City of Vallejo, CABuilding, Planning, Water, & Fire User Fee StudyAUGUST 2025 2 AGENDA
Introductions & Project BackgroundScope of ServicesMethodology & ApproachExecutive Summary of FindingsDepartment Results + RecommendationsPeer Comparison SurveyImplementation 3 NATIONALL Y-RECOGNIZED. LOCALLY-FOCUSED.Accelerating Social Impact and Improving Performance Technology, finance, human capital, performance & education solutions in one provider 1,200+ staff across the US Performance & social impact leader for State, Local Government & Education (SLED) Past partnerships on more than 30,000 engagements
4 •City Sponsor:Office of theChief Financial Officer•Participating Departments:Fire (Prevention);Planning & Development Services—Building&Planning;Water•Data Years: Analysis usesFY 2024–2025budgeted expenditures, staffing costs, and operational information;Draftreport datedAugust 6, 2025.•Guardrails: Compliant withCalifornia Proposition 26(fees must not exceed theestimated reasonable cost of providing the service); some fees may be subject to statutory caps•Deliverables:Department fee models, proposed fee schedules,revenue projections,peer benchmarkingsummary, andphased implementationframework with annualCPIadjustment Purpose: Align fees with thedocumented cost of service, set clearcost-recovery targets, project revenue impacts, and confirm fairness viapeer benchmarking.
Introduction & Project BackgroundProject background and foundational context for the fee study 5 GUIDE POLICY DECISIONS
ØAdjustoutdated or unclear fee amounts & structuresØAdd / remove feesØEnsure compliancewith reasonable cost standard
DETERMINE FULL COSTS
UPDATE & ALIGN FEES
Establishing a fair, transparent, and sustainablefee structure for the City of Vallejo Scope of ServicesPurpose of the User Fee Study
ØProvide fiscalprojectionsof fee changesØBenchmarkagainst peersØSupportinformed Counciladoption ØAnalyzestafftime, resources, overheadØEstablishtrue cost ofeachserviceØIdentifysubsidy levels 6 Defined objectives, assembled team, gathered key documents.Scope & PlanningCurrent fee schedules & volumes;FY25budgets; salaries/benefits & FTEs; org charts; CAPData CollectionRate DevelopmentTime EstimationComputefully burdened hourly rates(direct labor + dept. indirect + external overhead).Staff time spent per fee activity ×volumes to calculate per-unit& annualcostsUser Fee ModelingCompare full costs vs. current revenues, identifysubsidies/over-recoveries & propose feesLegal & Policy LensProp 26compliance; community vs. private benefit; demand elasticity; competition; incentivesPeer BenchmarkingSix CA peers:Concord, Fairfield, Richmond, San Pablo, Santa Rosa, VacavilleImplementationDepartment targets (80% -100%);3-year phase-in Project Methodology & ApproachEvidence-based methodology aligned with California standards 7 MGT analysis shows Vallejo recovers only 60% of costs today vs. 83% under recommended policy Executive Summary of FindingsCost Recovery and Subsidy Shifts at a Glance At a GlanceCurrent Revenue60%Policy Target83%Recovery Lift+23 ptsSubsidy Share40% →17% Estimated Added Revenue
$1.4MCurrent
RecoveredSubsidy
Policy Target
RecoveredSubsidy
8 Current recovery levels, revenue gaps, and key fee structure changes by departmentDepartmentCurrent RecoveryRecovery at PolicyRecovery LiftEst. Revenue ImpactSignals Fire Prevention70%100%+ 30 pts+$468K •Updated alarms/sprinklers/ER comms/energy storageBuilding59%80%+ 21 pts+$760K•Base+hourly; valuation tiers•% plan review•phased targetsPlanning44%62%+ 36 pts+139K•New: Design Review–Minor; SB-9 Water73%100%+ 27 pts+45K•Per-transaction•20 new fees•deposits/penalties update•more actual-cost Executive Summary of FindingsDepartment Snapshot —Recovery & Signals 9 Department Results & Recommendations
10 Fire Prevention Department
11 Protects life and property through plan check and permitting, fire and life-safety inspections, investigations, and public education/outreach.
Fire Prevention Department Data Findings
FY25 cost
-
of
-
service: 70%
→
100% (≈ +$457k)
At a GlanceCurrent Revenue 70%Policy Target (83%)100%Recovery Lift+30 ptsSubsidy Share30% →0% Estimated Added Revenue
$457kCurrent
RecoveredSubsidy
Policy Target
RecoveredSubsidy
12 Fire Prevention Fee Schedule Updates
Snapshot of proposed new fees and adjustments to existing fees for Fire Prevention activitiesNew Fees Updated feesFee AmountHood & Duct Extinguishing System$735Stationary Fire Pump$1,290Emergency Responder Communication Coverage System$624Energy Storage System —Residential $735Energy Storage System —Commercial $1,845CO₂Beverage Dispensing Systems$735Cryogenic Fluids $445Additive Manufacturing$445Amusement Buildings$634Energy Storage Systems (other)$445Exhibits & Trade Shows$445Floor Finishing $445Hot Work Operations$445Mobile Fueling of Hydrogen-Fueled Vehicles$445Plant Extraction Systems$445Pyroxylin Plastics $445Rooftop Heliports $445Lithium Batteries $445Administrative Citation —Fireworks $1,000Printing Fees —Per Page -Printing Fees —Double-Sided -Printing Fees —Photocopy - Item AmountFire alarm systems —26–50 devices $1,290Fire alarm systems —51–100 devices $1,845Fire alarm systems —>100 devices $2,956Fire Sprinkler System —Commercial 13/13R (New Installation, per riser/system): 1–99$2,179Fire Sprinkler System —Commercial 13/13R (New Installation, per riser/system): 100–199 $2,623Fire Sprinkler System —Commercial 13/13R (New Installation, per riser/system): 200+$3,289Fire Sprinkler System —Commercial 13/13R (Tenant Improvement): 1–99 sprinklers$957Fire Sprinkler System —Commercial 13/13R (Tenant Improvement): 100–199 sprinklers$1,290Fire Sprinkler System —Commercial 13/13R (Tenant Improvement): 200+ sprinklers$1,623Residential Fire Sprinkler System (Custom or Master Plan)$1,068Residential Fire Sprinkler System (per lot —inspections only)$513 •No fees removed•Each fee amount reflects the full cost of service•Supporting the goal of 100% cost recovery Additional Notes
13 Planning & Development Services Department
14 Safeguards the built environment by reviewing plans, issuing permits, and inspecting construction to enforce state and local codes, including investigating unsafe or nuisance structures.
Building Department Data Findings
FY25 cost
-
of
-
service: 59%
→
80% (≈ +$760k)
At a GlanceCurrent Revenue 59%Policy Target (83%)80%Recovery Lift+21 ptsSubsidy Share41% →20% Estimated Added Revenue
$760kCurrent
RecoveredSubsidy
Policy Target
RecoveredSubsidy
15 •No fees removed•Each fee amount reflects the full cost of service•Supporting the goal of 80% cost recovery; 3-year phase-in Building Department -Fee Schedule Updates
Snapshot of proposed new fees and adjustments to existing fees for Building activitiesNew Fees Updated feesNew Building FeesAmountExpired Permits —Less Than One Year% of original permit**Expired Permits —Over One Year up to Five Years% of original permit**Expired Permits —Over Five Years % of original permit**Yearly Review of Qualification to be Included in Special Inspection Program$876Residential Solar —Remove & Reinstall Panels (same location) to allow reroof (under separate permit)$477Commercial Solar —Remove & Reinstall Panels (same location) to allow reroof (under separate permit)$855Residential re-roof (max 3 inspections) with solar removal & re-install (same location)$1,227Residential multi-family re-roof (max 3 inspections) with solar removal & re-install (same location)$1,227Electrical when added to a set-fee permit $409Water heater replacement (same location) —convert to heat pump (includes adding 1 electrical circuit)$647Plumbing when added to a set-fee permit $409Whole-home fan $477**(basis in schedule) Item Updated AmountTemporary Certificate of Occupancy —Second Month (31–60 days)$558Temporary Certificate of Occupancy —Third Month (61–90 days)$558 Additional Notes
16 Guides land use and development consistent with the General Plan, zoning, and CEQA, and supports the Planning Commission and related boards.
Planning Department Data Findings
FY25 cost
-
of
-
service: 44%
→
62% (≈ +$139k)
At a GlanceCurrent Revenue 44%Policy Target 62%Recovery Lift+18 ptsSubsidy Share56% →38% Estimated Added Revenue
$139kCurrent
RecoveredSubsidy
Policy Target
RecoveredSubsidy
17 Planning Department -Fee Schedule Updates
Snapshot of proposed new fees and adjustments to existing fees for Planning activitiesNew Fees Updated feesFee AmountDesign Review —Minor $4,243SB-9 —Lot Split $3,881SB-9 —Two Unit Development$3,881SB-9 —Lot Split & Two Unit Development$5,897Street Vendor —Permit $347 Item Updated AmountMills Act —Contract Monitoring$626Abandoned Shopping Cart Prevention Plan$2,385Modification of Shopping Cart Prevention Plan$368 •No fees removed•Each fee amount reflects the full cost of service•Supporting the goal of 62% cost recovery; 3-year phase-in Additional Notes
18 Water Department
19 Treats and delivers potable water and provides engineering and maintenance support while meeting state and federal regulatory standards and educating the community.
Water Department Data Findings
FY25 cost
-
of
-
service: 73%
→
100% (≈ +$45k)
At a GlanceCurrent Revenue 73%Policy Target (83%)100%Recovery Lift+27 ptsSubsidy Share27% →0% Estimated Added Revenue
$45kCurrent
RecoveredSubsidy
Policy Target
RecoveredSubsidy
20 Water Department -Fee Schedule Updates
Snapshot of proposed new fees and adjustments to existing fees for Water activitiesNew Fees Updated feesFee AmountMeter Upsizing to ¾ inchActual CostDevelopment Agreement$599General Plan Update $599Minor Use Permit $492Accessory Dwelling Unit $492Planned Development $1,337Planned Development —Amendment $546Preliminary Review (Inside City)$1,688Preliminary Review (Outside City)$2,284Preliminary Review (School/Hospital)$2,284Development Review —Major (Staff Level: Large Multi-Family, Demolition)$7,084Development Review —Major (PC Public Hearing)$733Development Review —SB 35 and/or Density Bonus$6,189Development Review —Minor (Single/Multi-Family, Tenant Improvements)$3,095Lot Line Adjustment $492Parcel Map $1,230Parcel Map Amendment $492Tentative Map —5–20 lots $4,303Tentative Map —20+ lots $10,278Tentative Map —Amendment $4,391 Item Updated AmountUp to 1-inch Meter Set $1,0453in Double Check Value$166in Double Check Value$328in Double Check Value$3610in Double Check Value$416in Reduced Pressure $338in Reduced Pressure $3910in Reduced Pressure$426in Double Detector $328in Double Detector $3610in Double Detector $41 •No fees removed•Each fee amount reflects the full cost of service•Supporting the goal of 100% cost recovery.
Additional Notes
21 Comparison Study Department Results
22 Key Insights:•Vallejo’s proposed fees generally fall within peer ranges, some positioned toward the higher end (e.g., extinguishing systems).•Several updates move Vallejo closer to peer medians, such as monitoring equipment and small occupancy categories.•Peers use varied approaches (flat rates vs. occupancy/risk-based tiers), which explains the spread across benchmarks.
This slide compares Vallejo’s current and proposed fees with peer cities for selected fire activities.
Fire Department –Peer Fee Comparison
Peer cities include Concord, Fairfield, Richmond, San Pablo, Santa Rosa, and Vacaville.
ActivityVallejo (Current)Vallejo (Proposed)Peer RangeAutomatic fire extinguishing systems$824$1,068$251–$804Monitoring equipment for sprinkler/alarm$415$513$348–$648R-1 Occupancies up to 20 rooms$362$634$219–$474High-piled combustible storage$1,125$634$504–$603 23 Key Insights:•Vallejo’s current building fees generally fall below the peer median across common permit types.•With proposed adjustments, fees would move into the central range of peers, with some activities slightly above or below.•Peer agencies vary in approach, with some using flat rates or capped structures, while Vallejo maintains itemized fees.
This slide compares Vallejo’s current and proposed fees with peer cities for selected building activities.
Building Department –Peer Fee Comparison
Peer cities include Concord, Fairfield, Richmond, San Pablo, Santa Rosa, and Vacaville.
ActivityVallejo (Current)Vallejo (Proposed)Peer RangeResidential multi-family re-roof permit (2 Inspections)$246$654$242–$915Water heater replacement (same type/location)$141$381$71–$208Decks or trellis permits (<500 sq. ft., no electrical)$412$583$241–$689 24 Key Insights:•Current planning fees are lower than most peer benchmarks, particularly for discretionary reviews.•Proposed fees would narrow the difference and bring Vallejo closer to the peer group averages.•Peer agencies tend to charge higher rates for complex reviews, providing a reference point for Vallejo’s phased adjustments.
This slide compares Vallejo’s current and proposed fees with peer cities for selected planning activities.
Planning Department –Peer Fee Comparison
Peer cities include Concord, Fairfield, Richmond, San Pablo, Santa Rosa, and Vacaville.
ActivityVallejo (Current)Vallejo (Proposed)Peer RangeDevelopment Review –Major (PC Public Hearing)$3,000$6,660$4,715–$14,312Development Review –Minor $824$1,233$1,000–$10,351Exceptions $2,275$2,755$1,169–$3,052 25 Key Insights:•Vallejo’s proposed fees for certain services (e.g., lock box installations) fall on the higher end of the peer spectrum.•Many peers use low flat rates, while Vallejo’s proposed updates reflect a cost-based approach.•Peers also show variation between flat fees and actual-cost billing, indicating flexibility in fee structures.
This slide compares Vallejo’s current and proposed fees with peer cities for selected water activities.
Water Department –Peer Fee Comparison
Peer cities include Concord, Fairfield, Richmond, San Pablo, Santa Rosa, and Vacaville.
ActivityVallejo (Current)Vallejo (Proposed)Peer RangeLock box installation –2nd occurrence$452$468$131Lock box installation –Each additional$574$468$131Water service turn-on Actual CostActual Cost$50–$83 26 Next Steps
27 Operational roadmap to implement cost-of-service findings across all divisions.
Policy-Aligned Next Steps
Continuous Fee Governance
Align Fees With Cost To Serve
Adopt Updates•Update Building, Planning, Water, Fire•Set fees to estimated reasonable cost 3-Year Phase-In•Year 1: 1/3 • Year 2: 2/3 • Year 3: target•Eases impacts; improves predictability Annual CPI Index•Apply during the budget processfor year 4•Maintains chosen cost-recovery level 3–5 Year Study Cycle•Full study every 3–5 yrs•Minor updates in off-years Thank you
UPDATE -PUBLIC SAFETY STAFFING EMERGENCY
Jason Ta, Chief of PoliceSeptember 9, 2025
1 2
ADJUSTMENTS FOR LOWER STAFFINGService Model Reduction (“Phase #1”)•Prioritize responses to certain calls for service (CFS) -CompletedRotation of Officers to Patrol Shifts (“Phase #2“)•Non-patrol officers filling vacant patrol slots -CompletedTemporarily Eliminate (“Collapse”) Traffic Division (“Phase #3”)•Collapsed Traffic Division -Completed Modify Patrol Shifts to 12-hours or Another Staffing Model (“Phase #4“)•Due to recent staffing trends, Phase #4 does not appear to be needed 3 –By July 2025, expect to…•Assign an Officer back to reconstituted Traffic Unit–Effective September 20thassigning a 2ndtraffic officer (1-Sgt, 2 Ofc)•Assign an Officer back to federal task force–TBD -Pending additional staffing numbers•Assign four Officers to a dedicated Problem Oriented Policing (POP) Unit –Go live September 20th •Increase number of Police Assistants (community service officers) over time to supplement officers–Effective October 28, 2024, a Police Assistant was assigned to the Traffic Unit to address abandoned vehicles full time.
Staffing Level Has Begun to Increase Modestly
4 4
6 CURRENT STAFFING NUMBERSTotal Sworn Staffing8281Modified Duty Officers22Off on Worker’s Comp.11Sworn Working Full Duty7978 Anticipated Officers Resigning02Officers Starting /Final Offers00 Officers Working Patrol4546Supervisors Working Patrol (Sgts)55Officers in FTO52 07-08-2025Current
–Sheriff’s Office contract services •SB 1379 approved by Gov. Newsom Sept of 2024•Implementation of either (9-23-25 B.O.S. decision)–Solano SO contract services (as proposed or reduced)–Continued assistance from the CHP•CHP sideshow deterrence detail and/or increased enforcement–Expansion of the Security Guard program–Expansion of technology to help reduce crime and aid with investigations Options Being Explored to Supplement Officers
VPD Average Response Times
•August 2025 (12-month average as compared to SPLY)•Priority 1 –50% improvement•Priority 2 –23% improvement•Priority 3 –22% improvement August/September 2024 -34 Officers assigned to Patrol
August/September 2025 -46 Officers assigned to Patrol
Revitalize VPD Community Volunteer Program •To increase community engagement, expand department capacity for non-enforcement duties, and strengthen trust •Cost-effective alternative to additional sworn police staffing •A phased launch can begin in January 2026 –Request Council's consideration and finding to continue the declared State of Local Emergency due to ongoing public safety staffing challenges Continuation of Local Emergency –Public Safety Staffing
CONTACT(S)
Jason Ta, Chief of PoliceBob Knight, Deputy Chief of Police Blue Rock Springs
Golf Facilities
Preliminary Cost & Scope
1 Contextual Map
2 oOver 30 Years of Global Golf Course Design
and Development Experience
oOver 100 Courses Worldwide
oAward Winning, World-Class Course Designs
oLeader in Environmental Stewardship
oPrincipal – Greg Norman
oOver 70 Continuous Years of Master Plan
Community Design and Development Experience
oOver 55,000 Homes Developed (Including in
Vallejo)
oDeveloping Communities, Apartments, and Retail
Projects in Solano County Since Early 70’s
oCurrently Most Active Developer in Solano
County
oPrincipals –
oRichard Lewis
oRandall Lewis
oRobert Lewis
oRoger Lewis
oJohn Goodman
Blue Rock Springs, LLC
3 2017
City – Development Partner
Recruitment & Selection
2018 – 2019
Community Outreach
2020 – 2021
Lake Herman Quarry
Settlement
2022 – 2024
Public – Private
Partnership
2024 – 2025
Stakeholder Meetings
2025 – 2031
Performance Agreement
Milestones
Project Timeline
4 Purchase Agreement
December 2022
o
Preserved and protected
city land use decisions by
confirming exemption from the
Surplus Lands Act
o
Appraisal (Required): $285K
o
City retains 100% revenue/operational
oversight
o
Developer has no rights to Property for use
o
City retains Lease on Property at $1 / year
o
Developer negotiated closing of $400K w/ City
Participation Agreement
December 2024
o
Confirmed Public
-
Private Partnership (City
–
BRS)
o
Pending Milestones 2 and 3 (Golf Focused / Concept
Plan); Entitlement Applications to be submitted by
Developer
o
Additional Consideration (City)
o
Century Urban
–
City’s Financial Consultant
–
Audit Financials (3
-
5 months, 2024)
o
$1.5M due to City upon Entitlement
o
City negotiated to maximize proceeds by
receiving balance of consideration at lot sale
o
All revenues taken into consideration at time
of land sale (Upside)
o
City to receive % share of revenue to fund
Golf Facilities
o
City guaranteed minimum of $10M
o
Appraisal required at the time of Entitlement to
confirm land value(s)
Public – Private Partnership
5 Performance Milestone #2
6 oBlue Rock Springs, LLC shall provide no less than 3 conceptual plans for the city golf course.
▪Submitted to the City July 16th, 2025
oThe City shall approve or provide comments back to allow for revision and resubmittal of Golf Concept Plan.
▪Due September 15th, 2025
oThe City shall respond to the resubmitted Golf Concept Plan within 90 days.
Blue Rock Springs, LLC
Submittal of Golf Facilities
Preliminary Cost and Scope
120 days after the Effective date of the
Performance and Participation Agreement.
City shall approve or disapprove within 60
days after submittal.
Participation
Agreement
Golf Facilities
Preliminary Cost and Scope
7 2017 – 2025
RFQ Goals &
Community Outreach
City of Vallejo RFQ, September 8, 2017
oFocus on Preserving Golf as the Centerpiece of the Project – Golf FIRST oSolicitation of Qualifications and Development Concepts That Achieve:
oGolf FIRST: Renovation/redesign of the municipal Golf Course absent of City subsidies
oGolf FIRST: Fund the development of a new Clubhouse.
oClubhouse Built in the1960’s
oIndoor Seating Capacity 80
oOutside Tented Capacity - No
oPre-Function Space - No
oOutdoor Reception Space - No
oHousing / mixed-use development concepts must preserve community and neighborhood aesthetics.
8 Community Outreach Meetings 2018 – 2019
Stakeholder Meetings 2024 – 2025
Clubhouse Drawing
Clubhouse Preliminary Scope
Option 1
10 The
Clubhouse
building
is
located
where
the
existing
Driving
Range
is
.
The
Dining
Room
and
Bar
are
located
adjacent
to
the
Driving
Range
which
provides
for
optimal
use
of
the
Bar
and
Grille
area
for
patrons
at
the
Driving
Range
.
It
also
offers
the
Pro
Shop
view
of
the
Driving
Range
which
is
a
desired
criteria
for
the
new
Clubhouse
Design
.
The
Banquet
Hall
is
designed
to
provide
service
for
350
persons
with
an
outside
event
Courtyard
that
faces
the
existing
creek
.
Parking
provided
is
approximately
371
cars
or
approximately
339
cars
with
a
free
-
standing
Cart
Barn
for
80 golf
carts
.
Clubhouse
Conceptual Rendering
Option 1 11
Shown here as the combined clubhouse and event center
Clubhouse Preliminary Scope
Option 2
12 The
Clubhouse
is
located
where
the
existing
driving
range
ball
distribution
canter
building
currently
exists
.
It
is
immediately
visible
from
the
existing
entrance
drive
off
Columbus
Parkway
.
The
Dining
Room
and
Bar
are
located
with
interior
and
exterior
seating
with
views
to
the
West
.
It
also
offers
the
Pro
Shop
view
of
the
Driving
Range
which
is
a
desired
criteria
for
the
new
Clubhouse
Design
.
The
Banquet
Hall
is
designed
to
provide
service
for
350
persons
with
an
outside
event
Courtyard
that
has
a
view
of
the
Golf
Course,
to
the
South
and
West
.
Parking
provided
is
approximately
350
cars
or
approximately
318
cars
with
a
free
-
standing
Cart
Barn
for
80 golf
carts
.
Clubhouse
Conceptual Rendering
Option 2
13 Shown here as the combined clubhouse and event center Clubhouse Preliminary Scope
Option 3
14 The Clubhouse is located where the Putting Green currently exists.
The main feature of this Clubhouse design is a large viewing deck/outdoor dining terrace, that provides for maximum views to the West.
The entrance Driveway has been relocated to the North, to maximize parking at the existing Driving Range site.
It also offers the Pro Shop view of the Driving Range which is a desired criteria for the new Clubhouse Design.
The Banquet Hall is designed to provide service for 350 persons with an outside event Courtyard that has a view of the Golf Course, to the South and West.
Parking provided is approximately 390 cars or approximately 358 cars with a free- standing Cart Barn for 80 golf carts.
Clubhouse
Conceptual Rendering
Option 3
15 Shown here as the combined clubhouse and event center
Golf Facilities Preliminary Scope
East Course
This option focuses on providing an enhanced practice experience, integrated seamlessly with the new clubhouse layout as the focal point of the golf course. The centerpiece is a state-of-the- art driving range with the following key components:
Covered hitting bays to ensure maximum guest comfort, providing shade from the sun and shelter from rain for year-round, uninterrupted use.
Lighting to allow for evening and night use, extending operating hours and thereby serving as a major revenue generator.
Integrated technology such as Trackman or Toptracer to provide real-time data analytics and “gamified” entertainment options appealing to guests of all backgrounds and skill levels.
Four target greens are provided at varying distances of 50, 100, 150, and 200 yards. A net is required along the right side and back end of the driving range to protect the maintenance facility and Hole 14 of the golf course. Regardless, at 230 yards the length of the new driving range will be comparable to the existing range, and the net will not impede golfers’ ability to observe the trajectory of their shot (average drive apex occurs before 150 yards).
In addition to the driving range, a Putting Green and Chipping Green are provided at alternate ends of the tee, together forming a one-stop practice complex with convenient access from the clubhouse.
Importantly, the clubhouse footprint for this option does not result in any disturbance to the existing golf course, allowing for the budget to instead be allocated toward value-add items such as the driving range and West Course reconfiguration. However, we have identified an opportunity to add a new back tee on Hole 12 for increased length. 16 Golf Facilities Preliminary Scope
West Course Option 1
This option offers a regulation 9-hole routing including a balanced 3 Par-3 holes, 3 Par-4 holes, and 3 Par-5 holes with an aggregate par of 36 and a total length of 3,119 yards.
Practice putting and chipping greens are provided in a dedicated short game area located at existing Hole 7. Golf frontage is maintained for all existing homes along the northern perimeter of the course (Pebble Beach Drive / Claret Court).
Hole 1 combines the existing Hole 8 and Hole 11 corridors to create a long Par-5 hole, requiring removal of the existing Hole 8 green. Holes 2 and 3 split existing Hole 12 into a Par-4 and Par-3, therefore requiring the construction of a new green on Hole 2 and new tees on Hole 3. Holes 4, 5, and 6 correspond to existing Holes 13, 14, and 15 with no changes required. A new back tee is added on Hole 4 for additional length. Finally, Holes 7, 8, and 9 are new corridors requiring substantial clearing / demolition of existing site features. After finishing Hole 9, players must travel a distance of ±1,750 feet to reach the tunnel crossing Columbus Parkway, posing a challenge for walkability.
The resulting 27-hole course (East 18 + West 9) provides valuable operational flexibility, however we anticipate that this option would continue to attract the same guest demographic that currently enjoys the existing course, given that the experience would differ only in degree rather than in kind. This option would be appealing to existing stakeholders but would not necessarily contribute to advancing the goal of attracting more new players to the course. While this option provides a desirable golf experience, cost is estimated to be significantly higher than the alternatives due to the extent of new construction works required to build golf features and / or entire holes outside of the existing corridors.
HOLE #123456789Total
PAR543443535 36
YARDAGE638328933163901795231175353,119
17 Golf Facilities Preliminary Scope
West Course Option 2
This option positions the West Course as a designated “practice course” to complement the regulation 18-hole East Course.
Hole 1 is existing Hole 8 with no further changes. Hole 2 is a Par-3 using the existing Hole 11 green complex, but a new set of tees is required to accommodate the adjacent residential boundary. Hole 3 is a long Par-4 corresponding to existing Hole 12, with a new back tee for increased length and a new forward tee for yardage flexibility. Hole 4, by contrast, is a short Par-4 located on the existing Hole 13 corridor, with a new back tee for additional length. These four holes together present a wide variety of shots, offering players the opportunity to use every club in the bag in a condensed format.
In addition to the four golf holes, practice putting and chipping greens are provided in a short game area located at existing Hole 7, with an expanded chipping / pitching area compared to Option 1. Similarly, golf frontage is maintained for all existing homes along the northern boundary of the course (Pebble Beach Drive / Claret Court).
This option represents the greatest diminishment of the existing course and presents operational challenges due to the unconventional format. The 4-hole offering may be difficult to market as an “incomplete” course relative to market expectations for an 18- hole or 9-hole experience. The finishing position of Hole 4 at the western end of the property is additionally problematic, hindering walkability. While this option has the lowest estimated construction budget, monetization of the practice course may prove difficult for long-term commercial viability.
HOLE #1234Total
PAR534416
YARDAGE5361004333161,385
18 Golf Facilities Preliminary Scope
West Course Option 3
This option reimagines the West Course as a completely new golf experience and marketable product at Blue Rock Springs in the form of a 9-hole Par-3 course.
Starting Holes 1 and 2 as well as finishing Hole 9 all occupy the existing Hole 8 corridor.
Hole 3 plays to the current Hole 11 green, with Hole 8 located in the adjacent existing landscape area. Holes 4 and 5 use the existing Hole 12 corridor, and Hole 13 is converted into Holes 6 and 7. A short game warm-up area including practice greens and an extended chipping / pitching area is provided at existing Hole 7, identical to Option 2.
The Par-3 concept allows for the golf holes to be arranged with minimal land area while providing a complete 9-hole experience and fully preserving golf frontage on all existing homes along the northern site boundary (Pebble Beach Drive / Claret Court). With a returning loop configuration, the Par-3 course ensures not only accessibility to players across a full range of skill levels, but walkability as well.
Given that 9 holes are allocated within the space of only 4 existing holes, a considerable number of new tees and greens are necessary for this option. However, construction cost is substantially lower compared to Option 1 (the 9-hole regulation layout) as the condensed footprint of the course is expected to reduce high-cost items such as irrigation. The resulting minimal managed turf area will also yield relative cost savings for ongoing maintenance expenditures as a result of reduced requirements for irrigation, fertilizer, and labor, among other considerations.
This option has the unique benefit of delivering a completely new product for Blue Rock Springs, complementing the regulation 18-hole East Course to collectively provide two unique golf offerings appealing to a broader demographic of guests. In particular, the 9- hole layout is appealing to new players, juniors, and families, all of whom should be a key focus for achieving an inclusive and sustainable business model. The lower greens fees and time commitment associated with a Par-3 course increase affordability and accessibility, together enhancing overall revenue potential. Importantly, the 9-hole Par-3 West Course will serve as a steppingstone to develop new golfers, creating a pipeline of future demand to the benefit of the 18-hole East Course.
HOLE #123456789Total
PAR333333333 27
YARDAGE1972101001481741771201231601,409
19 Pictured is The Hay, a 9-hole Short Course that is widely regarded in its own right as a unique amenity and accessible golf experience, complementing the renowned regulation courses at Pebble Beach. We envision the Par-3 course at Blue Rock Springs as a similarly innovative amenity, enhancing the value of the regulation 18-hole course through a diversified offering.
Preliminary Costs
20 * Estimated Minimum: $14,189,160 – Estimated Maximum: $17,766,235 Quantity
1 2 3 1 2 3
Clubhouse 8,800 sf 5,852,000$ 5,852,000$ 5,852,000$ Ev ent Structure 7,200 sf 1,080,000$ 1,080,000$ 1,080,000$ Cart Barn 8,000 sf 240,000$ 240,000$ 240,000$ Site Work 2,540,600$ 2,496,400$ 2,726,900$ Golf Course 50,000$ 50,000$ 50,000$ 4,850,000$ 1,970,000$ 3,825,000$ Driving Range 650,000$ 650,000$ 650,000$ Design/Soft Costs 15% 1,561,890$ 1,555,260$ 1,589,835$ 727,500$ 295,500$ 573,750$ Subtotal: 11,974,490$ 11,923,660$ 12,188,735$ 5,577,500$ 2,265,500$ 4,398,750$ Site Improvement East Course West Course
*If the clubhouse and event center are combined into one structure, and the cart storage is placed under the clubhouse, the additional cost is estimated to be $5.25 million.
Community
Conversations
Community Meeting: August 26, 2025
Golf Facilities
•Indoor cart storage for privately owned golf carts
•Community’s input on preferred option(s)
•Ownership, operational oversite, maintenance
•Connectivity/accessibility via golf cart/pedestrian paths •Preservation and enhancement of wildlife habitat
•Course(s) playability during development/construction
•Clubhouse programming
•Clubhouse locker room amenities
21 Community
Conversations
Community Meeting: August 26, 2025
General Inquiries
•Developer, roles, and responsibilities
•Project goals for amount, typology, and product types for Residential •Construction impacts to adjacent neighborhood
•Viewshed alterations (residential in place of golf course) •Topography/terrain/elevation of residential
•Project timeline/schedule going forth
•Columbus Parkway condition/maintenance
•Incorporation of regional and local trail systems into project •Residential project access/entry points
•Supportive elements for police and fire
•CEQA application and potential exemptions
22 Thank You!
Questions or Comments?
For additional information please contact:
Jeb Elmore
[email protected]
916-403-1713
BLUE ROCK SPRINGS GOLF COURSE:Golf Concept Plan Review
Presented by:Gillian Haen, Assistant City Manager September 9, 2025 Agenda
•Site Location•Project Background•Public Outreach•Concept Plan review –Lewis Company•Costs/Funding•Staff Recommendation Blue Rock Springs Golf Course655 Columbus Parkway, Vallejo
BLUE ROCK SPRINGS GOLF COURSE-655 COLUMBUS PRKWY, VALLEJO Background
•Blue Rock Springs Golf Course: City owned municipal golf course-225 acres of 18 holes golf•Negative Golf Course revenues reported in May 2017:•-$4.6M 2011-2017•Issued an RFQ in 2017-Sell portion of golf course to Fund development of new Clubhouse and improved golf course to increase revenues Council Goals for Blue Rock Golf Course RFQ1.Update public golf course to operate fiscally positive;2.Fund new Clubhouse and upgraded facilities serving both the golf course and community; 3.Preserve or improve aesthetics, quality, property values, and retain views of the surrounding neighborhoods.
Winning Respondent…Greg Norman/Lewis (Blue Rock LLC)
The Greg Norman CompanyCredit to GETTY IMAGES
“I wouldn't be here today if I didn't have access to public golf facilities. This is the heartbeat of golf right here.”-Greg Norman Blue Rock, LLC
BACKGROUND cont.6.2020-Challenging Syarnegotiations-initiative, legal claim, & Settlement Agreement/Collaborative Use Easement7.New design incorporating Syarinterests Prior designs considered
Design Challenges-SyarSettlement Agreement
Design Selected in Settlement Agreement
BACKGROUND cont.6.2020-Challenging Syarnegotiations-initiative, legal claim, & Settlement Agreement/Collaborative Use Easement7.New design incorporating Syarinterests8.Ownership transfer completed in December 2022 portion of BRS9.Staff negotiated Performance and Participation Agreement-Ext expires 1/14/2510.Century Urban -review deal points& analyze Lewispro formas11.PPA approved by Council-12/17/24 Summary of Performance and Participation Agreement Terms•Payment structure•Concept Golf Plan•Commercial component•Appraisal•CFD Special Tax•Performance Schedule
1. City $ Participation –($10.5M floor)i) $400k upfront consideration-paid at PSAii) Upon entitlements -appraisal by both parties-if more than $10.5M, then City gets additional 25% of value above $10.5M (including $1.5M for golf course design/entitlements). (Assumes 18.5% return for BRS)iii) Sale of Land to Housing Developer-Proceeds: Greater of 8.1525% as a percentage of gross lot sales or $8.6M allocated by lot minimumiv) Profit share of 50% of homebuilder profits at sale of home-25% to City; 25% to Lewisv) Transfer Fee-subsequent land sale (1% ) in perpetuity to City Key Deal Terms
Key Terms Cont.2. Concept Golf Plan-New clubhouse and refurbished 9 holegolf course at BRS design cost and $1.5M for construction docs3. CommercialComponent(estimated at $5-$6M)-Neighborhood serving; City may repurchase for approximately $67,000 if not developed4. CFD Special Tax:For infrastructure and City services in perpetuity5. Schedule of Performance:Performance schedule for project deadlines, to be recorded in the property title Other Terms•Community Benefits, non-monetary consideration as a result ofthe conveyance to BRS, which generally consist of community benefits as follows: –(i) job creation and sales and other tax revenues generated by the Property and the Project; –(ii) Golf Concept Plan for the revitalization and redevelopment of the City Golf Course: renovated/restored municipal golf course & new multi-use clubhouse, within parameters established by City;–(iii) Project Entitlement Approvals permitting construction by the City of the City Golf Course •Termination Clause-City repurchase of property for original purchase price•Non-material changes by CM and CAO; staff extension up to 6 months on performance deadlines•Assignment is at City’s discretion Public Outreach•Stakeholder meetings have taken place on:–July 30, 2024, September 5, 2024, October 3, 2024, and October 31, 2024; September –June 2025–August 26, 2025Community Meeting for public input –Reps from the golfing community, Greater Vallejo Recreational District (GVRD), City of Vallejo, and two members at large–Sustainability of the golf facilities, fiscal responsibility, fiscal enhancements of the golf facilities, redevelopment with housing/community concepts, and a public/private partnership–2 emails form the public-Trails & Golf concept #3 Golf Concept Plan Review•July 16, 2025-Consistent with the PPA, Developer submitted 3 concept clubhouse plans and 3 concept golf course plans.•City must respond with approval and/or direction by Spetmber13, 2025.•Lewis Company to review plans•Back to City staff to review staff recommendation Golf Concept Plan Review•Staff Recommendation:•Clubhouse Concept Plan #1 is the preferred plan with some additional adjustments for consideration:1.Add a larger clubhouse bldgwith added flex space ~500 person capacity including a commercial kitchen and adding additional outdoor gathering area/space for events.2.Clubhouse views appear best in plan #1, as the building is not surrounded by parking.3.Staff suggests that Council consider the design they prefer not based on budget, but based on long term golf operations and programming at the site.4.Funding of the upgrades will come from the sale of the residential land, the residential lots, and long term payback in transfer fees of each newly created lot (As the Performance and Participation Agreement require as described above). Anything beyond project revenues would be the responsibility of the City to contribute.5.Request designing for best outcome with tasks that can be added or phased as funding is identified.
Golf ConcpetPlan Review Staff Recommendation:•West Course Concept Plan #3 is preferred option:1.This option allows for potential future revenues by reimagining the west course as a 9 hole par 3 course and preserves the golf view of the existing homes that is important to the community.2.This reduced size 9 hole is more affordable to golf, opens up a pipeline of new golfers for the larger 18 hole course, and opening golf up for families, new golfers, junior golfers and those that like a quick warm up game. This potentially enhances revenue overall and reduced turf management costs. Development cost is slightly lower.
Costs
Concept Golf Clubhouse #1-$11.9MConcept West Course $3-$4.4MTotal Estimate:$16.3MUnderground cart storage/connect bldgs.$5.25MMinimum $10.5M from sale and more depending on market Funding Mechanisms•Market will dictate City share of profits•Participation at remaining sales points-minimum $10.5M•Other City assets-properties, revenues, etc•CFDS and other financing mechanisms could contribute to infrastructure of golf course•Decisions to be made at time of entitlement when costs are refined regarding funding of preferred alternative.
Next StepsIf Council gives direction on the Golf Concept plans, Developer will make design adjustments accordingly and move forward with planning and entitlement submittals:•General Plan Amendment, Zoning amendment, Tentative map, Planned development permit, other entitlements prepared and submitted•CEQA analysis•Public Input•Public Hearing on final design for project and golf course design at City Council Staff RecommendationAdopt a Resolution Approving the Blue Rock Springs Concept Clubhouse Design #1 with suggested revisions and Golf Course concept design #3 and recommending certain updates to the plans.
CONTACT(S)
Gillian Haen,Assistant City [email protected] Performance AgreementMilestoneDate*BRS posting of $100,000 deposit per Deposit and Indemnification Agreement30 days after the Effective Date of the Performance and Participation Agreement and at least 90 days prior to the submittal of development applications.
BRS submittal of Golf Facilities Preliminary Cost and Scope.120 days after the Effective Date of the Performance and Participation Agreement. City shall approve or disapprove within 60 days after submittal.
BRS submittal of Golf Concept Plan.120 days after City approval of Golf Facilities Preliminary Cost and Scope.BRS submittal of Submittal Package120 days after City final approval of Golf Concept Plan.Submittal of BRS Pre-Application120 days after the Effective Date of the Performance and Participation Agreement.
Submittal of BRS Project Entitlement Applications:§General plan amendment;§Zoning amendment;§Tentative map (large lot and/or small lot);§Planned Development Permit (if needed)Note: Proposed Development Agreement or proposed documentation for CFD may be submitted at a later date, if desired. 270 days after receipt of Agency comments on City of Preliminary Review Application.
Planning Application Resubmittal and required additional applications.270 days after Agency comments on Applications.Posting of Deposits for preparation of CEQA analysis.10 days after Agency’s comments on Planning Application final Resubmittal Selection of MAI-Certified Appraisal to perform Entitlement Appraisal.90 days prior to the date by which the appraiser shall be directed to complete the Entitlement Appraisal.Appraiser to complete Entitlement Appraisal.60 days after the Final Approval.Submittal of Grading Permit application (for BRS Project and Golf Facilities)180 days after receipt of Final Approvals, and completion of Entitlement Appraisal.Submittal of grading and backbone infrastructure plans for BRS Project.180 days after completion of Entitlement Appraisal.
Vallejo City Council 555 Santa Clara Street Vallejo, CA 94590 Re: City Council Agenda Item 9.G – Blue Rock Springs Golf Course Concept Plan Mayor and Councilmembers: As you may know, for over twenty-five years the Bay Area Ridge Trail has been in East Vallejo, on the ridgeline and where necessary on city streets including the sidewalk on the east side of Columbus Parkway from Ascot Drive to Blue Rock Springs Park. In addiNon, there has been a connector trail from Hahn’s Park to Columbus Parkway on the south side of the golf course. As a part of the Blue Rock Springs golf course concept plan we request that the feasibility of moving the exisNng Ridge Trail alignment on the sidewalk on the east side of Columbus Parking further east away from Columbus Parkway be studied. Also an alternaNve alignment for the connector trail from Hahn’s Park to Columbus Parkway should be studied. We want to ensure that both these trails are included in the proposed project. We are more than willing to work with the developer on the locaNon of these secNons of the Ridge Trail. Thank you for your aTenNon to this important maTer. Sincerely, Kathy Hoffman, Chair Solano Trails CommiTee 307 Palo Verde Way Vallejo, CA 94589 707-644-5190 [email protected]