Title
Study Session on the Future Development of the Main Street Neighborhood North Area in Alameda Point. In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), this study session is categorically exempt from further environmental review pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15262 (Feasibility and Planning Studies)
Body
To: Planning Board
From: Abigail Thorne-Lyman, Base Reuse and Economic Development Director
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Base Reuse and Economic Development is exploring the possibility of releasing a developer Request for Qualifications (“RFQ”) in late 2026/early 2027 for the redevelopment of the Main Street Neighborhood North (“MSNN”) area at Alameda Point. Staff are seeking feedback from the Planning Board, Historic Advisory Board (“HAB”), and City Council to help establish clear land use, development, and planning priorities that can be incorporated into this potential RFQ.
The purpose of this study session is to provide the Planning Board (“PB”) with an update regarding preliminary development feasibility analysis for the MSNN area, which staff initially introduced during a December 6, 2025, joint workshop and walking tour with the City Council, HAB, and PB, and to receive feedback regarding future planning priorities, land use considerations, development assumptions, and implementation strategies. Staff encourage Planning Board members and community members to review the Main Street Neighborhood Specific Plan and other Alameda Point planning, zoning, environmental, and historic preservation documents, which are available on the City’s Alameda Point webpage: <https://www.alamedaca.gov/Departments/Alameda-Point>. Several policy questions for the PB are included in the Discussion section of this staff report and will be the core topics of the Study Session.
MSNN is generally bounded by Main Street to the north and east, West Midway Avenue to the south, and Pan Am Way to the west. Staff has also incorporated into the MSNN feasibility study area the area generally bounded by Main Street, Pan Am Way, Essex Drive, and Lexington Avenue, including the Chapel, Theater, and Albert H. DeWitt Officers’ Club (“O’Club”). This expanded study area also includes the “North Shore” area, located immediately west of the O’Club and generally bounded by Main Street, West Red Line Avenue, and Navy Way.
As part of the feasibility analysis, staff is also evaluating, and discussing with the Alameda Unified School District (“AUSD”), whether certain District-owned properties - including Building 17 and 101 and 102 West Red Line Avenue - should be included in the MSNN developer Request for Qualifications (“RFQ”). Buildings 101 and 102 West Red Line Avenue were previously approved for demolition in connection with the transfer of the properties from the U.S. Navy.
Since the December 2025 workshop, City staff and consultants have continued evaluating redevelopment feasibility, infrastructure requirements, land use assumptions, historic preservation considerations, open space planning, and implementation challenges associated with the MSNN area. Initial findings suggest that redevelopment of the area will require the City to evaluate tradeoffs between housing production, historic preservation, open space objectives, infrastructure costs, flood adaptation requirements, and overall project feasibility.
No formal policy decisions or project approvals are being requested at this time.
BACKGROUND
The Main Street Neighborhood North (“MSNN”) area encompasses roughly 31 acres generally bounded by West Midway Avenue to the south, Main Street to the north and east, and Pan Am Way to the west. The City originally envisioned residential development in this area through the Main Street Neighborhood Specific Plan (“Specific Plan”), which focused on revitalization and redevelopment north of West Midway Avenue and generally west of Main Street. The Specific Plan is attached to this staff report as Exhibit 2.
Staff has also incorporated into the MSNN feasibility study area the area generally bounded by Main Street, Pan Am Way, Essex Drive, and Lexington Avenue, including the Chapel, Theater, and Albert H. DeWitt Officers’ Club (“O’Club”). As part of the feasibility analysis, staff is also evaluating and discussing with the Alameda Unified School District (“AUSD”) whether certain District-owned properties - including Building 17 and 101 and 102 West Red Line Avenue - should be included in a future development solicitation area.
Zoning
The Main Street Neighborhood Specific Plan and Alameda Point-Main Street (“AP-MS”) zoning regulations contemplate a mix of historic preservation, adaptive reuse, infill development, residential uses, and limited neighborhood-serving commercial and community-serving uses within the MSNN area, with a variety of housing types and building heights generally ranging from two to four stories. The Specific Plan also contemplates a walkable neighborhood pattern that includes parks, open space, shoreline access, neighborhood-serving uses, and multimodal connections to surrounding Alameda Point neighborhoods, the waterfront, and future transit connections, including the Main Street Ferry Terminal.
The “North Shore” area and properties west of Pan Am Way, including the O’Club, Chapel, Theater, and certain AUSD properties, are outside the Main Street Neighborhood Specific Plan area and are instead governed by the Alameda Point-Adaptive Reuse (“AP-AR”) zoning regulations. Existing AP-AR zoning generally allows adaptive reuse, commercial, institutional, assembly, waterfront, and community-serving uses, but does not currently allow new residential development, with the exception of the reuse of Building 17, the Bachelor Officers’ Quarters (BOQ) between West Midway, West Essex, Todd Street and Pan Am Way. Future redevelopment of portions of these areas may require rezoning or other land use modifications.
Housing Element/Housing Production
The 2023-2031 Citywide Housing Element identifies the Site A and West Midway/RESHAP areas as the locations accommodating 2,094 of the 5,353 housing units needed in this Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) Cycle, with the remainder of the units accommodated in areas outside of Alameda Point. The MSNN area is not currently identified as a Housing Element opportunity site during this cycle. Additionally, the current RHNA Cycle ends in 2031, and given the slow pace of development, staff believe that units developed here would more likely count toward the next Housing Element cycle.
Open Space and Community-Serving Uses
The Main Street Neighborhood Specific Plan contemplates a substantial acreage of parks, open space, shoreline access, urban agriculture, and community-serving uses within the MSNN area, including a large central park and greenway concept and the continued operation of the Alameda Point Collaborative (“APC”) farm and Ploughshares Nursery properties. As staff and consultants have continued feasibility analysis, questions have emerged regarding the size, configuration, location, long-term maintenance, and financial implications of planned open space and community-serving uses within MSNN. These issues raise broader planning questions regarding the amount, location, maintenance, and long-term viability of planned open space and community-serving uses within the MSNN area.
Historic District Overlay
The MSNN area and adjacent areas being evaluated as part of the broader feasibility analysis include portions of the former Naval Air Station Alameda Historic District and contain both contributing and non-contributing historic resources. Historic resources associated with the study area include the “Big Whites” neighborhood, bungalow/NCO residential area, Building 17, the O’Club, and potentially the Chapel and Theater properties.
A study session with the Historic Advisory Board (“HAB”) regarding historic preservation considerations within the MSNN area is scheduled for June 4, 2026. The HAB staff report, available at the following link, contains additional information regarding historic resources, preservation considerations, and a separate list of questions and issues pertinent to HAB’s jurisdiction:
https://alameda.legistar.com/MeetingDetail.aspx?ID=1409164&GUID=BFAE4359-195D-4CF8-B16A-F2A0AD71E277&Options=info|&Search= <https://alameda.legistar.com/MeetingDetail.aspx?ID=1409164&GUID=BFAE4359-195D-4CF8-B16A-F2A0AD71E277&Options=info%7C&Search=>
Following the meeting, a recording of the HAB study session will be posted on the City's website and will provide additional detail regarding HAB’s discussion of historic preservation considerations associated with the MSNN area.
December 2025 Joint Study Session and Walking Tour
On December 6, 2025, the City Council, Historic Advisory Board (“HAB”), and Planning Board (“PB”) participated in a joint study session and public walking tour regarding the MSNN area. Staff presented the broader redevelopment context at Alameda Point, existing site conditions, planning assumptions within the Specific Plan, historic preservation considerations, sea level rise and flooding concerns, redevelopment sequencing, and preliminary redevelopment opportunities and constraints.
Staff emphasized that redevelopment of the MSNN area would require additional analysis and planning before the City could consider selecting a development partner.
Technical and Implementation Challenges
Since the December 2025 workshop, staff and consultants have continued evaluating infrastructure requirements, rehabilitation costs, development scenarios, and overall site feasibility.
The City and its consultants have identified several significant technical and implementation challenges associated with redevelopment of the MSNN area, including:
• Rehabilitation costs associated with historic structures
• Flooding and sea level rise adaptation requirements
• Significant infrastructure replacement and upgrade needs
• Limited connectivity to the Main Street Ferry Terminal
• Tenant engagement and consideration of options for City-managed properties
• Complex development phasing requirements
• Affordable housing obligations and Navy payment obligations
• Development financing and market constraints
• A large regional queue of market-rate and affordable housing projects competing for labor, financing, and construction resources
Development Economics and Feasibility
The redevelopment feasibility of the MSNN area is also influenced by several Alameda Point-specific development constraints, including the “Navy fee” established under the City’s conveyance agreements with the U.S. Navy. Because the level of residential development currently being studied for MSNN would likely trigger the Navy fee, future redevelopment concepts will need to account for these additional costs. The relationship between housing density, infrastructure obligations, historic preservation requirements, and Navy payment obligations is an important component of the City’s ongoing feasibility analysis.
Staff have completed additional analysis of these issues, which is discussed below.
DISCUSSION
Strategic Considerations for Selecting a Developer Now
Staff believes there are significant benefits to advancing redevelopment planning now, including:
• Allowing the City to proactively establish priorities before selecting development partner(s)
• Coordinating redevelopment sequencing with RESHAP and West Midway implementation, since the projects are interconnected
• Identifying infrastructure funding opportunities that may improve project feasibility and attract prospective development partners
• Positioning the City to begin discussions with development teams during the current market cycle, instead of selecting a developer at the height of the market.
• Finding solutions to the area’s complex problems in the context of an actual development proposal, rather than as an abstract exercise.
Feedback received during the December 2025 workshop generally reflected support for continuing to explore redevelopment opportunities in the MSNN area while balancing housing production, historic preservation, neighborhood character, infrastructure limitations, and implementation realities.
Overall Redevelopment Feasibility and Infrastructure Challenges
Based on preliminary feasibility analysis completed by staff and consultants, approximately 600 to 1,000 existing and new residential units could potentially be accommodated within the broader MSNN area under different redevelopment scenarios.
Redevelopment of the MSNN area presents several overarching planning and implementation challenges, including infrastructure replacement needs, flood adaptation requirements, shoreline improvements, development financing constraints, circulation and connectivity issues, historic preservation considerations, development phasing, and overall project feasibility. The scale and complexity of these issues may require the City to reevaluate portions of the Main Street Neighborhood Specific Plan and consider whether additional planning flexibility may be appropriate in certain areas which are raised below.
Density, Feasibility, and Alameda Point Development Requirements
One finding from the City's preliminary feasibility analysis is that increasing density does not necessarily make redevelopment of the MSNN area more financially feasible.
Development at Alameda Point is subject to costs and obligations that do not typically apply to residential development elsewhere in Alameda or in many other jurisdictions. Among these obligations are the requirement that 25% of all newly constructed housing units be affordable, as established by the 2001 Renewed Hope Settlement Agreement. Under the Agreement, 10% of all newly constructed housing units must be affordable to households earning no more than 80% of Area Median Income ("AMI"), while the remaining 15% must be affordable at income levels specified in the Agreement. This requirement exceeds the City's standard inclusionary housing requirement of 15% affordable units applicable in most other parts of Alameda.
Development at Alameda Point is also subject to payments to the U.S. Navy required under the agreements governing conveyance of land to the City. The City is required to make conveyance payments to the Navy once more than 2,011 market-rate housing units have been developed at Alameda Point. As of the date of this report, approximately 677 market-rate units have been constructed, with another 1,084 entitled, leaving 250 available under the 2,011-unit cap. Depending on the type of housing product, these payments currently range from approximately $45,000 to $75,000 per market-rate housing unit. The current Navy payment obligation may exceed the value of the underlying land in some development scenarios, creating a significant feasibility challenge.
For these reasons, increasing the unit count and density within MSNN does not necessarily improve project feasibility and may, in some cases, reduce it. In addition, higher-density development types can require more expensive construction methods, which may further reduce feasibility.
Staff believes this issue warrants further evaluation as part of any future developer solicitation process. If a future development team establishes a higher-density development concept that is otherwise feasible and consistent with City objectives, the developer might propose an alternative payment approach for the Navy fee, which is a discussion the City would need to facilitate with the Navy.
This raises an important policy question for the City. While higher-density development can advance housing production goals, lower-density development concepts, such as townhomes and other wood-frame housing types, may be more financially viable and therefore more likely to be implemented. Staff are seeking Planning Board feedback regarding the appropriate balance between housing production goals, development density, project feasibility, and other community objectives within the MSNN area.
Development Phasing Considerations
As discussed at the December walking tour, this area is physically constrained in many ways that will affect the phasing and viability of development.
• First and foremost, the area proposed for development includes tenants of both the Alameda Point Collaborative (APC) and of the City of Alameda. The APC housing - with the potential exception of the historic bungalow/non-commissioned officers’ housing (NCO’s) - is envisioned to be demolished and redeveloped as the new, permanent supportive housing in the RESHAP project is built out and tenants are relocated. Because there are four unique residential buildings in RESHAP, this process could take several years given the lagging pace of affordable housing subsidies in the United States.
• Secondly, the timing of the preservation and reuse of the historic Big Whites and bungalows needs to be considered. Staff are working under the assumption that a developer would be able to revitalize and sell these historic homes to generate a boost in revenue in a first phase. But this is more complicated than it seems, as - in order to subdivide and sell these lots - the homes need to be connected to new utilities, requiring a costly backbone street replacement along Pan Am and within the “Beehive” neighborhood. Moreover, the Big Whites are within a 100-year flood plain and have experienced flooding during King Tide events and the groundwater table is extremely high in this area. Federal flood insurance requirements will require additional flood protection measures for these units if restoration exceeds a certain cost.
• Lastly, as with the rest of Alameda Point, the provision of backbone infrastructure will be the largest capital expense for any new development. Backbone streets and all associated wet and dry utilities must be replaced along Pan Am Way, West Red Line Avenue, Saratoga Street, Main Street, and Orion Street. It will be important to phase development in close proximity to the new streets as they are phased in, in order to generate revenue from new units, presenting an extraordinary logic puzzle for a future developer.
Open Space and Community-Serving Uses
Open space and community-serving uses within the MSNN area also raise important planning considerations. The Main Street Neighborhood Specific Plan calls for a large park on West Midway Avenue - the area that will be on a new backbone street once the West Midway development is constructed - as well as retaining the APC farm and nursery properties along Main Street. The new parks and open space areas called for in the plan will bring with them new up front and ongoing maintenance costs, and staff are curious about their necessity and contributions to the area.
“North Shore Area” and AUSD Properties
Additional questions have also emerged regarding including the “North Shore” area - denoted as the area north of West Red Line but south of Main Street, and nearby Alameda Unified School District (“AUSD”) properties in a future RFP. These areas could add greater value as residential neighborhoods while allowing for the possible revitalization of the City’s Officers’ Club (“O’Club”), which is in need of considerable reinvestment. However, existing zoning in most of these areas currently does not allow residential development (with the exception of the Building 17 property).
The North Shore area and northern portions of AUSD properties also face challenges associated with sea level rise vulnerability and soil stabilization needs. The City has received authorization in the 2024 Water Resources Development Act and is seeking appropriations through the Army Corps of Engineers to support the costs of a shoreline stabilization, two new stormwater outfalls and a sea wall adjacent to Main Street, as these costs are prohibitive to any new development.
Moreover, the City is exploring whether to include the Chapel and Theater area along Saratoga Street in a future development. This area would not be redeveloped with new homes, but including these historic properties as a commercial amenity to an otherwise mostly large scale residential development could stimulate reinvestment and reuse.
Study Session Questions and Next Steps
As noted above, staff believe it is appropriate to begin exploring a future developer solicitation process now because redevelopment of the MSNN area will require significant long-term planning, infrastructure coordination, historic preservation analysis, and financial evaluation. Experienced development teams often have the expertise, resources, industry relationships, and access to capital and funding sources necessary to help identify creative solutions for complex and challenging properties such as MSNN.
Staff are not proposing formal zoning amendments or demolition approvals at this time. Instead, staff are envisioning that a future development partner - in partnership with City staff - would bring forth a concrete preservation and redevelopment proposal for Planning Board consideration, including possible rezoning, or re-envisioning of the Main Street Neighborhood Specific Plan context.
The purpose of this Study Session is to help identify City development priorities, articulate areas where the City may be willing to accommodate creative development solutions or future policy flexibility and identify areas where the City’s priorities and policies are firmly established and are baseline requirements for any developer. Staff will collect feedback and create a position document for inclusion in the future RFQ. This document would be brought back for review by Planning Board in a subsequent study session later this year.
Following are questions that staff have identified for feedback by:
1. Height limitations and densities incorporated into the Main Street Specific Plan.
a. Do height limits still align with the Planning Board’s vision or is there an interest in revisiting these as part of a development proposal?
b. If the Navy Fee structure were revised to improve project financial feasibility, would there be greater willingness to consider additional density?
2. Better connectivity to the Main Street Ferry Terminal. Right now, the Specific Plan does not envision this area as a transit-oriented development, where greater densities would be concentrated near the Main Street ferry terminal, and circulation would encourage walking to the terminal. Should this be revisited?
3. Parks and Open Space:
a. Should the City consider removing large central park envisioned in Specific Plan, and instead, exploring smaller, decentralized open space options?
b. If APC were to express an interest in relocating its farm to another part of the MSNN area, how should land use and development potential along Main Street be evaluated in light of existing Specific Plan assumptions?
4. Residential Rezoning:
a. If AUSD is willing to include its properties located between Pan Am, Todd, West Red Line and West Midway, is there openness to allowing new housing on these sites, and if so, what requirements should be considered (height, density, etc.)?
b. Is there openness to expanding residential zoning in the North Shore area, and what requirements should be considered?
5. Affordable Housing Requirements: Under the Renewed Hope Settlement Agreement, no less than 25% of units must be provided for lower income households. Staff are envisioning that this requirement will be delivered similarly to Site A and West Midway/RESHAP, where developer makes a land and infrastructure contribution for one or several standalone affordable projects. But West Midway will construct moderate-income units under its Disposition and Development Agreement. Are there expectations we should set for the developer around the provision of affordable housing?
As the Planning Board reviews the Main Street Neighborhood Specific Plan, Alameda Point zoning regulations, and broader redevelopment context, additional policy considerations or redevelopment questions may emerge that should be discussed during this Study Session.
MUNICIPAL CODE/POLICY DOCUMENT CROSS REFERENCE
This action is consistent with the Alameda Municipal Code. This action is subject to the Levine Act. Relevant documents include:
• NAS Alameda Community Reuse Plan (1996)
• Alameda Point Zoning and Municipal Code Amendments and EIR (2014)
• Alameda Point Master Infrastructure Plan (MIP) (2014)
• Main Street Neighborhood Specific Plan (2014)
• Climate Action and Resiliency Plan (2019)
• MIP Amendment (2020)
• 2040 Citywide General Plan (2021)
RECOMMENDATION
Hold a study session to provide staff with feedback regarding development strategies, future planning priorities, land use considerations, and implementation strategies for the Main Street Neighborhood North Area of Alameda Point.
Respectfully submitted,
Nicole Franklin, Base Reuse Manager
EXHIBITS
Exhibit 1 - December 6, 2025 Alameda Point Housing Update & Walking Tour presentation
Exhibit 2 - Main Street Neighborhood Specific Plan