A Silicon Valley-backed initiative to build a ‘green city’ for up to 400,000 people on farmland in the San Francisco Bay Area has been put on hold in an embarrassing reversal.
The city would have been built from scratch on land 60 miles north of San Francisco which is currently rolling prairie, but the tech billionaires say the entire timeline, which would have seen the city up and running within ten years, was unrealistic.
The California Forever campaign was going to feature on this November’s ballot, but a Solano County report released last week raised questions about the project and concluded that despite the backing of billionaires, it ‘may not be financially feasible.’
‘While the need for more affordable housing and good paying jobs has merit, the timing has been unrealistic,’ Mitch Mashburn, chair of the county’s Board of Supervisors explained, noting how without an environmental review the project ‘was a mistake.’
A Silicon Valley-backed initiative to build a green city for up to 400,000 people in the San Francisco Bay Area, on land zoned for agriculture, has been put on hold for two years
An environmental review will now be carried out before any building work begins. The plans see streets dominated by pedestrians and cyclists, with outdoor cafes filling the town square
‘This politicized the entire project, made it difficult for us and our staff to work with them, and forced everyone in our community to take sides.’
This November’s ballot would have asked voters to allow urban development on 27 square miles of land between Travis Air Force Base and the Sacramento River Delta city of Rio Vista currently zoned for agriculture.
The land-use change is necessary to build the homes, jobs and walkable downtown proposed by Jan Sramek, a former Goldman Sachs trader who heads up California Forever.
But the group has now suddenly decided that it will follow the normal county process for zoning changes for the swath of land that is proposed for development.
The group will fund a full environmental impact review and reimburse the county for staff time and consultants work relating to the venture.
Solano County supervisors were set to consider the report on Tuesday but the organizers have now suddenly withdrawn the measure and say they will try again and send the package back to local voters for approval in two years time.
The investor group acquired around 53,000 acres in the region, worth $1 Billion, close to Travis Air Force Base
A map of a new proposed community in Solano County, California, is displayed
The report found the new city was likely to cost the county billions of dollars and create substantial financial deficits, while slashing agricultural production and potentially threatening local water supplies.
The city had been described on the California Forever website as an ‘opportunity for a new community, good paying local jobs, solar farms, and open space.’
California Forever said project organizers would spend the next two years working with the county on an environmental impact report and a development agreement.
Delaying the vote ‘also creates an opportunity to take a fresh look at the plan and incorporate input from more stakeholders,’ read a joint statement on Monday by the county and California Forever.
‘We are who we are in Solano County because we do things differently here,’ Mitch Mashburn, chair of the county’s Board of Supervisors, said in the statement.
‘We take our time to make informed decisions that are best for the current generation and future generations. We want to make sure that everyone has the opportunity to be heard and get all the information they need before voting on a General Plan change of this size.
Founder & CEO, for California Forever Jan Sramek had earlier outraged locals by covertly purchasing more than $800 million in farmland and even suing farmers who refused to sell. He has insisted the project will get back on track
The plans promise to create ‘walkable, middle class neighborhoods that we can afford’
There has been plenty of opposition to the project including from conservation groups and some local and federal officials who say the plan is a speculative money grab rooted in secrecy.
Sramek had earlier outraged locals by covertly purchasing more than $800 million in farmland and even suing farmers who refused to sell but has insisted the project will get back on track.
At one stage the group also used a shell company to buy up land from Rio Vista west toward Travis Air Force Base.
The land sales, close to a military installation, sparked rumors that foreign spies were buying up the land in order to obtain military secrets.
‘We want to show that it’s possible to move faster in California,’ Sramek said conceding that the group had to follow due process. ‘But we recognize now that it’s possible to reorder these steps without impacting our ambitious timeline.
‘For every year we delay, thousands of Solano parents miss more mornings, recitals and bedtime stories because they’re commuting two hours for work. They cannot get those magical moments back.’
The Solano Land Trust, which protects open lands, said in June that such large-scale development ‘will have a detrimental impact on Solano County’s water resources, air quality, traffic, farmland, and natural environment.’
The company described the area as ‘some of the worst for agriculture in Solano County. Land where for years, nothing much has been able to grow’
Ads for the proposed community promise $400 million in down payment assistance for residents and 15,000 new jobs with ‘good pay in manufacturing and tech’
Sramek has said he hoped to have 50,000 residents in the new city within the next decade.
The proposal included an initial $400 million grant to help residents buy homes in the community, as well as an initial guarantee of 15,000 local jobs paying a salary of at least $88,000 a year.
Sramek’s blueprints for the new, walkable community, fueled by green energy, depicted tens of thousands of homes surrounded by plenty of open space and trails.
The renderings also portray the city as noticeably car free, instead dominated by pedestrians and cyclists.
Sramek has said he had hoped to have 50,000 residents in the new city within the next decade
Images shared by the group show rolling landscapes with families enjoying a picnic amongst a cluster of trees, while youngsters are seen cycling
Other proposed features include commercial buildings and parks, with one image showing people kayaking through a nature reserve.
The plans also contain proposals to plant 1million olive trees, as well as orchards.
At 50,000 acres, the project is gigantic in scale. By comparison, the city of San Francisco itself is only 30,000 acres, while Manhattan is 14,500 acres.
The billionaires say they would be converting unused farmland into ‘middle-class neighborhoods with homes we can afford.’
High-end sport facilities were also included in the plans with the group already committing $500,000 to the planning stage.
Facilities for baseball, football, basketball, soccer, volleyball, tennis, gymnastics, and swimming would be included, and could host players from around the county.
Jan Sramek, a 36-year-old billionaire appears to have been quietly working on his plan for California Forever since 2017
Sramek, the leader of California Forever, is a 36-year-old financial prodigy who made a name and fortune by his early 20s as an emerging markets trader in Goldman Sachs’ London office.
As a high school student in York, Sramek broke the British record for A-level exams by scoring 10 As in a diverse set of subjects, and went on to graduate from the London School of Economics.
In 2009, when he was just 22, Sramek was the youngest-ever financier to be named to the annual Financial News list of 100 ‘Rising Stars’.
Days after his 24th birthday, Sramek mysteriously quit Goldman Sachs and dropped out of the limelight.
Since then, Sramek relocated to the Bay Area, and appears to have been quietly working on his plan for California Forever since 2017.
/static.texastribune.org/media/files/f5fdb1dff4d6fd788cba66ebaefe08d0/Paxton_GOP_Convention_2018_BD_TT.jpg "Ken Paxton sues NCAA over transgender athletes’ participation in women’s sports")
