Agenda — Fairfield City Council, September 12, 2023

CITY OF FAIRFIELD
SPECIAL MEETING
STUDY SESSION
TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 12, 2023; 6:00 PM
COUNCIL CHAMBER, 1000 WEBSTER STREET,
FAIRFIELD, CA 94533 OR VIA ZOOM
AGENDA
Members of the public can observe the meeting on Comcast Cable Channel 26, ATT UVerse 99, and webstreamed live at www.youtube.com/user/FFCATV/live . The public may join the meeting via Zoom at https://fairfieldca.zoom.us/j/89060213840?pwd=UUd0WlpEMStLemcxbld4dzVMK3Z5dz09 or via phone (408) 6380968, Webinar ID: 890 6021 3840, Passcode: 7074287400 CALL TO ORDER 6:00 PM
ROLL CALL
Councilmember Doug Carr
Councilmember Doriss Panduro
Councilmember Scott Tonnesen
Councilmember Rick Vaccaro
Councilmember K. Patrice Williams
Vice Mayor Pam Bertani
Mayor Catherine "Cat" Moy
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
PUBLIC COMMENTS
PROCESS FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS
Persons wishing to address the City Council on subjects not on the agenda but within the jurisdiction of the council may do so at this time. The council cannot discuss or take action on matters not on the agenda for this meeting, but councilmembers may briefly respond to statements made or questions raised by the public, ask for clarification from staff, refer the matter to staff, request staff to report back to the council at a subsequent meeting, or place the matter on a future agenda. To speak on an agenda item please use the “raise your hand” feature or press *9 on your phone. Speakers are limited to three minutes per item.

PRESENTATIONS

1.Discussion and Direction Regarding the General Plan Update Land Uses in Cordelia Contact:Jessie Hernandez, (707) 4287450
a

ADJOURN
Any disclosable public records related to an open session item on a regular meeting agenda and distributed by the City of Fairfield to all or a majority of the Fairfield City Council less than 72 hours prior to that meeting are available for public inspection at City Hall, in the 4th floor lobby, 1000 Webster Street, Fairfield, California during normal business hours.

Packet Page 1 of 26

CITY OF FAIRFIELDSPECIAL MEETINGSTUDY SESSIONTUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 12, 2023; 6:00 PMCOUNCIL CHAMBER, 1000 WEBSTER STREET,FAIRFIELD, CA 94533 OR VIA ZOOMAGENDAMembers of the public can observe the meeting on Comcast Cable Channel 26, ATT UVerse 99, andwebstreamed live at www.youtube.com/user/FFCATV/live . The public may join the meeting via Zoomat https://fairfieldca.zoom.us/j/89060213840?pwd=UUd0WlpEMStLemcxbld4dzVMK3Z5dz09 or viaphone (408) 6380968, Webinar ID: 890 6021 3840, Passcode: 7074287400CALL TO ORDER 6:00 PMROLL CALLCouncilmember Doug CarrCouncilmember Doriss PanduroCouncilmemberScott TonnesenCouncilmember Rick VaccaroCouncilmember K. Patrice Williams Vice Mayor Pam BertaniMayor Catherine "Cat" MoyPLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCEPUBLIC COMMENTS PROCESS FOR PUBLIC COMMENTSPersons wishing to address the City Council on subjects not on the agenda but within the jurisdictionof the council may do so at this time. The council cannot discuss or take action on matters not on theagenda for this meeting, but councilmembers may briefly respond to statements made or questionsraised by the public, ask for clarification from staff, refer the matter to staff, request staff to report backto the council at a subsequent meeting, or place the matter on a future agenda. To speak on anagenda item please use the “raise your hand” feature or press *9 on your phone. Speakers arelimited to three minutes per item.PRESENTATIONS1.Discussion and Direction Regarding the General Plan Update Land Uses in CordeliaContact:Jessie Hernandez, (707) 4287450aADJOURNAny disclosable public records related to an open session item on a regular meeting agenda anddistributed by the City of Fairfield to all or a majority of the Fairfield City Council less than 72 hoursprior to that meeting are available for public inspection at City Hall, in the 4th floor lobby, 1000 Webster Street, Fairfield, California during normal business hours.

The City of Fairfield does not discriminate against any individual with a disability. City publications will be made available upon request in the appropriate format to persons with a disability. If you need an accommodation to attend or participate in this meeting due to a disability, please contact the City Clerk's Office, in advance of the meeting at (707) 4287400 or (707) 3995623 (TTY).

PUBLIC NOTIFICATION
I, Esther Beavers, Deputy City Clerk, do hereby certify that I have caused a true copy of the above notice and agenda to be delivered to each of the members of the Fairfield City Council, at the time and in the manner prescribed by law and that this agenda was posted at City Hall, 1000 Webster Street, Fairfield, California on Thursday, September 7, 2023.

Packet Page 2 of 26

Agenda Item No: 1.

AGENDA REPORT
DATE:September 12, 2023
TO:Mayor and City Council
FROM:David Gassaway, City Manager
SUBJECT:Discussion and Direction Regarding the General Plan Update Land Uses in Cordelia RECOMMENDED ACTION
Receive report, open discussion, and provide direction to staff.

STATEMENT OF ISSUE
The City of Fairfield is currently updating its General Plan, the longrange vision for how the city should develop and grow. Through a series of study sessions, the City Council has provided direction regarding the development vision for various parts of the city. At the September 12, 2023, study session, the council will be asked to provide direction for the remaining portion of the city – the Cordelia area.

DISCUSSION
Overview and Study Session Purpose: The General Plan Update was launched in December 2020. The project, called Fairfield Forward 2050, will set the vision and goals for growth in Fairfield for the next 25+ years. The project is currently in the land use alternatives phase. This phase focuses on working with the community to prepare, evaluate, and ultimately develop a preferred land use plan that will communicate the community’s vision for future growth and development. The preferred plan identifies the vision for what the city will look like at buildout in 20 to 30 years. In a subsequent phase, the City will identify what improvements, facilities, and amenities are needed to serve the overall vision.

During the land use alternatives phase, the council has provided direction regarding the vision for most parts of the city. The purpose of this council study session is to request direction for the vision for longterm growth and development of the city’s Cordelia area. The study session will also review the direction provided by the council for the unincorporated Suisun Valley at the June 13, 2023, study session and determine if the council wishes any changes to that direction. Staff will also ask the council any other topics or questions they want to discuss.

Following the establishment of the longterm land use vision for Cordelia, staff will return in a subsequent phase with recommendations for various facilities to serve Cordelia's development. These include recommendations for new roadways and other circulation improvements and potential sites for schools, parks, and other needs to support the overall vision for development.

Cordelia Vision for LongTerm Growth and Community Engagement:Following various engagements with the council and community, in Fall 2021, planning consultants Dyett & Bhatia prepared three land use alternatives for consideration. Engagement included stakeholder interviews, public workshops, online surveys, community event popups, Planning Commission, and City Council meetings. Following presentations from staff and consultants, the council directed that additional engagement be conducted prior to the final consideration of the alternatives. An overview of community input from this engagement is provided below.

Community Input: Key comments from Cordelia residents include a desire for more grocery stores and shopping opportunities; concerns about school capacity, particularly at Nelda Mundy Elementary; the need for more parks on the north side of Interstate 80 (I80); and traffic issues, with particular focus on congestion at the intersection of Business Center Drive and Green Valley Road. Residents also noted challenges traveling between North Cordelia and South Cordelia to access grocery stores on one side of I80 and schools on the other. Finally, residents identified undesirable, piecemeal development along Business Center Drive, resulting in a mix of land uses seen as incompatible, such as large warehouses next to housing, offices, and hotels. Certain landowners expressed interest in building housing on nonresidentially designated properties during community engagement. These properties and their desired land uses are described in Attachment 1:

Description of Cordelia Land Use Requests and depicted in Attachment 2: Map of Cordelia Land Use Requests.

Feedback from the council at the June 2023 study session highlighted the need to better understand the relationship between housing and grocery store demand in making decisions about the amount of residential development to include in the vision for Cordelia. The next section provides additional information on this topic.

Grocery Store Demand in Cordelia: Staff engaged economic consultants BAE Urban Economics and Chabin Concepts to evaluate the demand for a new grocery store in the Cordelia area. A detailed analysis is provided in Attachment 3: Cordelia Area Grocery Store Demand Analysis. Cordelia currently includes two grocery retailers, Safeway and Costco; both retailers are on the north side of I80. Current housing development demographics indicate that these two stores serve most of the demand, with a small excess of demand for a third store. The study concludes that currently planned or approved housing would result in demand for roughly 0.58 a new, fullsize grocery stores such as Safeway or Raley’s. Planned and approved projects accounted for in this analysis are listed on page 6 of Attachment 3.

Packet Page 3 of 26

This future demand may be sufficient to attract a smaller grocer such as Sprouts. The consultants found that a new Trader Joe’s is unlikely, as the company would not want to cannibalize its own sales given the existing Trader Joe’s in the Central Fairfield area. To support a new, full grocery store, approximately 2,100 additional housing units would be required beyond planned and approved units. Thus, the Cordelia area is likely only to attract one more grocery store longterm – either a smaller store if no additional housing is planned or a fullsize store if a substantial increase in planned housing is accommodated in the upcoming General Plan.

Staff recommends identifying one or two sites for a new grocery store South of I80, as those residents lack access to a nearby grocery store and must travel north of I80 to access fresh food. The consultants evaluated two potential sites for new grocery stores south of I80, which are depicted in Figure 1 below. Both sites are large enough to support a new grocery store. The planned STA freeway improvements would improve automobile access to site #2, while site #1 would be largely unimpacted by the improvements. However, the improvements may reduce the portion of site #2 that can accommodate development.

Key questions related to grocery stores for the council to consider at the September 12 study session include:

Does the City Council want to identify sufficient housing sites to support a full new grocery store or approximately 2,100 housing units? Potential housing sites are discussed in the next subsection.

What site or sites should be identified and preserved for a new grocery store with other retail uses? Should the City leave it up to the market to decide whether the second grocery store would be north or south of I80, or should the City focus General Plan efforts to facilitate a grocery store south of I80, where none currently exist? Figure 1. Potential Grocery Store Sites South of I80
Housing
Driving factors for new housing include the existing and future Housing Elements, the decision on whether to support a full new grocery store, and landowner requests.

Table 1, below, provides estimates for the number of housing units certain properties could accommodate.

Project Name
/ Address
Developer
/ Property
Owner
Number in
Attachments
1 and 2
Existing General
Plan Designation
and Zoning
Designation
Desired
Zoning
Developable
Acres
Potential
Num. of
Housing
Units
Notes
Suisun Valley Discovery 6 Highway and Zoning to +/ 30 220 See Attachment Packet Page 4 of 26

Nelson Hill
Conceptual Site
Plan
Total 1,215 – 1,730
Key questions related to new housing for the council to consider at the September 12 study session include:

Should additional sites be designated for new housing?
Which sites above requested by property owners should be designated for new housing? Should additional sites beyond those requested by property owners be designated for new housing? Considering this question, note that approximately 370 885 houses beyond those requested in Table 1 would be needed to support a fullsize grocery store. Staff can review options at the study session if the council desires to design additional housing sites.

Vision for Employment and Other Retail
Packet Page 5 of 26

Vision for Employment and Other Retail
The land use alternatives prepared in 2021 propose options to facilitate new employment centers and retail along Business Center Drive. The options include 1) a knowledge hub with medical, research, and technologyoriented jobs; 2) a jobs corridor with flexible office, light industrial, and research and development; and 3) advanced manufacturing jobs; and a mixeduse corridor. These three land use alternatives are depicted in Figure 2.

Figure 2. Business Center Drive Land Use Alternatives
Both alternatives 1 and 3 consider housing and retail for an approximately 44acre parcel owned by the Garaventa Family at the southeast corner of Suisun Valley Road and Business Center Drive. Discovery Homes is interested in developing the property in a manner generally consistent with alternatives 1 and 3.Attachment 4: Suisun Valley Place Conceptual Site Plan provides a preliminary conceptual plan submitted by Seeno, which proposes a mix of housing and various commercial sites, including small shop and restaurant buildings, hotel, larger space that could accommodate a smaller hardware/landscape store, gas station, and multiple drivethrough restaurants.

Key questions related to employment and other retail uses for the council to consider at the September 12 study session include:

What kinds of employment uses would you like to see along Business Center Drive? How much land would you like to reserve for those activities?
Should warehousing and distribution uses be allowed or not allowed along Business Center Drive? Should additional land be available for warehousing and distribution uses south of I80 near existing warehouse and distribution uses along Lopes Road?
Should the 44acre parcel be retained for employment and retail uses, or for mixed use including housing? What kinds of retail should be developed on the 44acre parcel? Are gas stations and fast food appropriate for this area, or should they be concentrated on the south side of I80 in their existing locations generally along Central Way? Note that, with growing tourist interest in the Suisun Valley, the site could be considered as “gateway” for visitors to the area. A higherend center with strong sense as a gathering place and destination that serves the local community as well as Suisun Valley visitors could be desirable, with emphasis on sitdown restaurants, brewpubs, winetasting facilities and entertainment as well as integrating mixeduse and/or more dense housing types.

Review of Suisun Valley Direction
At the June 13, 2023, study session, the council identified four study areas in the unincorporated Suisun Valley to include in the General Plan Update. These study areas are depicted in Figure 3 below.

Figure 3. Suisun Valley Study Areas Identified at the June 13, 2023 Study Session Packet Page 6 of 26

Agenda Item No: 1.AGENDA REPORTDATE:September 12, 2023 TO:Mayor and City CouncilFROM:David Gassaway, City ManagerSUBJECT:Discussion and Direction Regarding the General Plan Update Land Uses in CordeliaRECOMMENDED ACTIONReceive report, open discussion, and provide direction to staff.STATEMENT OF ISSUEThe City of Fairfield is currently updating its General Plan, the longrange vision for how the city should develop and grow. Through a series ofstudy sessions, the City Council has provided direction regarding the development vision for various parts of the city. At the September 12,2023, study session, the council will be asked to provide direction for the remaining portion of the city – the Cordelia area.DISCUSSIONOverview and Study Session Purpose: The General Plan Update was launched in December 2020. The project, called Fairfield Forward2050, will set the vision and goals for growth in Fairfield for the next 25+ years. The project is currently in the land use alternatives phase. Thisphase focuses on working with the community to prepare, evaluate, and ultimately develop a preferred land use plan that will communicate thecommunity’s vision for future growth and development. The preferred plan identifies the vision for what the city will look like at buildout in 20 to30 years. In a subsequent phase, the City will identify what improvements, facilities, and amenities are needed to serve the overall vision.During the land use alternatives phase, the council has provided direction regarding the vision for most parts of the city. The purpose of thiscouncil study session is to request direction for the vision for longterm growth and development of the city’s Cordelia area. The study sessionwill also review the direction provided by the council for the unincorporated Suisun Valley at the June 13, 2023, study session and determine ifthe council wishes any changes to that direction. Staff will also ask the council any other topics or questions they want to discuss. Following the establishment of the longterm land use vision for Cordelia, staff will return in a subsequent phase with recommendations forvarious facilities to serve Cordelia's development. These include recommendations for new roadways and other circulation improvements andpotential sites for schools, parks, and other needs to support the overall vision for development. Cordelia Vision for LongTerm Growth and Community Engagement:Following various engagements with the council and community, inFall 2021, planning consultants Dyett & Bhatia prepared three land use alternatives for consideration. Engagement included stakeholderinterviews, public workshops, online surveys, community event popups, Planning Commission, and City Council meetings. Followingpresentations from staff and consultants, the council directed that additional engagement be conducted prior to the final consideration of thealternatives. An overview of community input from this engagement is provided below. Community Input: Key comments from Cordelia residents include a desire for more grocery stores and shopping opportunities; concernsabout school capacity, particularly at Nelda Mundy Elementary; the need for more parks on the north side of Interstate 80 (I80); and trafficissues, with particular focus on congestion at the intersection of Business Center Drive and Green Valley Road. Residents also notedchallenges traveling between North Cordelia and South Cordelia to access grocery stores on one side of I80 and schools on the other. Finally,residents identified undesirable, piecemeal development along Business Center Drive, resulting in a mix of land uses seen as incompatible,such as large warehouses next to housing, offices, and hotels. Certain landowners expressed interest in building housing on nonresidentiallydesignated properties during community engagement. These properties and their desired land uses are described in Attachment 1:Description of Cordelia Land Use Requests and depicted in Attachment 2: Map of Cordelia Land Use Requests. Feedback from the council at the June 2023 study session highlighted the need to better understand the relationship between housing andgrocery store demand in making decisions about the amount of residential development to include in the vision for Cordelia. The next sectionprovides additional information on this topic. Grocery Store Demand in Cordelia: Staff engaged economic consultants BAE Urban Economics and Chabin Concepts to evaluate thedemand for a new grocery store in the Cordelia area. A detailed analysis is provided in Attachment 3: Cordelia Area Grocery Store DemandAnalysis. Cordelia currently includes two grocery retailers, Safeway and Costco; both retailers are on the north side of I80. Current housingdevelopment demographics indicate that these two stores serve most of the demand, with a small excess of demand for a third store. Thestudy concludes that currently planned or approved housing would result in demand for roughly 0.58 a new, fullsize grocery stores such asSafeway or Raley’s. Planned and approved projects accounted for in this analysis are listed on page 6 of Attachment 3.This future demand may be sufficient to attract a smaller grocer such as Sprouts. The consultants found that a new Trader Joe’s is unlikely, asthe company would not want to cannibalize its own sales given the existing Trader Joe’s in the Central Fairfield area. To support a new, fullgrocery store, approximately 2,100 additional housing units would be required beyond planned and approved units. Thus, the Cordelia area islikely only to attract one more grocery store longterm – either a smaller store if no additional housing is planned or a fullsize store if asubstantial increase in planned housing is accommodated in the upcoming General Plan. Staff recommends identifying one or two sites for a new grocery store South of I80, as those residents lack access to a nearby grocery storeand must travel north of I80 to access fresh food. The consultants evaluated two potential sites for new grocery stores south of I80, which aredepicted in Figure 1 below. Both sites are large enough to support a new grocery store. The planned STA freeway improvements wouldimprove automobile access to site #2, while site #1 would be largely unimpacted by the improvements. However, the improvements mayreduce the portion of site #2 that can accommodate development. Key questions related to grocery stores for the council to consider at the September 12 study session include: Does the City Council want to identify sufficient housing sites to support a full new grocery store or approximately 2,100 housing units?Potential housing sites are discussed in the next subsection.What site or sites should be identified and preserved for a new grocery store with other retail uses? Should the City leave it up to themarket to decide whether the second grocery store would be north or south of I80, or should the City focus General Plan efforts tofacilitate a grocery store south of I80, where none currently exist?Figure 1. Potential Grocery Store Sites South of I80Housing Driving factors for new housing include the existing and future Housing Elements, the decision on whether to support a full new grocery store,and landowner requests. Table 1, below, provides estimates for the number of housing units certain properties could accommodate. Project Name/ Address Developer/ PropertyOwner Number inAttachments1 and 2 Existing GeneralPlan Designationand ZoningDesignation DesiredZoning DevelopableAcres PotentialNum. ofHousingUnits NotesSuisun ValleyPlace DiscoveryHomes 6 Highway andRegionalCommercial (CHR)and RegionalCommercial (CR)Zoning topermitresidentialdevelopment +/ 30 220 See Attachment4: SuisunValley PlaceConceptual SitePlan; potential“gateway” toSuisun ValleyProducersDairy FoodExpansionandResidentialDevelopment /117 Red TopRoad (APN:0180010160)MargaretFerrari 1 ExtensiveAgriculture andHighway andRegionalCommercial(AE/CHR) andAgriculture andRegionalCommercial withHillsideDevelopmentOverlay (AG/CRH)Zoning topermitresidentialdevelopment +/ 15.5 40Dittmer /APNs: 0148270060,0148270370, 0148270340,0148270350, 0148220060,0148220080 RobertDittmer 3 Unincorporated Annexationand zoning topermitresidentialdevelopment 40 80 100 200Mangels /APN: 0148260010 GaryMangels 2 Unincorporated Annexationand zoning topermitresidentialdevelopment 70 140 175 350West of RedTop Road /APN: 0180070080 DiscoveryHomes 12 Residential, HighDensity (RH)Zoning topermitmediumdensityresidential +/ 19.5 160 200 It may requireidentification ofnew lowincomehousing sitesandrecertification ofHousingElement ifdownzonedRed Top Roadand LopesRoad (West) /APN: 0180160220 and0180160230 DiscoveryHomes 10 and 11 Business andIndustrial Park(IBP) and IndustrialBusiness Park(IBP)Zoning topermitresidentialdevelopment +/ 27 220 270 Part of potentialgrocery storesite; one of fewremainingindustriallyzoned vacantsites; limitedindustrialcapacity overthe next 10 – 20yearsNelson Hill FrederickNelson 7 Unincorporated Zoning topermitresidentialdevelopment +/ 78 300 – 450 Included asstudy area inexisting GeneralPlan, SeeAttachment 5:Nelson HillConceptual SitePlanTotal1,215 – 1,730Key questions related to new housing for the council to consider at the September 12 study session include: Should additional sites be designated for new housing?Which sites above requested by property owners should be designated for new housing?Should additional sites beyond those requested by property owners be designated for new housing? Considering this question, note thatapproximately 370 885 houses beyond those requested in Table 1 would be needed to support a fullsize grocery store. Staff can reviewoptions at the study session if the council desires to design additional housing sites.Vision for Employment and Other Retail The land use alternatives prepared in 2021 propose options to facilitate new employment centers and retail along Business Center Drive. Theoptions include 1) a knowledge hub with medical, research, and technologyoriented jobs; 2) a jobs corridor with flexible office, light industrial,and research and development; and 3) advanced manufacturing jobs; and a mixeduse corridor. These three land use alternatives are depictedin Figure 2. Figure 2. Business Center Drive Land Use AlternativesBoth alternatives 1 and 3 consider housing and retail for an approximately 44acre parcel owned by the Garaventa Family at the southeastcorner of Suisun Valley Road and Business Center Drive. Discovery Homes is interested in developing the property in a manner generallyconsistent with alternatives 1 and 3.Attachment 4: Suisun Valley Place Conceptual Site Plan provides a preliminary conceptual plansubmitted by Seeno, which proposes a mix of housing and various commercial sites, including small shop and restaurant buildings, hotel,larger space that could accommodate a smaller hardware/landscape store, gas station, and multiple drivethrough restaurants.Key questions related to employment and other retail uses for the council to consider at the September 12 study session include: What kinds of employment uses would you like to see along Business Center Drive? How much land would you like to reserve for thoseactivities?Should warehousing and distribution uses be allowed or not allowed along Business Center Drive? Should additional land be available for warehousing and distribution uses south of I80 near existing warehouse and distribution usesalong Lopes Road?Should the 44acre parcel be retained for employment and retail uses, or for mixed use including housing?What kinds of retail should be developed on the 44acre parcel? Are gas stations and fast food appropriate for this area, or should theybe concentrated on the south side of I80 in their existing locations generally along Central Way? Note that, with growing tourist interest inthe Suisun Valley, the site could be considered as “gateway” for visitors to the area. A higherend center with strong sense as a gatheringplace and destination that serves the local community as well as Suisun Valley visitors could be desirable, with emphasis on sitdownrestaurants, brewpubs, winetasting facilities and entertainment as well as integrating mixeduse and/or more dense housing types. Review of Suisun Valley DirectionAt the June 13, 2023, study session, the council identified four study areas in the unincorporated Suisun Valley to include in the General Plan Update. These study areas are depicted in Figure 3 below.

Figure 3. Suisun Valley Study Areas Identified at the June 13, 2023 Study Session As directed by the council, the General Plan would reserve these areas for future study as to the City’s future role in their development. Council noted that sites on the north side of I80 would not be annexed to the city but would potentially be served by city water in a way that supports the community’s vision for Suisun Valley. Sites on the south side could be annexed to the city to access better infrastructure needed for larger wine, food, and other beverage manufacturing.

After the June study session, Solano County staff submitted a letter to the City explaining its formal response to the four study areas; Attachment 6: August 2023 Solano County Letter. The letter highlights the County’s opposition to City annexation within Suisun Valley due to the County’s need for economic development and revenue generation for the County. The County is concerned about the four study areas and the city annexation of Nelson Hill, which could ultimately lead to “intrusion” into Suisun Valley and present issues relating to infrastructure and services. However, The County indicates in the letter that it would like to see partnerships regarding City services and infrastructure serving Suisun Valley.

Following the June study session, staff also met with representatives of the Suisun Valley Vintners & Growers Association (SVVGA). The representatives expressed a desire for future industrialscale winemaking operations to be located on the south side of I80. They indicated, however, a strong disinterest in the city specifying any of the four areas for inclusion in the General Plan. Rather, they prefer the City to include policy language in the General Plan directing the City to work with the County and other Valley interests to plan for the needs of the Valley, but without the City’s direct annexation of land within the Valley.

In response to County opposition, staff will ask the council if they would like to revise their direction regarding the Suisun Valley study areas.

Options include 1) keeping previous direction to identify the four areas for future study and potential City involvement; 2) following SVVGA’s suggestion to eliminating all four and including policy language in the General Plan for the City to work with Valley stakeholders as described above; 3) eliminating all four and including no language in the General Plan regarding support for City involvement in Suisun Valley; 4) eliminating one or more of the four study areas; and 5) eliminating one or more of the four study areas, and direct that specific land use designations be given in the General Plan for the rest rather than continuing to study the sites for appropriate uses.

In reviewing the above options, the staff is comfortable removing study areas #1 and #2 north of I80 and #4 adjacent to Nelson Hill. Staff recommends that area #3, approximately 200 acres adjacent to the Anheuser Busch Brewery, be included in the General Plan, with specific land use designation identified that provides direction as to the uses it for which it should be developed. Appropriate uses could include winemaking and related production activities and food and beverage manufacturing, with a prohibition on warehousing and distribution uses.

This choice would allow the city to capitalize on existing strengths such as water supply and adjacent infrastructure and growing food production technology expertise in the region. Staff is concerned that the city will run out of industrial capacity early in the life of the General Plan. Site #3 would allow the city to continue highvalue industrial development well into the life of the General Plan.

Next Steps:In a subsequent meeting later this year, staff and consultants will return to the council with a draft preferred land use plan for final approval. The draft plan would reflect all of the direction provided by the council during study sessions in 2022 and 2023. Staff will also return with recommendations for new roadways and circulation improvements and potential sites for schools, parks, and other needs to support the overall vision for development. Following the selection of a preferred plan, staff will begin working on the Environmental Impact Report and Climate Action Plan and collaborate with Departments and Divisions across the City to update the General Plan Elements. These Elements will consist of goals, objectives, and detailed policies to address needs and achieve the community’s shared vision.

FINANCIAL IMPACT
N/A
Packet Page 7 of 26

Agenda Item No: 1.AGENDA REPORTDATE:September 12, 2023 TO:Mayor and City CouncilFROM:David Gassaway, City ManagerSUBJECT:Discussion and Direction Regarding the General Plan Update Land Uses in CordeliaRECOMMENDED ACTIONReceive report, open discussion, and provide direction to staff.STATEMENT OF ISSUEThe City of Fairfield is currently updating its General Plan, the longrange vision for how the city should develop and grow. Through a series ofstudy sessions, the City Council has provided direction regarding the development vision for various parts of the city. At the September 12,2023, study session, the council will be asked to provide direction for the remaining portion of the city – the Cordelia area.DISCUSSIONOverview and Study Session Purpose: The General Plan Update was launched in December 2020. The project, called Fairfield Forward2050, will set the vision and goals for growth in Fairfield for the next 25+ years. The project is currently in the land use alternatives phase. Thisphase focuses on working with the community to prepare, evaluate, and ultimately develop a preferred land use plan that will communicate thecommunity’s vision for future growth and development. The preferred plan identifies the vision for what the city will look like at buildout in 20 to30 years. In a subsequent phase, the City will identify what improvements, facilities, and amenities are needed to serve the overall vision.During the land use alternatives phase, the council has provided direction regarding the vision for most parts of the city. The purpose of thiscouncil study session is to request direction for the vision for longterm growth and development of the city’s Cordelia area. The study sessionwill also review the direction provided by the council for the unincorporated Suisun Valley at the June 13, 2023, study session and determine ifthe council wishes any changes to that direction. Staff will also ask the council any other topics or questions they want to discuss. Following the establishment of the longterm land use vision for Cordelia, staff will return in a subsequent phase with recommendations forvarious facilities to serve Cordelia's development. These include recommendations for new roadways and other circulation improvements andpotential sites for schools, parks, and other needs to support the overall vision for development. Cordelia Vision for LongTerm Growth and Community Engagement:Following various engagements with the council and community, inFall 2021, planning consultants Dyett & Bhatia prepared three land use alternatives for consideration. Engagement included stakeholderinterviews, public workshops, online surveys, community event popups, Planning Commission, and City Council meetings. Followingpresentations from staff and consultants, the council directed that additional engagement be conducted prior to the final consideration of thealternatives. An overview of community input from this engagement is provided below. Community Input: Key comments from Cordelia residents include a desire for more grocery stores and shopping opportunities; concernsabout school capacity, particularly at Nelda Mundy Elementary; the need for more parks on the north side of Interstate 80 (I80); and trafficissues, with particular focus on congestion at the intersection of Business Center Drive and Green Valley Road. Residents also notedchallenges traveling between North Cordelia and South Cordelia to access grocery stores on one side of I80 and schools on the other. Finally,residents identified undesirable, piecemeal development along Business Center Drive, resulting in a mix of land uses seen as incompatible,such as large warehouses next to housing, offices, and hotels. Certain landowners expressed interest in building housing on nonresidentiallydesignated properties during community engagement. These properties and their desired land uses are described in Attachment 1:Description of Cordelia Land Use Requests and depicted in Attachment 2: Map of Cordelia Land Use Requests. Feedback from the council at the June 2023 study session highlighted the need to better understand the relationship between housing andgrocery store demand in making decisions about the amount of residential development to include in the vision for Cordelia. The next sectionprovides additional information on this topic. Grocery Store Demand in Cordelia: Staff engaged economic consultants BAE Urban Economics and Chabin Concepts to evaluate thedemand for a new grocery store in the Cordelia area. A detailed analysis is provided in Attachment 3: Cordelia Area Grocery Store DemandAnalysis. Cordelia currently includes two grocery retailers, Safeway and Costco; both retailers are on the north side of I80. Current housingdevelopment demographics indicate that these two stores serve most of the demand, with a small excess of demand for a third store. Thestudy concludes that currently planned or approved housing would result in demand for roughly 0.58 a new, fullsize grocery stores such asSafeway or Raley’s. Planned and approved projects accounted for in this analysis are listed on page 6 of Attachment 3.This future demand may be sufficient to attract a smaller grocer such as Sprouts. The consultants found that a new Trader Joe’s is unlikely, asthe company would not want to cannibalize its own sales given the existing Trader Joe’s in the Central Fairfield area. To support a new, fullgrocery store, approximately 2,100 additional housing units would be required beyond planned and approved units. Thus, the Cordelia area islikely only to attract one more grocery store longterm – either a smaller store if no additional housing is planned or a fullsize store if asubstantial increase in planned housing is accommodated in the upcoming General Plan. Staff recommends identifying one or two sites for a new grocery store South of I80, as those residents lack access to a nearby grocery storeand must travel north of I80 to access fresh food. The consultants evaluated two potential sites for new grocery stores south of I80, which aredepicted in Figure 1 below. Both sites are large enough to support a new grocery store. The planned STA freeway improvements wouldimprove automobile access to site #2, while site #1 would be largely unimpacted by the improvements. However, the improvements mayreduce the portion of site #2 that can accommodate development. Key questions related to grocery stores for the council to consider at the September 12 study session include: Does the City Council want to identify sufficient housing sites to support a full new grocery store or approximately 2,100 housing units?Potential housing sites are discussed in the next subsection.What site or sites should be identified and preserved for a new grocery store with other retail uses? Should the City leave it up to themarket to decide whether the second grocery store would be north or south of I80, or should the City focus General Plan efforts tofacilitate a grocery store south of I80, where none currently exist?Figure 1. Potential Grocery Store Sites South of I80Housing Driving factors for new housing include the existing and future Housing Elements, the decision on whether to support a full new grocery store,and landowner requests. Table 1, below, provides estimates for the number of housing units certain properties could accommodate. Project Name/ Address Developer/ PropertyOwner Number inAttachments1 and 2 Existing GeneralPlan Designationand ZoningDesignation DesiredZoning DevelopableAcres PotentialNum. ofHousingUnits NotesSuisun ValleyPlace DiscoveryHomes 6 Highway andRegionalCommercial (CHR)and RegionalCommercial (CR)Zoning topermitresidentialdevelopment +/ 30 220 See Attachment4: SuisunValley PlaceConceptual SitePlan; potential“gateway” toSuisun ValleyProducersDairy FoodExpansionandResidentialDevelopment /117 Red TopRoad (APN:0180010160)MargaretFerrari 1 ExtensiveAgriculture andHighway andRegionalCommercial(AE/CHR) andAgriculture andRegionalCommercial withHillsideDevelopmentOverlay (AG/CRH)Zoning topermitresidentialdevelopment +/ 15.5 40Dittmer /APNs: 0148270060,0148270370, 0148270340,0148270350, 0148220060,0148220080 RobertDittmer 3 Unincorporated Annexationand zoning topermitresidentialdevelopment 40 80 100 200Mangels /APN: 0148260010 GaryMangels 2 Unincorporated Annexationand zoning topermitresidentialdevelopment 70 140 175 350West of RedTop Road /APN: 0180070080 DiscoveryHomes 12 Residential, HighDensity (RH)Zoning topermitmediumdensityresidential +/ 19.5 160 200 It may requireidentification ofnew lowincomehousing sitesandrecertification ofHousingElement ifdownzonedRed Top Roadand LopesRoad (West) /APN: 0180160220 and0180160230 DiscoveryHomes 10 and 11 Business andIndustrial Park(IBP) and IndustrialBusiness Park(IBP)Zoning topermitresidentialdevelopment +/ 27 220 270 Part of potentialgrocery storesite; one of fewremainingindustriallyzoned vacantsites; limitedindustrialcapacity overthe next 10 – 20yearsNelson Hill FrederickNelson 7 Unincorporated Zoning topermitresidentialdevelopment +/ 78 300 – 450 Included asstudy area inexisting GeneralPlan, SeeAttachment 5:Nelson HillConceptual SitePlanTotal1,215 – 1,730Key questions related to new housing for the council to consider at the September 12 study session include: Should additional sites be designated for new housing?Which sites above requested by property owners should be designated for new housing?Should additional sites beyond those requested by property owners be designated for new housing? Considering this question, note thatapproximately 370 885 houses beyond those requested in Table 1 would be needed to support a fullsize grocery store. Staff can reviewoptions at the study session if the council desires to design additional housing sites.Vision for Employment and Other Retail The land use alternatives prepared in 2021 propose options to facilitate new employment centers and retail along Business Center Drive. Theoptions include 1) a knowledge hub with medical, research, and technologyoriented jobs; 2) a jobs corridor with flexible office, light industrial,and research and development; and 3) advanced manufacturing jobs; and a mixeduse corridor. These three land use alternatives are depictedin Figure 2. Figure 2. Business Center Drive Land Use AlternativesBoth alternatives 1 and 3 consider housing and retail for an approximately 44acre parcel owned by the Garaventa Family at the southeastcorner of Suisun Valley Road and Business Center Drive. Discovery Homes is interested in developing the property in a manner generallyconsistent with alternatives 1 and 3.Attachment 4: Suisun Valley Place Conceptual Site Plan provides a preliminary conceptual plansubmitted by Seeno, which proposes a mix of housing and various commercial sites, including small shop and restaurant buildings, hotel,larger space that could accommodate a smaller hardware/landscape store, gas station, and multiple drivethrough restaurants.Key questions related to employment and other retail uses for the council to consider at the September 12 study session include: What kinds of employment uses would you like to see along Business Center Drive? How much land would you like to reserve for thoseactivities?Should warehousing and distribution uses be allowed or not allowed along Business Center Drive? Should additional land be available for warehousing and distribution uses south of I80 near existing warehouse and distribution usesalong Lopes Road?Should the 44acre parcel be retained for employment and retail uses, or for mixed use including housing?What kinds of retail should be developed on the 44acre parcel? Are gas stations and fast food appropriate for this area, or should theybe concentrated on the south side of I80 in their existing locations generally along Central Way? Note that, with growing tourist interest inthe Suisun Valley, the site could be considered as “gateway” for visitors to the area. A higherend center with strong sense as a gatheringplace and destination that serves the local community as well as Suisun Valley visitors could be desirable, with emphasis on sitdownrestaurants, brewpubs, winetasting facilities and entertainment as well as integrating mixeduse and/or more dense housing types. Review of Suisun Valley DirectionAt the June 13, 2023, study session, the council identified four study areas in the unincorporated Suisun Valley to include in the General PlanUpdate. These study areas are depicted in Figure 3 below. Figure 3. Suisun Valley Study Areas Identified at the June 13, 2023 Study Session As directed by the council, the General Plan would reserve these areas for future study as to the City’s future role in their development. Councilnoted that sites on the north side of I80 would not be annexed to the city but would potentially be served by city water in a way that supports thecommunity’s vision for Suisun Valley. Sites on the south side could be annexed to the city to access better infrastructure needed for larger wine,food, and other beverage manufacturing.After the June study session, Solano County staff submitted a letter to the City explaining its formal response to the four study areas;Attachment 6: August 2023 Solano County Letter. The letter highlights the County’s opposition to City annexation within Suisun Valley due to theCounty’s need for economic development and revenue generation for the County. The County is concerned about the four study areas and thecity annexation of Nelson Hill, which could ultimately lead to “intrusion” into Suisun Valley and present issues relating to infrastructure andservices. However, The County indicates in the letter that it would like to see partnerships regarding City services and infrastructure servingSuisun Valley.Following the June study session, staff also met with representatives of the Suisun Valley Vintners & Growers Association (SVVGA). Therepresentatives expressed a desire for future industrialscale winemaking operations to be located on the south side of I80. They indicated,however, a strong disinterest in the city specifying any of the four areas for inclusion in the General Plan. Rather, they prefer the City to includepolicy language in the General Plan directing the City to work with the County and other Valley interests to plan for the needs of the Valley, butwithout the City’s direct annexation of land within the Valley. In response to County opposition, staff will ask the council if they would like to revise their direction regarding the Suisun Valley study areas.Options include 1) keeping previous direction to identify the four areas for future study and potential City involvement; 2) following SVVGA’ssuggestion to eliminating all four and including policy language in the General Plan for the City to work with Valley stakeholders as describedabove; 3) eliminating all four and including no language in the General Plan regarding support for City involvement in Suisun Valley; 4)eliminating one or more of the four study areas; and 5) eliminating one or more of the four study areas, and direct that specific land usedesignations be given in the General Plan for the rest rather than continuing to study the sites for appropriate uses. In reviewing the above options, the staff is comfortable removing study areas #1 and #2 north of I80 and #4 adjacent to Nelson Hill. Staffrecommends that area #3, approximately 200 acres adjacent to the Anheuser Busch Brewery, be included in the General Plan, with specificland use designation identified that provides direction as to the uses it for which it should be developed. Appropriate uses could includewinemaking and related production activities and food and beverage manufacturing, with a prohibition on warehousing and distribution uses.This choice would allow the city to capitalize on existing strengths such as water supply and adjacent infrastructure and growing food productiontechnology expertise in the region. Staff is concerned that the city will run out of industrial capacity early in the life of the General Plan. Site #3would allow the city to continue highvalue industrial development well into the life of the General Plan. Next Steps:In a subsequent meeting later this year, staff and consultants will return to the council with a draft preferred land use plan for finalapproval. The draft plan would reflect all of the direction provided by the council during study sessions in 2022 and 2023. Staff will also returnwith recommendations for new roadways and circulation improvements and potential sites for schools, parks, and other needs to support theoverall vision for development. Following the selection of a preferred plan, staff will begin working on the Environmental Impact Report andClimate Action Plan and collaborate with Departments and Divisions across the City to update the General Plan Elements. These Elements willconsist of goals, objectives, and detailed policies to address needs and achieve the community’s shared vision.

FINANCIAL IMPACT
N/A
PUBLIC CONTACT/ADVISORY BODY RECOMMENDATION
This study session was duly noticed in the Daily Republic on Friday, August 31, 2023. Other outreach efforts included a story on the project’s website, a press release, social media posts, and two eblasts.

ALTERNATIVE ACTION
N/A
STAFF CONTACT
Jessie Hernandez, Associate Planner
(707) 4287450
[email protected]
COORDINATED WITH
N/A
ATTACHMENTS:

Description
Attachment 1: Description of Cordelia Land Use Requests Attachment 2: Map of Cordelia Land Use Requests
Attachment 3: Cordelia Area Grocery Store Demand Analysis Attachment 4: Suisun Valley Place Conceptual Site Plan
Attachment 5: Nelson Hill Conceptual Site Plan
Attachment 6: August 2023 Solano County Letter
REVIEWERS:

Reviewer Action Date
Beavers, Esther Approved 9/7/2023 2:49 PM
Packet Page 8 of 26

Attachment 1: Description of Cordelia Land Use Requests Number Project Name Project
Number (if
applicable)
Developer/Pro
perty
Owner/Applica
nt
Address/APN Acreage Description
6 Suisun Valley
Place
N/A Seeno Business Center
Drive and Suisun
Valley Road (APN:
0027-260-240,
0027-340-090,
9999-999-902,
0027-340-030)
39 General Plan Amendment and Zone
Change request to change General Plan
designation and zoning from CHR and CR-
NC to permit residential development.
5 Green Valley 3 GPA2021-
001
The Spanos
Corporation
4840 Business
Center Drive
(APN: 0148-540-
350)

5.78 Approved August 2023.
4 5253 Business
Center Drive
GPA2022-
001
Jose McNeil 5253 Business
Center Drive
(APN:

11.06 General Plan Amendment and Zone
Change request to change General Plan
designation and zoning from CHR and CO-
NC to IBP and IBP to permit industrial
development.
1 Producers
Dairy Food
Expansion and
Residential
Development
N/A Margaret
Ferrari
117 Red Top Road
(APN: 0180-010-
160)

46.32 General Plan Amendment and Zone
Change request to change General Plan
designation and zoning from AE/CHR and
AG/CR-H to permit residential
development.
12 West of Red
Top Road
N/A Seeno APN: 0180-070-
080
33 (partial
lot)
Tentative Parcel Map, General Plan
Amendment, and Zone Change to change
the General Plan Designation and Zoning
10 Red Top Road
and Lopes
Road (West)
N/A Seeno APN: 0180-160-
220

31.98 General Plan Amendment and Zone
Change to change General Plan
designation and zoning from IBP/IBP to
permit residential development.

Packet Page 9 of 26Attachment 1 Page 1 of 2

Number Project Name Project
Number (if
applicable)
Developer/Pro
perty
Owner/Applica
nt
Address/APN Acreage Description
11 Red Top Road
and Lopes
Road (East)
N/A Seeno APN: 0180-160-
230

9.5 General Plan Amendment and Zone
Change to change General Plan
designation and zoning from CO/CO to
permit residential development.
7 Nelson Hill N/A Frederick
Nelson
2409 Cordelia
Road and 2416
Cordelia Road
(APN: 0044-230-
030 and 0044-
240-050)
230.06 Annexation with new residential
proposed.
3 Dittmer N/A Dittmer APNs: 0148-270-
060, 0148-270-
370, 0148-270-
340, 0148-270-
350, 0148-220-
060, 0148-220-
080
165.29 Annexation with new residential
proposed.
2 Mangels N/A Gary Mangels APN: 0148-260-
010
256.10 Annexation with new residential
proposed.
8 Meadow Creek
Group, LLC
N/A
(Formal
application
expected
soon)
Meadow Creek
Group, LLC
535 Pittman Road
and 475 Pittman
Road (APN:
0044080160 and
0044080170)

8.07 Island annexation. Pre-zoned Service
Commercial (CS).
9 228 Lopes
Road
GARTON

MICHAEL &

BEVERLY JT
228 Lopes Road
(APN:
00180110120)

0.24 Island Annexation

Packet Page 10 of 26Attachment 1 Page 2 of 2

1 2
3 4
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 ATTACHMENT 2
Packet Page 11 of 26Attachment 2 Page 1 of 1

bae urban economics
San Francisco Sacramento Los Angeles Washington DC Atlanta New York City www.bae1.com
Memorandum
To: Rajeev Bhatia, Principal, Dyett & Bhatia
Alison Moore, Senior Associate, Dyett & Bhatia
From: Matt Kowta, Managing Principal
Matt Fairris, Vice President
Date: September 6, 2023
Re: FINAL Cordelia Area Grocery Store Demand Analysis
Introduction
In support of the General Plan Update process, this memorandum summarizes the existing and future demand for a grocery store in the Cordelia area of Fairfield. This analysis considers the existing demographic and housing characteristics in Cordelia, broken down by the portion of the area north of Interstate-80 (‘North Cordelia’) and the area south of Interstate-80 (‘South Cordelia’). The analysis also reviews the pipeline of future housing development in the Cordelia area, which will drive additional grocery store spending in Cordelia. Lastly, the memo reviews the locational factors and site characteristics that grocery stores seek when analyzing potential new locations and, based on this information, summarizes the potential for a future grocery store in the South Cordelia area and factors for the City to consider as part of the General Plan Update process.

Summary of Key Findings
Based on the following analysis, BAE estimates that the existing Cordelia population and future population driven by the residential projects in the pipeline are insufficient to support a full grocery store in the Cordelia area. As summarized below, the pipeline of roughly 2,200 housing units will increase the Cordelia population by roughly 6,750 new residents, or 24 percent above the existing population. This growth, combined with currently unmet demand from the existing Cordelia population, will generate additional demand for approximately 0.6 of a traditional grocery store. Based on this finding, buildout of the current development pipeline is unlikely to attract a new full-sized grocery store to the Cordelia area. The estimates indicate that the future Cordelia population may be sufficient to attract a small-scale grocery store; however, the types of grocery store brands, such as Sprouts and Trader Joes that typically operate stores smaller than conventional full-service supermarkets, also typically serve larger trade areas and tend to locate in the center of population rather than on the outskirts of population concentrations, such as would be the case with a Cordelia location.

ATTACHMENT 3
Packet Page 12 of 26Attachment 3 Page 1 of 11

2 Should the City seek to use the General Plan Update to accommodate sufficient growth in the Cordelia area to support a full grocery store, the General Plan would need to accommodate approximately 2,100 additional housing units in the Cordelia area beyond the current development pipeline.

Population and Household Characteristics
This section summarizes the critical population, household, and housing unit characteristics in the Cordelia area, the City of Fairfield, and Solano County. This section leverages information from the U.S. Census Bureau, California Department of Tax and Fee Administration, and the City of Fairfield to inform the existing and future demand for a grocery store in Cordelia. As illustrated in Figure 1, below, data are provided for the entire Cordelia study area, and broken out separately for the North Cordelia area and South Cordelia area to better understand the characteristics of these two subareas. Given that the North Cordelia area currently contains the only grocery store shopping options in Cordelia, the existing population and planned growth in South Cordelia will be critical to understanding the potential demand for a new grocery store on one of two commercial sites in South Cordelia. As described above, and shown below in Figure 1, the North Cordelia area is the area located North of I-80 (shown in green below) and the South Cordelia area is the area located south of I-80 (shown in pink below). These areas include the population within the City of Fairfield and population in the unincorporated areas of Solano County.

Figure 1: Cordelia Study Area
Source: Dyett and Bhatia, 2023.

North Cordelia
South Cordelia
Packet Page 13 of 26Attachment 3 Page 2 of 11

3 Population and Household Characteristics
As shown in Table 1 below, the Cordelia Area currently contains roughly 28,000 residents, including population in both the City and nearby unincorporated areas. This accounts for roughly 23 percent of the total Fairfield population. Approximately 55 percent of the Cordelia population lives in South Cordelia, or roughly 15,400 residents. The remaining 12,620 residents live north of Interstate 80 in the South Cordelia area. Since 2010, the Cordelia population has grown by roughly 31 percent, compared to 14 percent in Fairfield and ten percent in Solano County. The number of households displays similar trends, with household growth in Cordelia outpacing the growth in Fairfield and Solano County. Overall, Cordelia household sizes are comparable to the City of Fairfield, at roughly three persons per household, although households in South Cordelia are notably larger than North Cordelia and the City as a whole, at roughly 3.25 persons per household.

Table 1: Population, Household, and Housing Unit Characteristics, 2010 and 2020 Sources: U.S. Census, Decennial Census 2010, Tables P1, H4, H12; Decennial Census 2020, Tables P1 and H4; BAE 2023

% Change
Population 2010 2020 2010-2020
Cordelia Area 21,389 28,013 31.0%
North Cordelia 9,529 12,621 32.4%
South Cordelia 11,860 15,392 29.8%
City of Fairfield 105,321 119,881 13.8%
Solano County 413,344 453,491 9.7%
Households
Cordelia Area 7,039 9,208 30.8%
North Cordelia 3,307 4,493 35.9%
South Cordelia 3,732 4,715 26.3%
City of Fairfield 34,484 39,026 13.2%
Solano County 141,758 155,924 10.0%
Average Household Size
Cordelia Area 3.04 3.04 -0.1%
North Cordelia 2.88 2.81 -2.4%
South Cordelia 3.18 3.25 2.3%
City of Fairfield 2.98 3.03 1.5%
Solano County 2.83 2.84 0.3%
Housing Units
Cordelia Area 7,494 9,479 26.5%
North Cordelia 3,557 4,675 31.4%
South Cordelia 3,937 4,804 22.0%
City of Fairfield 37,184 40,539 9.0%
Solano County 152,698 162,237 6.2%
Packet Page 14 of 26Attachment 3 Page 3 of 11

4 Housing Unit Trends
As shown in Table 1 on the previous page, the Cordelia area currently contains nearly 9,500 housing units, or 23 percent of all Fairfield housing units. The growth in housing units in Cordelia has outpaced growth in the City and County, with the total number of units in Cordelia increasing by nearly 27 percent. While South Cordelia accounts for a larger share of residents in the Cordelia area, the number of housing units is nearly evenly split between South Cordelia and North Cordelia.

Household Incomes
Households in Cordelia have higher median incomes than in the City and County. As seen below in Table 2, Cordelia area households have a median income of roughly $121,250 per year, which is about 40 percent higher than the roughly $85,000 medians in both the City of Fairfield and Solano County. Due to the larger household sizes, noted above, the per capita income in the Cordelia area is only about 30 percent above the City and County levels. Per capita income is a critical factor when assessing the spending potential of existing and future households. Despite the higher median income in the area, grocers will primarily focus on the per capita income, which shows the Cordelia area is more moderately above the City and County levels.

Table 2: Household Income Characteristics, 2020
Notes:
(a) Cordelia Area Median Household Income is calculated based on the distribution of incomes by income category. (b) Cordelia Area Per Capita Income is calculated based on the aggregate income in the Cordelia area divided by the total population.

Sources: U.S. Census, American Community Survey, Tables B19001, B19013, B19301

Income Category Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Less than $15,000 195 2.4% 2,017 5.5% 9,291 6.1%
$15,000-$24,999 173 2.1% 1,985 5.4% 7,645 5.1%
$25,000-$34,999 208 2.5% 2,104 5.7% 9,237 6.1%
$35,000-$49,999 371 4.5% 3,452 9.4% 15,152 10.0%
$50,000-$74,999 1,237 15.1% 6,343 17.2% 24,928 16.5%
$75,000-$99,999 915 11.2% 5,491 14.9% 22,332 14.8%
$100,000-$149,999 2,333 28.5% 7,923 21.5% 30,684 20.3%
$150,000-$199,999 1,114 13.6% 3,620 9.8% 16,465 10.9%
$200,000 or more 1,635 20.0% 3,908 10.6% 15,457 10.2%
Total Households 8,181 100.0% 36,843 100.0% 151,191 100.0% Median HH Income (a)
Per Capita Income (b)
Cordelia
Area
$121,249
$46,367 $36,685$35,094
Solano
County
$84,638
City of
Fairfield
$86,204
Packet Page 15 of 26Attachment 3 Page 4 of 11

5 Estimated Potential Grocery Sales Per Capita
To estimate the potential sales at food and beverage stores, Table 3 compiles 2022 taxable sales data from the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration (CDTFA) and estimates the percentage of sales that are not subject to sales tax in order to estimate the total spending at Food and Beverage stores in the City of Fairfield and Solano County. As seen below, the City had roughly $75 million in annual taxable sales at food and beverage stores, or roughly $630 per capita. Based on a comparison of data published by the Economic Census, BAE estimates that roughly 70 percent of all expenditures at food and beverage stores are not subject to sales tax. Based on this, BAE estimates that Fairfield food and beverage stores had nearly $250 million in total sales in 2022, or roughly $2,100 per capita. Using the same methodology, it is evident that the average per capita sales at food and beverage stores in Solano County is roughly $2,570 per resident, or approximately $50 per person per week.

Table 3: Food and Beverage Store Spending Summary, 2022 Notes:
(a) Based on the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration. (b) Based on a comparison of Taxable Sales and Total Sales from the 2017 Economic Census for Solano County.

Sources: California Department of Tax and Fee Administration, Tables 3 and 4; BAE 2023.

Planned Housing Development
Based on the development pipeline of residential projects in the City and County, the Cordelia area is expected to grow by nearly 2,160 additional housing units, or nearly 23 percent growth over the existing number of units in the area. Specifically within the City of Fairfield, the development pipeline includes 1,400 approved housing units in the Cordelia area, as well as an additional 250 units supported by sites identified in the Housing Element of the Fairfield General Plan. In addition to projects in the City, the County has approved the 500-unit Middle Green Valley project, located northwest of the Fairfield city limits. Assuming the average household size of new residential units aligns with the existing household sizes in the area, BAE estimates the population in Cordelia will increase by roughly 6,750 residents at buildout, as summarized below in Table 4.

Sales Category Total Per Capita Total Per Capita
Taxable Food and Beverage Sales (a)$75,037,125 $626 $343,657,570 $758 Non-Taxable Percent (b)
Total Food and Beverage Store Sales $250,123,750 $2,086 $1,145,525,233 $2,526 City of Fairfield Solano County
70%70%
Packet Page 16 of 26Attachment 3 Page 5 of 11

6 Table 4: Housing Development Pipeline, Cordelia Area

Note:
(a) Assumes an average of 3.25 persons per household and a standard vacancy rate.

Sources: Dyett and Bhatia; U.S. Census Bureau; BAE, 2023.

Existing Grocery Options in Cordelia Area
Based on a scan of existing grocery options in Cordelia, the area contains one major supermarket and a variety of other stores with grocery options. The one traditional grocery store is a 53,000-square foot Safeway at 5051 Business Center Drive. This store is part of a broader shopping center with a range of in-line retail tenants, including CVS, T.J. Maxx, UPS, and other retail and dining establishments. Also located in the same shopping center is a 116,000-square foot Costco, which offers a variety of grocery options. Both Safeway and Costco are located north of Interstate 80, with relatively good visibility and easy access off Green Valley Road. Although the South Cordelia area contains the larger population, this area does not currently have grocery options, aside from the limited food available in the Power Markets connected to two Chevron locations in South Cordelia. The Power Markets are insufficient to support all of the grocery needs, but may support demand for limited convenience-oriented food and beverage needs. Despite the limited grocery options in South Cordelia, it is worthing noting that the total distance from the southern portion of South Cordelia to the Safeway is approximately five miles, or roughly 10 minutes by car.

Cordelia Number of
Project Name Location Housing Unit Type Units
Approved Projects within City
Green Valley II North of I-80 Single-Family Residences 270 Green Valley III North of I-80 Apartments 185
Estaire South of I-80 Condos & Live-Work 25
Fieldcrest South of I-80 Single-Family Residences 334
Gold Hill Village South of I-80 Single-Family Residences 90 Villas at Havenhill South of I-80 Single-Family Residences 284 Enclave at Red Top South of I-80 Single-Family Residences 125 Gold Hill Village II South of I-80 Single-Family Residences 90 Subtotal, Approved Projects in City 1,403
Fairfield Housing Element Sites
Sites in Cordelia Area Varied Varied 254
Approved Projects in County
Middle Green Valley Project North of I-80 Single-Family Residences / Secondary Units 500 Total Cordelia Area 2,157
North of I-80 1,082
South of I-80 1,075
Estimated Population (a)6,750
North of I-80 3,386
South of I-80 3,364
Packet Page 17 of 26Attachment 3 Page 6 of 11

7 Grocery Store Location Factors
When evaluating potential new locations for grocery stores, grocery brands seek to understand the nearby competition from existing grocery stores, as well as demographic and housing conditions that drive existing and future spending.

Competition: As noted above, Cordelia area residents currently have access to the existing Cordelia area Safeway and Costco stores, which likely capture the majority of grocery expenditures of Cordelia residents. The section below summarizes the comparison between expected expenditures from Cordelia residents and existing grocery stores in Cordelia.

A second component of evaluation for potential new sites is whether the specific grocery store brand has an existing location within the trade area and how its sales may be affected by a new sister store. Grocery brands will be hesitant to build a second store within a specific trade area if it will only cannibalize on existing sales at their existing store, rather than capture new expenditures. One example of this type of store is Trader Joe’s. Trader Joe’s already has a location in Fairfield, at 1350 Gateway Boulevard, which is roughly 6.5 miles from the South Cordelia area. With an existing store at this distance, also located in the center of Fairfield, Trader Joe’s is unlikely to locate a second store in South Cordelia.

Expected Population and Sales Potential: Aside from reviewing the competition, both with their existing sister stores and with other competing brands, grocery operators will focus primarily on the expected sales at a potential new location as a test of feasibility. The sales potential at a new location consists of two sources of spending. The first is capturing existing sales from existing stores that are at a less desirable location or are otherwise less attractive to certain patrons. In terms of the Cordelia area, this would consist of spending at existing grocery stores (i.e., Safeway, Costco, Power Markets) in Cordelia that could shift to a new location in South Cordelia. The second portion of potential sales is driven by population growth in the study area. As documented above, the Cordelia area population is expected to grow by roughly 6,170 residents, or 21 percent above the existing Cordelia area population, upon buildout of the planned residential development in the area. These new residents will increase the potential spending at grocery stores. Grocery stores will assess whether the population growth will generate sufficient expenditures to support a whole new grocery store.

Grocery Store Demand Estimate
The following section summarizes the potential demand for a new grocery store in the South Cordelia area. As outlined in Table 5 below, BAE first analyzed the unmet grocery store demand driven by existing grocery spending in Cordelia. This assumes that Cordelia residents are currently underserved by the existing grocery store options and a new grocery store would capture those sales. The second component of demand estimates the spending potential from new residents driven by planned housing growth in Cordelia. This assumes that new Packet Page 18 of 26Attachment 3 Page 7 of 11

8 residents will have per capita spending at grocery stores that is similar to the current average resident in Solano County. Based on the potential grocery sales, this analysis estimates the new supportable grocery stores based on the assumption that a traditional grocery store will seek annual sales of roughly $40 million per year.

Existing Grocery Demand: Based on the existing 28,013 population in Cordelia, BAE estimates Cordelia residents currently spend nearly $72 million annually at grocery stores.

Assuming a traditional grocery store supports $40 million in annual sales, the existing Cordelia population supports an estimated 1.8 grocery stores. Based on the assumption that the existing Safeway, Costco, and Power Markets are equivalent to 1.65 grocery stores, this suggests there is existing unmet demand for only a small fraction (0.15) of a grocery store in the Cordelia area.

Future Grocery Demand Increase: With the expected increase of 6,750 residents in the Cordelia area, BAE estimates grocery spending from new residents of nearly $17.3 million annually upon buildout of planned residential development. Based on the required sales threshold to support a new grocery store, the new spending from Cordelia area population growth is sufficient to support just under half (0.43) of a full-sized grocery store.

Total Grocery Demand: Combining the existing unmet and future grocery demand, BAE estimates demand for roughly half of a new full-sized grocery store in the South Cordelia area at full buildout of the existing development pipeline.

Table 5: Grocery Store Demand Summary
Notes:
(a) Assumes an average annual spending at Grocery Stores of $2,526 per capita. (b) Assumes Grocery Stores require $40,000,000 in annual sales. (c) Assumes the existing Safeway and Costco account for 1.65 grocery stores.

Sources: BAE, 2023.

Commercial Site Assessment
In addition to estimating the potential demand for a new grocery store in South Cordelia, this section assesses the potential suitability of two commercial sites to accommodate a grocery store and potential in-line retail space that could be included within a larger grocery-anchored shopping center. Grocery-anchored retail centers are often configured as neighborhood retail centers that include a total of approximately 100,000 to 150,000 square feet of leasable Existing Grocery Future Grocery Total Future
Spending Spending Increase Grocery Spending
Grocery Store Spending Population Spending (a)Population Spending (a)Population Spending (a) South Cordelia 15,392 $39,544,014 3,364 $8,642,724 18,756 $48,186,737 North Cordelia 12,621 $32,424,961 3,386 $8,699,002 16,007 $41,123,963 Total Cordelia Area 28,013 $71,968,975 6,750 $17,341,726 34,763 $89,310,700 Supportable Grocery Stores (b)1.80 0.43 2.23
Less Existing Grocery Stores (c)1.65 0 1.65
Unmet Grocery Store Demand 0.15 0.43 0.58
Packet Page 19 of 26Attachment 3 Page 8 of 11

9 space, with the grocery store typically occupying around 50,000 square feet. This analysis assumes that if there is sufficient demand for a grocery store, there will be corresponding demand for a typical amount of in-line retail space sufficient to fill a neighborhood shopping center.

As seen below in Figure 2, the two sites are located along Red Top Road in the northern section of South Cordelia. According to information received from Dyett and Bhatia, this area is also likely to experience an upgrade in the Interstate 80 / Interstate 680 interchange (shown in light blue below). A portion of these improvements is funded and expected to deliver by 2040, while other portions of the infrastructure are unfunded and on a longer timeline. Given the uncertainty around the freeway interchange improvements, the following sections assess the suitability of each site with and without the interchange improvements.

Without Improved Freeway Interchange
Site #1 (shown in red below): The first potential site is located at the Red Top Road exit from I-80. This location is well positioned to capture spending from Cordelia residents coming and going to the Bay Area via I-80. Given that this site includes portions on the south and north side of Red Top Road, the southern portion likely offers better visibility and access relative to the northern portion of the site which borders an existing housing development.

Site #2 (shown in yellow below): The second potential site is located on the eastern portion of Red Top Road, near the intersection with Lopes Road. The two parcels considered sum to roughly 41 acres, with multiple potential points of entrance and egress. The site is larger than Site #1, though both sites are likely sufficient to accommodate a traditional grocery store and associated in-line retail space that is typical of neighborhood shopping centers. Currently, this site does not have direct access from Interstate 680, reducing the visibility and potential capture of daily spending from Cordelia residents returning from the Bay Area.

With Improved Freeway Interchange
Site #1 (shown in red below): Based on the proposed interchange, the infrastructure upgrades would have a limited impact on the suitability of Site #1, especially given that the site already has an existing freeway exit. However, it is worth noting that part of the proposal is to connect North Cordelia to Interstate 80 via an extension of Business Center Drive. Should this access also allow North Cordelia residents to access Site #1, these improvements would improve access to the site for North Cordelia residents.

Site #2 (shown in yellow below): The second site is likely to be impacted more significantly by the interchange infrastructure upgrades. First, the upgrades would positively impact the site by adding a new exit to Red Top Road from Interstate 680, improving automobile access to the site. Secondly, the infrastructure upgrades may Packet Page 20 of 26Attachment 3 Page 9 of 11

10 make the site less suitable for other uses, such as residential, due to the increased pollution and elevated on-/off-ramps through the site. However, the upgrades may reduce the portion of the site that can accommodate development. As seen in the figure below, the proposed upgrades will cut through the northern parcel. Based on the routing, it appears that these infrastructure upgrades may reduce the portion of the site that can accommodate development by roughly half. However, the site is still sufficient to accommodate a grocery-anchored shopping center, which typically requires roughly 10 acres.

Figure 2: South Cordelia Area Commercial Sites
Sources: Dyett and Bhatia, 2023.

Grocery Store Demand Summary
Based on the above analysis, this section summarizes the critical takeaways for the City to consider relating to future demand for a grocery store in the South Cordelia area.

Future Grocery Store Demand
Based on the existing unmet demand and future demand driven by population growth in the Cordelia area, BAE finds future demand for roughly 0.58 of a traditional full-sized grocery store at full buildout of the existing residential development pipeline. This suggests that future sales are likely insufficient to accommodate a traditional supermarket (e.g., Safeway, SaveMart, Raley’s, etc.). However, the demand may be sufficient to accommodate a small-scale (e.g., around 25,000 square feet) grocery store in South Cordelia along with a reduced amount of Packet Page 21 of 26Attachment 3 Page 10 of 11

11 ancillary in-line retail space (e.g., 25,000 to 40,000 square feet), though even small grocers may find the potential sales insufficient to support a new store. In addition, any new grocery store would likely not consider opening a new store until all of the housing units in the pipeline were built and occupied, which is likely at least several years from today.

It is worth noting that this is the near-term demand is based on the approved residential development pipeline and additional residential capacity identified in the Housing Element. If the City is interested in leveraging the General Plan Update to support a full grocery store in the South Cordelia area, the area would require approximately 2,100 additional housing units in the broader Cordelia area above the existing development pipeline. Any of this additional growth envisioned in the General Plan will not deliver until five or more years into the future.

Site Suitability
Based on the two commercial sites analyzed in South Cordelia, BAE finds that the site at the intersection of Red Top Road and Interstate 80 is likely the preferred site under current and anticipated conditions due to improved access for residents commuting to the Bay Area via I-

80. More specifically, the portion of the site that is southwest of Red Top Road is likely more suitable for the grocery store, due to the improved access for Bay Area commuters returning to Cordelia in the evenings.

The second site, at the intersection of Red Top Road and Lopes Road is likely less desirable due to the reduced traffic counts and the lack of a nearby freeway exit to attract resident spending. In addition, preliminary plans for the Interstate 80 / Interstate 680 interchange indicate the potential buildable acreage of this site is likely to shrink significantly. While this interchange will improve access to the site, thus increasing the potential spending, the interchange improvements could inhibit the ability for this site to reasonably accommodate a grocery store due to the reduced buildable acreage, depending on the final footprint and associated right-of-way for the interchange improvements.

Potential City Incentives
Should the City seek to incentivize a grocery store to locate in South Cordelia, the City has limited options. The main mechanism to potentially attract a grocery store is to offer development and impact fee waivers, thus reducing the development cost of the space. This will pass along short-term savings to the grocery store, however these types of costs typically represent a fairly small part of the overall development costs for a store and grocery stores are more focused on reaching sales goals, suggesting short-term upfront savings are less critical to the location decision. Aside from fee waivers, the City can also offer faster entitlement timelines and permit streamlining to reduce the time and burden of pursuing the development of a grocery store.

Packet Page 22 of 26Attachment 3 Page 11 of 11

4 YD4 YD
14 SUISUN VALLEY ROAD BUSINESSCENT
ER DR
I
V
E
I
N
T
E
R
S
T
A
T
E

8 0CIT
Y

P
A
RC
E
LCITY PARCELBUSSTOPFOUR-STORY HOTEL TENANT6,500 S,F,TENANT5,000 S,F,QSR3,200 S.F.8 MPDS

C-STORE
3,500 S.F.CARWASHHARDWARE14,700 S.F.TENANT
4,200 S.F.2,500
S
.

F
.OUTDOORBAR VENUETENANT
2,400 S.F.FEBRUARY 2023SUISUN VALLEY PLACECONCEPTUAL SITE PLANCITY OF FAIRFIELD, CALIFORNIAORTHN0DEVELOPING INNOVATIVE DESIGN SOLUTIONS4670 WILLOW ROAD STE 125 TEL 925.847.1556PLEASANTON, CA 94588 FAX 925.847.155724012060TOTALUNIT TYPEHOUSING SUMMARYTHREE-STORY HOMES218156TWO-STORY HOMES62QSR5,100 S.F.W.Q.BASINW.Q.BASINW.Q.BASINEXIST.W.Q.BASINOUTDOOR CENTERB LOC
K
WA
L
L
ATTACHMENT 4Packet Page 23 of 26Attachment 4 Page 1 of 1

CORDELIA
R
O
A
D

LINK RO
A

D CORDELIA
ROAD
RLM
75± AC.
450± LOTS

TRAIL HEAD PARK

1.0± AC

FUTURE HIGH DENSITY

RESIDENTIAL SITE

2.0± AC

POTENTIAL

WATER QUALITY
BASIN

TRAIL SYSTEM

VIEW OVERLOOK

VIEW OVERLOOK
A
A

PERIMETER TRAIL ALONG

LANDSCAPE BERM

PERIMETER TRAIL ALONG

LANDSCAPE BERM
A
A

OPEN SPACE
152± ACRES

ACCESS FROM

DAWSON CREEK DRDAWSONCREEK DR
I
-80
EX. WATER
TANK

ENTRY ROAD

VIEW OVERLOOK

VIEW OVERLOOK
3:1 2:1
10'TYPICAL VISUAL BERM SECTIONA
LEGEND

PROPERTY BOUNDARY

LIMIT OF DEVELOPMENT AREA

TRAIL SYSTEM

LAND USE SUMMARY

LANDUSE TYPE
APPROX.

GROSS
ACRES
APPROX.

UNITS DENSITY
OPEN SPACE 152± AC.--

RESIDENTIAL
LOW-MED. (RLM)75± AC.450±6.0 DU/AC

TRAIL HEAD PARK /
FUT. HIGH DEN. SITE 3± AC.--
TOTAL 230± AC.450±2.0 du/ac
PAD 260 PAD 260
PAD 270 PAD 2702:1EX. GROUND

VISUAL SCREENBERM & LANDSCAPE

LIMIT OF DEVELOPMENT
5'
20'
STREET
STREET
ATTACHMENT 5
Packet Page 24 of 26Attachment 5 Page 1 of 1

ATTACHMENT 6
Packet Page 25 of 26Attachment 6 Page 1 of 2

Packet Page 26 of 26Attachment 6 Page 2 of 2

Fairfield City CouncilSeptember 12, 2023

Fairfield City Council
September 12, 2023