Building a Brand New City in Solano County?
Vložit
- čas přidán 18. 01. 2024
- Discussion of a recent plan to create a new city from scratch in Solano County in the northeast part of the Bay Area. This project would be big enough to add as much as 400,000 people to the county and be a sustainable, walkable city.
California Forever website:
californiaforever.com/
Check out my main channel Geography King for more info on geography for the US and abroad.
/ @geographyking
Kyle, thanks for mentioning this new channel over on Geography King. I’ve subscribed with notifications turned on.
Hi Kyle, just a small correction, on the map where you're pointing west to Yolo County that is actually Sacramento county. It might still effect Yolo county, but that's further north.
Personally, living in Los Angeles, I don't feel it's my place to take a strong side one way or another. I imagine the investors are interested in building a desirable community on (relatively) cheap land and then retaining ownership of much of it to either lease, rent, or sell later when prices inevitably increase. The Irvine Company owns lots of property in Irvine, CA, another planned community. This will probably look pretty similar if it gets built, but maybe less car-centric than Irvine.
IMO if the private developers want to pay for a modern, fast electrified train system to connect the new city to both Sacramento and SF, and build & fund public transit in the area, then they should be allowed to build. Otherwise it is just contributing to more exutban car-depemdant sprawl.
BART would have to have a role in this, or at least rail of some sort. I'd like to think that the types of people who would want to live in a city like this would be more mass-transit oriented and not be looking to drive long distances in traffic.
I vote no. It is absolutely urban sprawl at its worst. Screw these billionaires.
400,000 people with no mass transportation plans to either of the cities it is trying to be an exurb of. That's not a good plan. All it will mean is another 100,000 cars going each way on the highways.
It worked for Los Angeles and San Jose. They just need to ban walking so all the parks and sidewalks will become wide roads full of potholes!
@@WanderingVincentgenius!
I'd say Caltrans would have to build a new Pittsburg-Collinsville Bridge or something to connect that new development to the outer east bay, and hopefully put BART tracks on the bridge too. Of course those are huge chores, but with ~400,000 projected residents that close to ~425,000 existing folks between Concord and Brentwood with no direct connection between them; and with all the business, trade, deliveries, and commuting to new and existing jobs that would flow between the two; I don't see that new city existing too sustainably if the already-clogged thoroughfares surrounding it receive even more pressure from this area (regardless of origin or destination) or if trips between the areas have to travel way out to Benicia or Antioch and then back around. Hopefully the civil/transportation/planning folks thought about this...
You are so right. One of the first things l thought about. That bridge would obviously be needed were this massive project be approved which it won't. Doubtful even enough sgnatures will be gathered to get it on a ballot anyway. But the carpetbagger landgrabbers won't ever pay the billons of dollars for transportation upgrades so the whole idea will fail.
Yes, even if not in my backyard 😃 it's simple: we need to build more, so i support any initiative that builds more. It will easily pay off just by selling the property with increased land value (if it works out)
Renting the property out is far more profitable; I expect that the end game for the investors here is to build a 100% renters city that will generate half a billion in rent every month, in perpetuity.
@@andreirachko I didn't consider this option. Thanks for pointing it out
this was great, i knew about this project but didn't have much details on it so didn't know what to think really. putting it out there as well as taking both sides of a debate for and against it really helped clear up stuff for me.
personally i don't think exurban sprawl is great, but if we have to have it, it can at least try to be a walkable, sustainable one. maybe if it succeeds it'll convince more developers to do less auto-oriented types of surburban/exurban development, and/or convince NIMBYs of the value of denser infill in the cities closer into the SF/SJ metro.
i also wonder if from the billionaire side they're really banking on doing a lot of the rental development themselves (commercial or residential). if they actually make a 400k city happen, that's a lot of land value creation they'd be able to suck up themselves via rent.
@@harktischris400k would double Solano County's population. Ridiculous. Ain't gonna ever happen. LOL!
@davidjackson7281 they'll hand out green cards to make it happen
@@longiusaescius2537Now that would work 😂
I had no idea you had a second channel. This is great.
Kyle, thank you for this piece - very well researched and well produced. You bring a wealth of expertise and common sense to the narrative.
I am a native of Rio Vista, born in the 1950’s, UC Berkeley educated, and lived in the Bay Area and East Coast (New York City) for major periods. I worked on Wall Street for 20 years.. Though I left long ago and haven’t lived there since, my younger brother remained and built his family and business there, and not only does he know everyone there, but he and his wife have been involved in local politics for many years.
My grandfather was one of six brothers that emigrated from Ireland over 100 years ago. What brought them to Rio Vista was that one of them developed a relationship with the US Army Corps of Engineers that resulted in them having a major collaboration in the design and construction of the Deep Water Channel project that extended major freight shipping lanes to Sacramento and Stockton. As a result, global markets opened up for agriculture in Yolo and Sacramento Counties which led to, among other things, the export of rice produced in the Sacramento River flood plain in Yolo County west of Sacramento to Asian markets. Yes that’s right - a significant portion of rice consumed in China is from Yolo County, which has been the case for decades.
Your point about water is major one, and somewhat ironic as well. Big money interests have been stealing that for years though the CA Water Project, and now doubling down with Twin Tunnels.
And about “altruistic” wealthy investors - just ask the land owners who elect not to sell. They are now getting sued for price gouging and collusion for the mere act of exercising their right not to sell. These investors are trying to create synthetic eminent domain and have the money to bleed the on legal defense for spurious court actions.
And finally, that area is a major wind corridor. That area is downwind from the break in the Coast Range mountains (remember the Bernoulli Principle in science?) created by San Francisco Bay and the Carquinez Strait. The prevailing west winds accelerate through that area and whatever ground moisture gets completely desiccated. The utopian images are laughable. Travis Airfare Base, just upwind from the site, is ideally situated as one of the world’s most ideal takeoff points for huge military transport aircraft, like the C-5A and its descendents, which have a large installation there. So it’s either steady high wind, jet exhaust polluted air, or both. Good luck Goldman Sachs!
And I swear this in the final point -- Suisun is pronounced "sue-soon". Ha - I guess the investors knew that in advance!
Since being a so called WallStreet boywonder trader from a foreign country for a mere two lucky years Jan for the next 15 years appears to have had little to no success from subsequent endeavors. A financial never really was and now a current has been. His admiration of Ayn Rand is simplistic and naive. Arrogantly he assumes no one can stop him. Guaranteed he wiill get a much deserved swelling down. Native Bay Arean and Old Blue here and now a proud RV resident since 2018.
No matter how much they plan for and consider, there would likely be a lot of unforseen issues with water, wind, and ag.
@@CaliforniaView_Kylel am keeping an open mind about "some" of this project. Rio Vista's location is 20-30 miles from anything such as shopping and services. With a large 55+ community its population of 10,000 is mostly aging, older and old. Another 5,000-10,000 (younger demographic) would bring more to the community, especially better health care.
But plans for initially even 50,000 and let alone maybe eventually up to 400,000 is too much. Solano Co. is now 450,000. Rio Vista and Suisun City are each 7 square miles. Flanery has astonishingly acquired 80 square miles. Hats off for such a 'landgrab'.
Rather than developing near Travis on the northside of Hwy 12, the southside may be more acceptable. lt does border the Suisun Bay. lt could be a short distance from Hwy 113 across to Bay Point and Hwy 4. Would look forward to anymore videos from you on this project.
I was recently in Solano County. There is room to grow out the existing cities. However, I think the cities would prefer to keep their size. Another urban area could be useful. I'm GenX.
Loving the California content. On a somewhat related topic, are you interested in making a video about California City?
Not sure. I haven't been there in a while, but I'd have to cover it from an angle not discussed before.
Forever Utopia is a flawed dream just as California City was. Funny how some never learn from other's mistakes.
thank you kyle
Kyle, have you heard of a new city called Utah City? It will be the new urban core to Provo and Lehi areas (aka silicone slopes) built on the lakefront. To jumpstart it will be a medical research facility with thousands of jobs. With it being on the existing commuter rail line it might be more feasible than the California city.
I hadn't heard about it, but it sounds pretty cool. I'll have to do a little research on it. There are a couple of other projects like this as well that I'm keeping an eye on.
Love the optimistic and pessimistic breakdown! We need homes so although infill would be great, housing is housing!
Would love to see how they integrate BART, SMART and the Capitol Corridor into this!!
I'm not sure if they even discussed BART. Throughout the entire plan, it says nothing about it. But it would have to play a huge role in the new city, and possibly be designed to cater to train riders.
I was not aware of this project, I will be following and researching this. Even though I'm from Ohio. Maybe something like this could happen and succeed in my state. A+ Kyle!
There are a handful of "new city" plans going around the US and world. I think the last new city in the US was Celebration, FL, the Disney city. It's not what I would consider a great development, but it shows it can be done.
Anything funded by private investors raises a huge red flag for me. Of course more specific details of the plan will be released over the course of this year, but I have a strong feeling they're purposefully leaving the "catch" unstated until after voters approve the project (if it gets approved at all, that is).
One huge mistake with a project like this is not integrating it into the existing region, like expanding BART into it as mentioned in the video. Can someone for once build infrastructure first BEFORE people move in and then have to retrofit everything later?? I at least hope they will develop plans to leave space for BART or Amtrak before the city gets built.
Personally if I was doing a project like this I'd want to build a city with no cars at all, or at least use very minimal car infrastructure. This project still looks far too car-centric for my tastes. It would be cool to see someone develop a rail network that incorporates both passenger and cargo lines so that way we don't have to rely on trucks to transport our packages, garbage, recycling, etc.
Well, I hope they make it coherent and not full of strip malls and stroads.
It looks like a typically over-zoned mess, but we'll see.
They just put up the first three houses in this new town
I do think investors and developers should be revitalizing the main streets and downtowns that are already falling apart. Building within the infrastructure and community that is already in place. I’m also ok with building new cities of the future which we need as well. However, as long as boomers are in control of the government positions local, state and federal; this country and its communities within will continue to crumble. Infrastructure is crumbling, housing is lacking, education is failing etc. and the boomers constantly stand in the way of anything new. As other countries progress forward in innovation and future thinking we will continue to fall behind.
Your inner optimist and pessimist is much like mine are except booth of mine often make me wrong, LOL. :)
Kyle if you were in charge of naming the city, what would you go with?
New Stockton, More Vacaville, Solanoburgh, or Springfield.
Could call the new city Cowville.
West Rio Village. Village emotes a walkable, happy township vibe. The locale is only a few miles West of the Sacramento River. With land parcels also acquired on Ryer lsland Flannery has the accompanying Sacramento River water rights.
Almost all privately used land has been funded with private money; this just happens to be newly minted billionaires who are fond of the spotlight. Which is one “altruistic” reason I can see tech billionaires funding this: legacy. Their own companies don’t have as much longevity, even if it carried their name, so at least this is a way to make a permanent impact that won’t be whittled away by newer billionaire capitalists.
I still don’t see what the difference is between a “sustainable” weak town that’s not a lot different from the greenfield developments of the last mid century (a century before this one would reach peak buildout production.
so they want to be like a 21st century Rockefellers I guess.
Your optimism is misplaced:these home are built nowhere near jobs, so residents will pour extra traffic onto Interstate 80.
The only answer is increasing residential density near where jobs are. This doesn’t mean people in Silicon Valley have to live in tall buildings, but current zoning that devotes most of the land to ONLY single-family lots must change.
On the one hand, the town itself is great. On the other, I just don't see how this would pan out. You'd need to get multiple developers to take on billions in debt to construct enough buildings to create a complete city (with jobs, homes, schools, healthcare facilities, etc.). Cities traditionally grew organically: they started out as a small settlement near a river or railroad track and grew over decades as more people and businesses moved in. I just don't see who will finance this thing: given California's construction costs, this project would cost tens or even hundreds of billions of dollars. And I certainly don't want to see taxpayer funds going toward this experiment! If they want to build this, they have every right to (it's their land, after all), but they shouldn't expect a dime of taxpayer funds.
I think these billionaires can actually make billions more off of this if it works. They own the land that would appreciate by a lot when they sell it. If they own all the apartment buildings and collect a whole cities with of rent. Although I'm not sure how much they can make from public utilities I less they can make a profit on them too. I could totally see the huge appeal to live in a place like this. Especially its cheaper. I hope they do it and I want to see how it works.
Imagine the HOA dues to pay for all those walkways, landscaping, 'public' use areas, water features, etc. They expect current taxpayers to pay for the expansion and maintenance of Hwy 12, the only access to their property. Their pictures and ads are idealistic and unrealistic...that's a major wind area (hence all the turbines on those hills). The investors don't plan to incorporate their city because then they'd be legally required to have a local city government, law enforcement/emergency services, and be answerable to state and county government. These billionaires aren't doing this out of the kindness of their hearts; they are looking for high returns on their investment...that's their bottom line. If they were nice people, they wouldn't have sued generational farmers and ranchers for their land.
"Big investor group" is what is wrong with every industry in every developed country in the past couple of decades. And "Silicon Valley" associated to the previous, judging by the past ten or so years, makes it even worse.
So yeah, it's gonna be shit.
Regarding water conservation and whether the project is altruistic: Yes, Las Vegas has successfully shown how water can be recycled 100%. Jan is an avid Ayn Rand devotee. Followers of objectivism believe foremost in the rights of individual man to achieve vs. collectivism. They believe that is to the purest form of altruism. The virtue of selfishness is part of the creed. Perhaps, in other words, think: "greed is good."
This new project would have to utilize water conservation techniques similar to, or improved upon, the techniques used in Vegas. Not sure about the philosophy though. There's Rand/individual on one end of the spectrum and Jesus/community on the other. It's the argument that keeps on giving.
@@CaliforniaView_KyleYes, water is a key issue. Besides using (expensive?) conservation techniques they have bought land on Ryer lsland with Sacramento River water rights. They appear to have considered water to some extent. Another issue is Hwy 12. lt is only two lanes and has a lot of freight truck traffic and is pretty much maxxed out.
The thorniest issue appears to be the very close proximity to Travis AFB. Congressman Garamendi, et al do not give their support which may be what ultimately derails this project.
There are things about Ayn Rand's philosophy l may like but l am suspicious of devotees true goals and objectives. Jan said very directly he will not be stopped. He seems perhaps a bit young and arrogant.
Sounds like shady dealings to me.
Too bad the video creator does not bother to reply at all to viewers comments. Perhaps his silence speaks volumes.
I've been out of the country for 2 weeks and am just now getting caught up on comments, messages, and emails. As this is my secondary channel, I catch up on main channel stuff first, but I do usually read and respond to comments.
@@CaliforniaView_KylePlease pardon my impatience. Glad you are back. Thank you for the replies. This is an interesting topic.
Strong local opposition to this project. My guess? IT WILL NOT HAPPEN!
A NEW CITY in california? What a joke!
There's no water.
There's no roads.
CA building regulations will expand the costs beyond possibility and delay construction for generations.
The CA unions will strike when illegals are used for construction - and construction will be suspended decades during legal action.
Even if a hospital is approved and built there are not enough avaialble physicians, nurses, technicians available. Plus the hospital will go broke a year after opening from being forced to treat Medi-cal and indigent patients for low pay or no pay.
The absurd demands about environmental concerns are insurmountable.
There aren't sufficient truckers with electric vehicles to bring in staff and building supplies.
Ad infinitum and ad nauseum
Totally impossible. The phrase: "hoisted upon it's own petard" fits here for the socialist failure know as california.
meds, immediately
Abolish NEPA and reverse laws passed in the 70s