The Bay Area’s largest planned housing development is stalled again. Will it ever be completed?

But, for now, the project lacks the most basic ingredient a real estate development project requires: a developer. And after what happened recently, it could be years until Concord finds a qualified builder with the means, capacity and desire to take on the $6 billion reuse project, according to experts.

On Jan. 28, for the second time in three years, the five-member Concord City Council voted to essentially fire the developer that the legislative body had previously voted to work with. In a 3-2 vote, the council rejected a term sheet with Concord First Partners, a local East Bay partnership that had been selected in 2021 to enter into talks with the city.

That vote came three years after the council had voted to part ways with Lennar, which had been selected as the master developer in 2016.

The Jan. 28 vote left city staffers scrambling to figure out what is next for the project, the biggest proposed housing development in the Bay Area.

Guy Bjerke, Concord's director of economic development and base reuse, said no decisions have been made about next steps. He said the property owner, the Navy, "continues to be a supporter of the plan and "wants to work to find ways to expedite property transfer." He said there is a slim chance that Brookfield Properties — the runner-up to Concord First Partners in the 2021 "request for qualification" process — could be asked if it is still interested, but cautioned "that is an unlikely choice as the community will want a broader, more transparent process."

"We are evaluating options and will seek council direction in the near future," he said.

That two straight naval weapons station development teams have put thousands of hours into envisioning the project, only to be sent packing, may make it hard to find a new team.

"If you are in the real estate development business and looking at the track record of this project, you are going to be extremely cautious in signing an agreement," said Matt Regan, a vice president of the Bay Area Council, which counts as members several of the groups that have bid on the project.

"The city of Concord has proven again and again that they are a little out of their depth on this project," Regan said. "There are a lot of applicants out there with burned fingers."

Rep. Mark DeSaulnier, who represents Contra Costa County and has been involved in base reuse planning for three decades, said he has become frustrated by the drawn-out process. He said the original reuse plan, passed in 2006, is "wonderful" and"driven by standards that were objective and not driven by individual politics."

"As a private citizen and Concord resident, I am very disappointed," said DeSaulnier, a former Concord City Council member and mayor. "I want (the City Council) to get back to a world-class project that we can all be proud of."

To those who follow Concord politics, the vote was not surprising. Tim McGallian, one of the three council members who had supported Concord First Partners — also a 3-2 vote — lost in last November's election to Laura Nakamura, a candidate who had made it clear she was opposed to the group.

And while Concord First Partners was able to come up with project terms that satisfied Concord planning staff, the group was damaged by the history and reputation of one of the partners, Discovery Builders. That group is headed up by Albert Seeno III, whose family has a long track record of litigation and clashes with city officials and environmentalists across the Bay Area.

Several City Council members mentioned the revelation, reported by the East Bay Times days before the vote, that Seeno had been sued by his 78-year-old father, Albert Seeno Jr., who had accused his son of erratic behavior, improper spending and attempting to freeze other family members out of their own companies.

At Saturday's vote, Seeno defended his track record, downplayed the blood feud and pleaded with council members to make a quick decision. He said the group had held 500 in-person meetings and spent 10,000 hours on the project.

"If you don't want us, you got to set us free," said Seeno. "We have worked our tails off, we have worked our buns to the grindstone, and if you don't want us here, if there is somebody or another group waiting in the wings, you have to have respect for us."

He said he wanted "nothing more than to plan this project."

"You can trash us. You can trash me. You can embarrass me in front of my partners, in front of my union friends," he said. "I'll take it. I won't be happy about it, I don't think it's appropriate…. We are going to do a great job for you."

While Seeno said the family litigation had nothing to do with the Concord project, or his company Discovery Builders, opponents to the project said they were concerned about whether the feud might create liabilities for the reuse development.

In addition, environmental group Save Mount Diablo had objected to aspects of the plan. And affordable housing advocates criticized the fact that the development agreement called for about 20% of the project's 4,000 affordable units to be accessory dwelling units in the back of single-family homes, rather than typical deed-restricted, low-income units in multi-family buildings. Others also objected to the fact that the developer only offered to contribute $50 million toward the affordable housing.

Council Member Nakamura, the deciding vote, said, "We have a world class project in our hand and have an obligation to world class integrity."

"For me this is not about personalities, this is about advocating for what is right for Concord," she said. "The residents of Concord have not agreed to important aspects of this project — quite the opposite."

Regan said that some of the changes by Concord First Partners helped make the project financially feasible. In addition to the ADUs, which are less expensive to build than typical units, the overall number of units was increased by 27%, from 12,272 to 15,585.

Longtime Contra Costa County Democratic strategist Lisa Tucker questioned whether "any legit developer" would take on the project.

"It's certainly been messy," she said. "We are basically building a brand-new city within the city of Concord and it's the largest development in the Bay Area. The stakes are high — that is why it's come under so much scrutiny and people are so passionate about it."

In an interview after the vote, several members of Concord First Partnership said they were sad not to be able to keep working on the development.

"We were fully prepared to commence, at our cost, the planning and engineering for this site," said Louis Parsons of Discovery Bay. "It's disappointing the City Council didn't allow us to commence with that work."

J.K. Dineen is a San Francisco Chronicle staff writer. Email: [email protected] Twitter: @sfjkdineen