Concord Naval Base Deal Falls Apart
- Sarah Klearman
- May 26, 2020
- 6 min read
From 1942 to 2007, the Concord Naval Weapons Station, a two-site 13,000-acre facility in and around the Contra Costa County suburb of Concord, played a significant role in post-World War II national defense. Since its decommissioning in 2007, the base has been the subject of a new battle, this time over its transformation into one of the Bay Area’s largest master-planned developments.
A treaty seemed imminent earlier this year but has given way to a stalemate that could rival that of the Cold War.
In March the Concord City Council was on the verge of approving a $6 billion proposal by Lennar to build almost 13,000 housing units and 5 million square feet of retail and commercial space on roughly half of the 5,028 acres located within the Concord city limits. The other half would be reserved for parks and open space. As is often the case with projects of regional import, Lennar’s proposal met its match in local politics.
But now the project has fallen apart, at least partly because of failed negotiations between the developer, Lennar, and the local Building Trades Council. In mid-March, the city council voted against extending the agreement’s March 31 expiration, effectively killing Lennar’s project. Concord will continue with the project without Lennar and plans to begin its search for a new master developer before the end of this year, assuming the COVID-19 crisis calms.
In 2007, the Navy deemed the facility surplus land in Round 5 of its multiyear Base Realignment and Closure program and stated its intent to transfer the land to the city. Phase one of the development - 500 acres of land to be developed into more than 4,400 housing units – began in 2013. In the housing-strapped Bay Area, the full build-out represents what the city website refers to as a “once in a lifetime opportunity.”
Concord chose Lennar Concord, LLC, and Lennar subsidiary Five Point as the project’s master developer in 2013 – a decision that itself proved divisive for stakeholders who disagreed over how the project’s potential could be best realized.
