Developers present revised Alexander Valley resort plan; propose river park, housing mix and temporary TOT split to fund hotel launch

Developers behind the Alexander Valley Resort project gave Cloverdale officials and the planning commission a detailed design and fiscal preview on Nov. 12, saying the revised plan reduces the build footprint, preserves mature oak groves and will gift a large riverside park to the city.

At the meeting, Devin Zugel, a project lead, said the team intends the development to knit into Cloverdale through a trail network they call the “Esmeralda necklace,” connected bike lanes and shuttle service into downtown. “One of our big goals with this project is to make the neighborhood very walkable and bikeable,” Zugel said.

Michael Yarny, summarizing a draft fiscal and economic impact study by Kaiser Marston Associates, said the 266‑acre site currently produces about $80,000 a year in property tax but could be assessed at roughly $945 million at build‑out. He told the council the study estimates a net fiscal surplus to the city of about $2.2 million annually after accounting for added service costs, and said the resort hotel could generate approximately $2.6 million a year in transient occupancy tax (TOT) when fully operational. The consultant also estimated roughly 480 direct jobs and more than 200 induced jobs tied to the development.

To help the proposed hotel get established, the developer outlined a financing approach that would split TOT receipts for the first 10 years — 50% to the operator and 50% to the city — with 100% of TOT flowing to the city in later years. “We’re proposing that the first 10 years of operation the TOT be split 50/50,” Yarny said, adding the arrangement is intended to make the hotel attractive to operators and investors.

The team also presented ecological ideas for a large eastern park that would be dedicated to the city. The presenters said they do not plan to divert the river’s primary channel; instead they propose restoring pre‑existing floodplain function in places to increase groundwater recharge and habitat. “We don't plan on diverting the river,” Zugel said. “What we want to do is go back to the way that our site was, which used to be a floodplain.”

Planning commissioners and council members focused questions on water supply, housing types, and infrastructure financing. The developers said a robust water supply assessment (WSA) and a separate, detailed fiscal report will be released publicly in coming weeks; the WSA was described as exhaustive and scheduled for a council hearing next month.

On housing, the team said they plan a range of market‑rate housing types and up to 200 senior units; they were explicit that they are not proposing tax‑credit or deeply subsidized units in this project, though the design includes mixed‑use parcels that could accommodate workforce housing if finances permit. The fiscal analysis used a conservative assumption that 75% of new units would be full‑time residences to avoid overstating net fiscal benefits.

Public commenters raised concerns about flooding, sediment and salmon habitat, downtown economic impacts, worker housing affordability and investor transparency. One resident challenged the developer about perceived ties to “network state” groups and high‑profile technology investors; developer representatives denied that the named national figures were investors. “None of the three of those people…are our investors,” Zugel said when a list of names was read aloud.

The project team said it will submit an entitlement package in early 2026 that will include a third addendum to the 2008 EIR, amendments to the 2018 specific plan, updates to the SP‑1 zoning, and a substantially amended development agreement covering infrastructure finance mechanisms such as a community facilities district (CFD) and an enhanced infrastructure finance district (EIFD). They estimated a phased build timeline of roughly 11 years from start to full build‑out, with the hotel targeted to open around year six of construction if approvals and financing proceed on schedule.

The developers encouraged continued local input, public workshops and technical review. They said they would return to council with the water‑supply assessment and the draft fiscal study for formal review and recommended public hearings.