Development in Dixon requires a rigorous, multi-phase process governed by local laws, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and state requirements. Every major proposal undergoes a detailed Environmental Review phase known as CEQA. During this time, independent experts study how a project would impact a wide range of environmental topics, covering essential community resources, including water, traffic, air quality and noise.

No major project is granted final approval until it has cleared every stage of this public roadmap. The final decision rests with formal public hearings and votes by the Planning Commission and City Council. In cases involving annexation (bringing land into City limits), an independent regional body called the Solano Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo) must also provide a final review and vote.

Current Project Status: To see where specific proposals are currently located within this multi-step process, please visit our Proposed Project Snapshots page.

Roles and Responsibilities

To ensure transparency, it is important to distinguish between the various entities involved:

The Applicant

(Developer)

Proposes a project and is responsible for funding the application materials, environmental studies, city staff review time and the eventual construction of required infrastructure (roads, pipes and parks).

The City

(Lead Agency)

Acts as a regulatory body (like a ‘referee’). The City evaluates applications against the local regulations – General Plan, Zoning Ordinance, Municipal Code and Subdivision Ordinance – as well as State law. The City is not the promoter of these projects; it is the evaluator.

The Community

(Residents, Business Owners, Property Owners and Interested Parties)

Provides input and opinions on specific proposed projects, in addition to broader “community-shaping” elements such as park amenities, downtown connectivity and land-use priorities.

How Developments Go From Proposal to Reality

The City of Dixon approaches development with a focus on thoughtful growth that respects our agricultural roots and small-town feel while planning responsibly for the future. 

It is important to note that the City is legally required to accept and process all formal development applications submitted to us. However, the receipt of an application does not guarantee a project’s approval or its eventual construction.

Every project in Dixon is unique, and the path from an initial submittal to a finished building is a multi-stage process that prioritizes thoroughness over speed. 

Most smaller projects do not entail a public planning process, and only require a permit to be reviewed and issued. Most larger projects require a public planning process and public hearings before permit review and issuance.

Planning Projects

Based on established criteria, most major new projects have to first go through a public planning process, which is considered a discretionary process that includes public review, public comments and public hearings. Some smaller projects may also require a planning process, depending on whether a planning permit like a design review or use permit is required, or a variance or deviation is requested or there is some other component of a project that requires a planning permit. During the planning process, the major steps include:

Once a new application is filed, all projects start with a staff review for completeness. The completeness review process ensures the information submitted with the application meets the submittal requirements and provides enough information to allow staff, the public and decision makers to make informed decisions.

Every city must conduct a CEQA review for its projects. The first step is to see if the project qualifies for an exemption from CEQA. The State provides two main exemption types: Categorical (common projects that usually have no impact) and Statutory (specific projects allowed by state law to skip the full review).
If a project is not exempt, it moves to an Initial Study. The Initial Study reviews and screens a project’s potential impacts on a checklist of 20 environmental topics, like noise, traffic and air quality. Depending on the level of impact, there are three possible review pathways:

  • Negative Declaration: Used if the study shows “less than significant” to all environmental topics.
  • Mitigated Negative Declaration: Used if there are impacts, but they can be lowered to “less than significant” with attainable mitigation measures.
  • Environmental Impact Report: Required if any impact to any environmental topic is potentially significant and there are no feasible mitigation measures that can reduce the level of impact.

Each pathway has different procedures established by state law and review timelines.

How a project is approved depends on its scope, the type of planning application and level of environmental review. There are three main levels of decision-making: 

  • Administrative Staff Decision – For: Small, routine projects.
    These are handled directly by city staff. If an application is straightforward and follows existing rules, it can be approved without a public hearing.
  • Planning Commission Decision – For: Moderate projects and appeals.
    The Planning Commission steps in for most projects that aren’t routine. They also handle any “appeals,” meaning if someone disagrees with a staff decision and files an appeal, the Commission reviews and acts on the appeal.
  • City Council Hearings – For: Major projects and final appeals.
    The City Council handles any project that include:

    • Large-scale developments: new non-residential projects over 75,000 sq ft.
    • Map and rule changes: Dividing land (subdivision maps), changing a property’s ‘zone’ or amending the city’s General or Specific Plans.
    • Final appeals: If a Planning Commission decision is challenged, it goes to the City Council for a final vote.

Once the planning stage is finished (or if the project didn’t need a planning review to begin with), the focus shifts to physical construction. Almost all construction work requires a building permit to ensure the project follows the California Building Codes. For a look at how different projects move through this process, see “Common Development Pathways” section.

Key Factors in Development Timelines

There is no “one-size-fits-all” schedule for development. Every project moves at a different pace based on three main factors:

The speed of a project often depends on the completeness and quality of the application submitted by the developer.

  • Review Cycles: Most projects go through multiple rounds of City staff feedback.
  • Alignment: Navigating these cycles effectively depends on a proposal’s ability to proactively meet the rigorous standards inherent in complex California planning environments.

State and local laws require specific “checkpoints” that cannot be skipped:

  • Public Transparency: Fixed periods for public notices and hearings are legally required to ensure the community has a voice. Decisions on projects can only be made in publicly noticed/agendized meetings.
  • Environmental Complexity: A simple site is reviewed faster than a complex one (e.g., land with flood zones or sensitive habitats) which requires deeper study.
  • Outside Agencies: Certain factors like wetlands, creeks, waterways and other features may require review and permitting of regional or state agencies. If a project is outside current city limits, independent agencies like LAFCo or the County must conduct their own separate reviews.

The City’s priority is a thorough technical evaluation.

  • Workload: Staff must balance multiple applications among other duties to ensure each one meets safety and zoning standards.
  • Compliance: City staff evaluate every project against Dixon’s General Plan. If a proposed project requires a zone change or a General Plan amendment, it must undergo a rigorous public review process. This includes thorough evaluation by the Planning Commission before the City Council ultimately votes on whether the proposed changes are appropriate and serve the community.

Common Development Pathways

Focus: Internal modifications or minor additions.

This pathway applies to projects that already meet zoning and development standards and do not require discretionary planning approval (i.e., no public notice or hearing).

Typical Process

  1. Optional pre-application meeting with City staff
  2. Building permit submittal
  3. Plan check review and corrections
  4. Permit issuance
  5. Construction and inspections

Estimated Timeline: 2 to 6 months

Smaller projects such as home and tenant improvements may move more quickly, while larger commercial or multi-family buildings may take longer.

Focus: Projects requiring a “second look” for design or specific use.

This pathway applies to projects that require limited planning review, such as a minor use permit or administrative design review.

Typical Process

  1. Pre-application meeting
  2. Planning permit submittal
  3. Staff review and possible public notice
  4. Planning decision with conditions of approval
  5. Building permit submittal
  6. Plan check and permit issuance
  7. Construction and inspections

Estimated Timeline: 4 to 9 months

Timelines vary widely based on the scope of the project and the number of review cycles required.

Focus: Large-scale developments, new neighborhoods or shopping centers

This pathway applies to larger or more complex projects that require public hearings, zoning changes, subdivision maps or environmental review. These projects often have the longest timelines due to the level of scrutiny required by law.

Typical Process

  1. Pre-application and early coordination
  2. Formal planning application and required technical studies
  3. Staff review and community engagement
  4. Environmental review (if required)
  5. External Agency Review: Coordination with jurisdictional authorities (like LAFCo or the County) if the project is in the Sphere of Influence.
  6. Public hearings before Planning Commission and or City Council
  7. Final Decision: Approval or denial by governing bodies.
  8. Subdivision Improvement submittal and construction (if applicable)
  9. Building permit submittal
  10. Plan check and permit issuance
  11. Construction and inspections begin

Estimated Timeline: 18 to 36 months or longer

City of Dixon Considerations + Commitments

Projects involving zoning amendments, environmental impact reports or significant public interest may require additional time.

Dixon Grown reflects our commitment to balancing economic opportunity, community character and long-term sustainability. From small business improvements to new neighborhoods, each project plays a role in shaping our city’s future.

This overview is intended as a general guide for development in the City of Dixon. Actual timelines and required approvals vary by project.

Growth vs. No Growth Tradeoffs

Topic Managed Growth No Growth
New Infrastructure Developers either provide the infrastructure required for their development area (water wells, sewer transmission lines, parks) or they pay impact fees to fund the expansion of these facilities. These costs are typically passed on to the new development's future homeowners—or, in the case of non-residential developments, to the developer or commercial user—protecting existing taxpayers. While new development legally cannot be used to fund existing infrastructure deficiencies, a no-growth approach leaves the City with a smaller overall tax base. Consequently, the City must identify alternative funding, such as grants and increased local fees or taxes, to upgrade aging infrastructure for current residents.
Maintenance In Dixon, new residential developments are required to annex into a special tax district called a Community Facility District (CFD) for essential services like Police and Fire. These residents pay extra to maintain their own parks, streetlights, roads, landscaping and storm drains. Maintenance costs for citywide services are spread across the current, smaller tax base. As inflation rises, the "buying power" of the City's general fund shrinks.
Retail & Services Larger populations attract "anchor" tenants (like restaurants or specialty grocers) who require a specific "rooftop count" to be profitable. Dixon remains a "small market." Residents will likely continue to travel to neighboring cities (Vacaville/Davis) for many retail needs.
Agricultural Impact Permanent loss of specific land within City limits (including potentially annexed land within Dixon's "Sphere of Influence") as it transitions to residential/commercial use. Preserves the immediate soil at the city's edge but does not prevent the County from approving "industrial" or "rural" projects just outside city lines.
Local Control The City of Dixon, guided by community input, sets the rules for land use, architecture, park sizes and environmental protections for every acre. If Dixon does not maintain a compliant Housing Element or meet state housing mandates, the City loses local control. The State can then trigger the "Builder's Remedy," which allows developers to bypass local zoning and density rules.
Regional Pressure Growth happens, but is concentrated near existing services, preventing "sprawl" further out into the deep county. Neighboring jurisdictions will likely grow toward Dixon. We may experience the traffic of regional growth without the tax revenue to mitigate traffic or fix and improve our infrastructure.
Housing Diversity Adds new "product types" (townhomes, apartments) that are largely missing in Dixon. Beyond meeting state mandates, this provides a variety of housing options that are more affordable by design (such as smaller lots and/or smaller houses), offering less expensive alternatives to the large-lot single-family homes that are the predominant housing type in the City. Housing supply remains constrained. As demand for Dixon grows, the price of existing "legacy" homes typically increases, potentially pricing out local families and young residents.
Pace of Change The neighboring community feels "under construction" for a longer period (20+ years) as phases are built out. The "small-town feel" is preserved in the short term, but may be challenged by overcrowding of existing parks and aging facilities over time.