Investors in a company proposing to build a new urban center in Solano County made some changes to the company’s plan this week.
California Forever, the parent company of Flannery Associates LLC, filed an amended proposed ballot initiative with Solano County on Monday, reducing the size of its proposed new community by 1,100 acres.
The updated version also clarifies that water sources could be developed elsewhere in the state and adds a section on rail connections to the community.
Water and transportation issues have been just some of the reasons the Sierra Club and a local coalition called Solano Together have opposed the project. Solano Together includes local elected officials and the Solano County Farm Bureau.
The initiative would amend the county’s general plan to allow the community to be developed even though it is outside an existing urban area.
In a revised version of the initiative filed Monday with the Solano County Registrar of Voters, the company reduced the size of its proposed community to 17,500 acres, down from 18,600 in its original proposal filed earlier this month.
The proposed initiative must receive 13,062 signatures from registered voters in the county to appear on the November ballot, 10 percent of the vote in the 2022 gubernatorial election.
The plan still calls for setting aside 4,000 acres for open green space, meaning the percentage of proposed green space increased from about 20% to 22%.
Unchanged are the 10 “voter guarantees” outlined in the initiative, including creating 15,000 jobs that pay more than the weekly county average. The company also proposed creating separate funds to support homebuyers in the new community and invest in other cities’ downtowns.
The revised version clarifies a section on water sources that could sustain the new community, adding that potable water sources may be developed “in other parts of the state.”
It also adds a section advocating for external rail connection to the community, calling on the Solano Transportation Authority and other regional transportation bodies to champion the idea, while pledging to set aside areas for rail connection in the community.
The initiative would establish a $400 million fund for education scholarships and homebuying assistance within the new community and another $200 million to revitalize downtowns in other cities in the county.
It proposes nearly doubling the size of the undeveloped defensive zone around Travis Air Force Base from about 8,000 acres to nearly 15,000 acres.
Other assurances touch on habitat preservation, water conservation and the promise to fund the entire project with taxes raised within the new community and leave county funds untapped.
The company has 180 days from Monday to collect enough valid signatures to get the initiative on the ballot.
17 comments
From what I can see in that area’s newspapers….. Nobody knows for sure who the real people behind the scene is for this…. And so close to a Military Base. HUMMMmmmmmmm
Too many questions to be answered
Too little info in this article to speculate, but I trust no one. Is this going to be a “smart city?” Top down planned community with everything wired to the Internet Of Things and cameras everywhere, and everything “walkable” so they can punish car driving?
We desperately need more housing, so I’m inclined to support any new construction at this point. NIMBYism is out of control. But a shadowy planned city does not fill me with good vibes.
Waiting to hear all the hypocrites that talk about housing affordability/availability that want this project stopped.
So those people should be subjected to living in a Truman Show style 15 minute city???
Re: WC—CREEKER. With your comment, we can check the box for hearing from those that support Corporate overlords who wish to use money and political connections to supersede the voter approved growth ordinances. Tech billionaires wanting to play Sim-City? No thanks.
This project’s leading investers…Silicon Valley Billionaires–plus- many “un-named, but all American” 😉😉 investers — led by a recent immigrant, up-and coming new resident & verified fast talker… who would be king …!
Trust me, they are not doing this for the poor folks that “just need a place to rest their heads and raise their 2.6 children.” You don’t need 55,000 acres to do that. The whole city of Concord is only 19,550 acres!~~~with 55,000 acres~~~They could build 2000 “California [Utopia] Forever” towns—- the size of Clayton…😱
apologize for sloppy (unediting)… Could build over 20 Claytons… not 2000
California’s first 15 minute city?
What I see in the article is proposed stealing of clean water from other sources in the state. Also a bribe to “other” unnamed cities down towns. If it does get on the Solano county ballot, I hope it gets 99% NO.
Jim Jones?
Shady sh*t going on!!! You will own nothing and be happy, we will control your life , not you!!! It’s real, it’s happening, it’s being fast tracked. Brandons last year to try to push this through!!! Praying people vote with their head and not their feelings this year.
With you up until the Brandon comment, which reveals the lack of logical thought process.
He did not use an apostrophe spelling “Brandon’s” either!
Another demerit …. right Mr. Fussy Pants?
“Brandon” has absolutely nothing to do with this California Forever disaster. Zero. Zip. Nada.
…. uhhhh. that’s a big “no way” ….. too close to a military base for one.. and if it did get built I can see residents in 5 yrs complaining about the airplane noise then trying to get it shut down – who was there first? The big money can think of another way to make more – maybe build water and power projects and sell it to the state? Somebody finally build a replacement system for the DMV instead of band-aiding systems from the ’70’s (probably other state’s sytsems too)
No Doubt they see Sierra Foothill dams, tubes and spillways in their future. A quick AI response to querry about the American River/Auburn Dam Project:
“The Auburn Dam Project was authorized in 1965, but construction was halted in 1975 due to seismic concerns, environmental concerns, and other reasons. The dam is still unbuilt, and current studies show it would cost over $6 billion to build. In 2008, the California State Water Resources Control Board denied water rights for the dam project due to lack of construction progress.
The Forresthill Bridge, a green metal and concrete bridge that spans a reservoir that never was, is a reminder of the Auburn Dam Project.”
Of course, those against the dam and bridge back then …. had not yet become newly invested in down-stream Utopian City projects.
Now why would a prudent investor be interested in financing a housing project in a state with increasing resident outflows?
They wouldn’t. There is obviously more to this story.
Comments are closed.