2000 Marin Street Site

Home Depot filed an application to build a 120,000 square foot store at 2000 Marin Street on the northern edge of Bayview two years ago, four years after having walked away from a decade long battle to develop the former Goodman Lumber site on Bayshore Boulevard.  Lowe’s subsequently developed the Bayshore site.

The 2000 Marin Street parcel which measures nearly 8-acres and fronts Cesar Chavez between Evans and I-280 is the former site of a printing facility for the San Francisco Chronicle which is owned by Hearst.

Citing significant increases in projected construction costs, Home Depot has now put the development of 2000 Marin Street “on hold,” according to the Chronicle.

Hearst declined to comment on their discussions with Home Depot nor the status of their agreement for the parcel, and Home Depot has yet to withdraw it application with Planning, but 8-acres of underdeveloped land could be up for grabs.

Recent Articles

Comments from “Plugged-In” Readers

  1. Posted by Alvin

    That is disappointing to hear. Home Depot has spent decades of time and money trying to develop unused parcels to no avail. It is embarrassing to hear Supervisor Malia Cohen have no support of improving her own district (taxes, infrastructure, jobs). The store would have activated the street (more than it currently is) instead of just being an on-ramp/off-ramp to the Mission or highways. I hope Home Depot finds a way to restart the project or this area will stay stagnant as empty buildings and fenced parking lots.

  2. Posted by BTinSF

    Somebody from Planning needs to tell them to fish or cut bait. Their indecision is getting very annoying. It would be nice to have a Home Depot in San Francisco but not at the expense of having an undeveloped 8 acre lot sit empty for years while they dither. And “Oh by the way”, let them know this “It’s getting more expensive the longer we wait” phenomenon is something with which every San Franciscan is familiar.

  3. Posted by Dewayne

    I never understood why they wanted to build at that location with Lowe’s being so close by anyway

    • Posted by SFrentier

      Yeah…me too. In my eyes, HD and Lowe’s, basically same-same. But I guess I wouldn’t mind an HD so near. I could always price shop between the two and arbitrage per item given that they’d be so close to each other. Probably no other location would have them less than a mile away from each other.

      • Posted by woolie

        In the rest of the country, it’s extremely common for Lowe’s and Home Depot to be practically adjacent. In Houston, there were multiple instances of having both within a half mile of each other. The inventories are not totally identical; helpful if one was out of stock, or didn’t carry a certain item.

  4. Posted by oscar

    Super disappointing. I hate the Lowe’s on bayshore. I’d come to this Home Depot in a heart beat. This would totally beat having to drive down to Colma or Daly City.

  5. Posted by R

    I always fantasize about the handful of creeks / channels being reconstructed and flowing further into the city one day. Wish we had better access to them.

    • Posted by friscan

      This shouldn’t just be a pipe dream — or an uncover-the-pipe dream. Separating the storm water from sewer is a long-term, cost-effective goal of PUCs, and no corridor is better to start with than Islais Creek. On the west end, the Glen Park Plan calls for daylighting the creek from the Canyon through to San Jose Avenue. Midpoint daylighting already kinda in effect near the Alemany HOPE SF. If this site saw the channel/creek extend west, then the last steps would be connecting the 3 gaps in the overall watershed.

  6. Posted by anon

    A large safeway would even be a better use. Do something akin to the Potrero Center with anchor grocery, chain coffee shop, some other smaller retailers. Not sure how much can be squeezed into that land. As a Bayview resident, I can tell you there are minimal grocery options. Safeway at Potrero Center, or Mission St. Bernal Location, Good Life stores on Cortland and in Potrero Hill, and the Whole Foods in Mission/Potrero. A Southeast SF Safeway store would be fantastic. Here or perhaps on Bayshore by the Lowes.

    • Posted by Sierrajeff

      Good idea – and from Google Maps, this site looks to be about 20% larger than the Potrero Center site. (But let’s put the parking in back, this time, so the center’s a little more neighborhood and pedestrian friendly!)

  7. Posted by Alex740

    I’m glad that the first Home Depot proposal in Visitacion Valley was rejected, the development going in there now is far better for the neighborhood, the city and the region given it’s proximity to Caltrain & the highways. I have similar reservations about this site, it’s a huge parcel in an area that is going to see a lot of redevelopment in the coming years as more industry leaves SF and whatever is built here is going to set the tone for the area. The size of the site makes me think Home Depot might have planned a building with a surface lot and not an urban model which would have ultimately been a wasted opportunity with such a large piece of land.

    This industrial knuckle of space between 101 & 280 is probably a good place for more tax generating formulaic retail but in a city this tight and expensive it should be mixed use to help alleviate with the office and housing crunch. This area although not pretty now, has a lot of potential in it’s location, It’s close to the highways, it’s close to Caltrain stops, it’s very accesible to downtown and SOMA, and it’s next to or near a lot of really hot areas for SF tech workers to live and work.

  8. Posted by invented

    1. Rezone this parcel for mixed-use. Read what’s taking place up and down 3rd and link Cesar Chavez into the goodness. Thinking live/work.

    2. Lowe’s is a wholly unpleasant mismanaged creepyplace. Go to the S. San Franc to maintain your sanity. Dublin one is fab too. I am stumped that Corporate hasn’t gotten their hands on the Bayshore site yet. Go and see what passes. I want to rave about it but each time I go I seem to forget just how bad it is. Service, clerks, check-out mess, incessant blasting PA system and on. Replace all management ASAP and give the place a chance. At your own risk.

    • Posted by soccermom

      Sorry, nope on the rezone, PDR is sacred, sacred, avowed enemy of live/work. Parcel is also within a ‘Special Industrial Protection Zone.’ From Section 249.22:

      ” (b) Controls.
      (1) General. The provisions of the M-1 and M-2 use districts established by Section 201 of this Code shall prevail except as provided in paragraphs (2) and (3) below.
      (2) Housing. In recognition of the need to preserve and protect production, distribution and repair land uses and facilities from competition from housing development, no residential or live/work development or conversion to such uses shall be allowed in the Industrial Protection Zone Special Use District.
      (3) Office. In recognition of the need to preserve and protect production, distribution and repair land uses and facilities from competition from office development, no new office development or conversion to office shall be allowed in the Industrial Protection Zone Special Use District except where such office space is determined to be accessory to a permitted industrial use.”

      • Posted by Alex740

        Damn, there goes my idea too. Thanks for posting!

      • Posted by Sierrajeff

        Ugh – San Francisco, trying to preserve industrial use, when cities such as Detroit and Youngstown can’t even give away industrial sites… Does the NYC government try to preserve industrial areas in Manhattan? Of course not. So what possible rationale is there for small-parcel industrial in an urban core as dense and as expensive as this?!

        • Posted by Alex740

          I agree, in a city this pricey what’s the point in manufacturing here? Plus, while it’s unfortunate, the sad reality is that those working in these shops probably can’t even afford to live here anymore so how convenient is it even for them?

      • Posted by Alex740

        So if Home Depot was thinking they could build here, is that retail use allowed under this zoning? Seems unfortunate that in such a dense and expensive urban environment we would not allow work/live projects to protect industrial but then allow big box retailers. With the price of land I would think eventually all of these industrial uses will disappear eventually and then will the only allowable option be retail?

    • Posted by SFrentier

      I’m not, exactly, an expert on big box stores, but whot’s wrong with the bayshore lowes?

  9. Posted by invented

    What an education I get here. And I’m (obviously) way not in the business of Planning or related. Just an urban flaneur willing SF to become. Thanks for the info.

  10. Posted by d-b

    How about a Walmart?

  11. Posted by BetterSF

    It can have office towers for tech companies, it can have coffee shops and restaurants, it could have apartments and condos.

    Call the SF supervisors to abandon the silly “industrial protection” zone. Why do you want to keep pollutions in a world class city? Industrial use is so 2 centuries ago. Are SF supervisors all 200 years old?

  12. Posted by joy

    This area is perfect for all the big box companies. Come on SF let the city grow and improve. No other city is having this luck. You should be honored that there are jobs being created and that companies are wanting to move in an improve properties.

Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *