located within the New Community from the Priority Habitat designation and the Resource Conservation Overlay which will have significant impacts on local ecosystems, biodiversity, and environmental quality.
     • The New Community will develop on land adjacent to and surrounding one 150-acre island consisting of a combination of land that is owned by the County (100 acres), the City of Fairfield (5 acres), and the Fairfield Housing Authority (45 acres), acquired for the purpose of preserving natural wildlife and habitat for mitigation wetlands that must be preserved in perpetuity.
2. Impact on Grazing Lands:
   • The New Community and Rio Vista Parkland areas currently encompass approximately 14,000 acres of rangelands used for cattle and sheep grazing. These rangelands provide significant ecosystem services and habitat for various species. The proposed Initiative would result in the loss of these grazing lands and the associated environmental benefits.

Summary

The proposed Initiative would significantly alter the use of land in Solano County by converting large areas of productive agricultural land into urbanized uses. This conversion would lead to a decrease in vacant land, a loss of agricultural productivity, and a reduction in ecosystem services. Additionally, the introduction of new zoning designations and the creation of open space areas aim to mitigate some impacts, but the overall effect would still be substantial.

7. Its impact on agricultural lands, open space, traffic congestion, existing business districts, and developed areas designated for revitalization

The proposed Initiative has several impacts on agricultural lands, open space, traffic congestion, existing business districts, and developed areas designated for revitalization.

Agricultural Lands

1. Conversion to Urban Use:
   • The Initiative proposes converting approximately 17,500 acres of agricultural land, including Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, and Farmland of Statewide Importance, to urban uses. This conversion would lead to a substantial decrease in agricultural land available in Solano County, affecting the agricultural economy and reducing agricultural production by an estimated $6.7 million annually.
2. Impact on Ecosystem Services:
   • The loss of agricultural land also means a loss of ecosystem services valued at over $11 million annually, including benefits such as climate change adaptation, biodiversity maintenance, water regulation, erosion prevention, and wildfire mitigation.

Open Space

1. Increase in Open Space Designation:
   • The proposed Initiative includes the creation of a new Open Space zoning designation and requires the New Community to provide at least 4,000 acres of open space. This would substantially increase the amount of land designated for open space in the County, including the implementation of the 712-acre Rio Vista Parkland.
2. Recreational and Environmental Uses:
   • The new Open Space designation includes a range of uses such as recreational open spaces, passive parks, and community agriculture, which aim to balance urban development with the preservation of natural areas and recreational amenities.

Traffic Congestion

Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT)

1. Increase in VMT:
   • Phase 1: The New Community is estimated to generate an additional 341 million residential VMT and 152 million employment VMT annually.
   • Buildout: The total increase in VMT is projected to be 2 billion residential VMT and 438 million employment VMT annually. This substantial increase in VMT reflects the additional travel required by new residents and employees.

Traffic Impact and Mitigation

2. Roadway and Bridge Improvements:
   • Phase 1: Estimated transportation improvement costs outside the development area are approximately $2.2 billion. Internal road construction costs are an additional $1.5 billion for Phase 1.
   • Buildout: Costs are estimated at $17.6 billion. Additional costs of $12.2 billion are anticipated for internal road construction within the New Community at Buildout.
   • Required improvements include upgrading impacted substandard roads to at least four lanes, replacing bridges, and enhancing intersections to mitigate traffic impacts.

Freeway and Local Roadway Conditions

3. Freeway Segment Level of Service (LOS):
   • Phase 1: Seven freeway segments are projected to operate at LOS E or F.
   • Buildout: Fifteen freeway segments are projected to operate at LOS E or F, indicating severe congestion and poor travel conditions.
   • Roads operating at LOS E or F will experience substantial delays and a range of impacts to local and regional roads. Failing to mitigate these impacts would lead to increased traffic congestion, reduced travel speeds, decreased roadway safety, a rise in significant injury and fatal accidents, and higher maintenance costs for roads and bridges.
4. Local Roadway Conditions:
   • Various local roadway segments are projected to operate at unacceptable LOS (LOS E or F) under both Phase 1 and Buildout conditions. This includes major roads such as Peabody Road, Flannery Road, and SR 12.

Construction and Operational Impacts

1. Construction Traffic:
   • Construction activities for Phase 1 are anticipated to last 10 years, involving road closures, detours, and increased truck traffic. This could temporarily exacerbate traffic congestion and disrupt transportation systems.

2. Long-term Operational Impacts:
   • The increased traffic volumes due to the New Community’s buildout are expected to lead to lower traveling speeds, decreased roadway safety, and increased incidence of significant injury and fatal accidents. Additionally, the increased wear and tear on roads and bridges will result in higher maintenance costs.

Existing Business Districts and Developed Areas

1. Impact on Urban Centers:
   • The proposed Initiative may lead to a redistribution of economic activity from existing urban centers to the new development area. This shift could impact the vitality of existing business districts in the seven cities.
2. Potential Revitalization Areas:
   • The focus on developing a New Community might detract from efforts to revitalize already developed areas within the county. Resources and investments may be diverted to support the new development, potentially slowing down the revitalization of older, established neighborhoods and business districts.

Water Resources

1. Water Demand:
   • Water demand in the New Community area will approximately double from baseline conditions in Phase 1, with water demand increasing by nearly 7-12 times at Buildout.
2. Water Supply:
   • The proposed Initiative does not identify precisely what water sources will be used to serve the New Community. It says generally that surface water, groundwater, and recycled water will be utilized, but lacks further detail.
   • The Initiative-proponent will face legal and physical hurdles to use surface water supplies to serve the New Community, the details of which depend on the nature of the surface water rights that the New Community intends to use. This information is not known. Additionally, there is currently no infrastructure in place to move surface water supplies to the New Community
   • The New Community is expected to rely heavily on groundwater, particularly in the initial phase, due to the uncertainty associated with legally and physically obtaining surface water supplies.
   • Increased groundwater pumping to serve the New Community may have a detrimental effect on other water users in the area and may require an update to the Solano Subbasin GSP.

Summary

The proposed Initiative significantly impacts Solano County’s agricultural lands by converting large areas to urban uses, thus reducing agricultural productivity and ecosystem services. It increases designated open space, aiming to balance development with environmental preservation. Traffic congestion is expected to rise substantially, necessitating major infrastructure investments. The development will lead to a substantial increase in VMT, necessitating extensive and costly roadway and bridge improvements to mitigate the traffic impacts. Both freeway and local road segments are projected to experience severe congestion, especially under maximum buildout conditions. The long-term operational impacts include lower travel speeds, decreased roadway safety, and higher maintenance costs. Additionally, the proposed Initiative could affect existing business districts and developed areas by shifting economic activity to the new development area, potentially hampering revitalization efforts in established urban centers. There is also substantial uncertainty regarding the source and quantity of water supplies that will be used to serve the New Community and resulting impacts on other water users in the area.

8. Any other matters the Board of Supervisors requests to be in the report

On June 23, 2024, the Board of Supervisors requested that this report also analyze the impacts of the proposed Initiative on the seven cities in Solano County and if the proposed Initiative were to pass, what would be the anticipated value of the land from the rezoning of the land for development.

Impacts of the proposed Initiative on the seven cities in Solano County:

Following the June 23, 2024 Board meeting, the County Administrator sent requests to the City Managers of Benicia, Dixon, Fairfield, Rio Vista, Suisun City, Vacaville and Vallejo for information on any anticipated impacts to these cities. The County received responses from each city except for Dixon. The cities provided high-level statements in the short amount of time available. Copies of the letters can be found in Supporting Documentation I.

The cities expressed a variety of concerns and questions about the potential impacts of the proposed Initiative as follows:

• Inadequate Information: The cities emphasize the lack of detailed information about the proposed Initiative, particularly regarding technical aspects like water supply, infrastructure, and environmental mitigation. They argue that a thorough environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) is necessary before any meaningful assessment of the proposed Initiative’s impacts can be made.
• Traffic and Transportation: The responses, especially those from cities close to the proposed development, express serious concerns about traffic congestion. They point out that Highway 12 is already heavily congested, and the project’s proposed “beach” or “lagoon” would exacerbate the problem. They call for a comprehensive traffic analysis and significant investment in infrastructure improvements.
• Water Resources: Water supply is a major concern for each city with questions regarding the proposed Initiative’s reliance on groundwater and the potential impact on existing water rights and resources. They demand transparency about the source of water, especially for the lagoon, and raise concerns about the proposed Initiative’s feasibility given recent droughts.
• Economic Impacts: The cities present a mixed view of the proposed Initiative’s potential economic impacts. While acknowledging the possibility of increased tax revenue and funding for downtown revitalization, they also express concerns about competition for economic development opportunities, potential negative impacts on existing businesses, and inflated construction costs.
• Environmental Impacts: Concerns were raised about the loss of agricultural land and open space, with potential negative consequences for air and water quality, wildlife habitat, and the rural character of surrounding communities. They also highlight the lack of information about environmental mitigation measures.
• Public Services and Infrastructure: The cities expressed concern about the strain on public services like fire and law enforcement, as well as the availability of affordable housing and educational resources. The proposed Initiative will require a significant increase in public safety personnel, which could strain existing resources and make it difficult for other jurisdictions to recruit and retain staff. They also question the adequacy of existing infrastructure, including wastewater treatment and energy supply, to accommodate such a large development.

Summary

The cities collectively present a skeptical view of the proposed Initiative, citing insufficient information, potential negative impacts on traffic, water resources, the environment, and existing communities. They urge the County to conduct a thorough and transparent environmental review process, with meaningful community engagement, before entering into agreements with Initiative-proponents.

The anticipated value of the land rezoned for development:

Assuming the proposed Initiative passes, the land would be automatically rezoned from its existing zoning designations to New Community thereby providing immediate development opportunities. The Land Value Analysis performed as a result of this report looked to evaluate the potential returns to landowners of the New Community area if they decide to sell the land. This analysis is based on the premise that the land’s value would increase significantly after being rezoned from agricultural to residential and nonresidential use as a result of the proposed Initiative passage.

Key takeaways from the analysis:

• Data from land purchases within the New Community area between 2018 and 2023 reveals an average assessed value of approximately $6,800 per acre. The analysis excluded transactions before 2018 due to their age and because they represent a small fraction of the total transactions.
• Analysis of transactions between 2018 and 2023 for vacant land zoned for development in Solano County suggests a current value of approximately $35,200 per acre. However, this figure could be discounted by 50 percent to account for a bulk sale scenario, bringing a conservative estimated value to $17,600 per acre.
• Based on these preliminary findings, the analysis suggests that landowners could potentially sell their land for approximately 2.6 times conservatively and up to 5.2 times the purchase price based purely on the value of the rezone from agricultural to high density residential and non-residential uses granted as part of the proposed Initiative.

It’s important to note that this analysis is based on a limited number of factors and makes certain assumptions. A more comprehensive analysis would need to consider a wider range of variables to provide a more accurate assessment of potential land value changes.

Conclusion

While the proposed Initiative presents ambitious plans for growth and development in East Solano County, it also brings significant financial, environmental, and planning challenges that cannot be overlooked. The proposed Initiative’s potential fiscal deficits, inconsistencies with the General Plan, adverse environmental impacts, infrastructure demands, and socioeconomic implications necessitate a thorough and critical evaluation. Ensuring that these issues are comprehensively addressed is crucial for understanding and managing impacts as a result of the proposed Initiative and for maintaining the County’s commitment to sustainable and balanced growth