Plans to level the long-standing Wells Fargo branch building at 2055 Chestnut Street in the Marina, which was built for Crocker Bank in 1974, have been drafted.

As envisioned by the Prado Group, a three-story building will rise up to 40 feet in height across the site which stretches from Chestnut to Lombard.

And as designed by Jensen Architects, the development would yield a total 44 apartments over nearly 34,000 square feet of new retail space fronting both Chestnut and Lombard and a basement garage for 24 cars and around 50 bikes with its entrance on Lombard.

We’ll keep you posted and plugged-in.

Recent Articles

Comments from “Plugged-In” Readers

  1. Posted by Amewsed

    Glad to hear since retail banking is scaling back. Of course, a bank could always move into the new retail space if there is sufficient demand. Again, a higher and better use for the space.

    • Posted by Hunter

      yeah, we really do not need suburban drive-thru banks with parking lots in SF (or anywhere for that matter). The two kitty corner at 4th and Brannan(WF & BoA) really need to go as well.

      • Posted by Mark

        Or suburban style grocery stores surrounded by parking adjacent to 5 Muni light rail lines.

        • Posted by Carlottavaldez

          You could add one historic streetcar and two bus lines, plus a short walk to BART. It’s amazing that site isn’t something better. It’s a sort of glaring bellwether monument of sorts.

        • Posted by mission-ite

          Groceries are a lot harder to carry than money

          • Posted by Mark

            No, not really. Try living in NYC. People do it all the time minus a car. Most grocery stores deliver too.

  2. Posted by Denis

    Looks great! I do wish the city would up-zone Lombard slightly, but I’ll take what we can get. Any new development along this stretch it more than welcome. Bring on the renderings for the now shuttered IHOP location!!

  3. Posted by Homer

    Good plan, but this could easily be 2 more floors without being out of place at all

  4. Posted by Miraloma Man

    Jensen does really nice work…. they’re right up there in my top three list of local architecture firms.

  5. Posted by Eddy

    More parking and more height. Hope it has a roof deck

  6. Posted by JWS

    I have been eyeing this lot for YEARS and am happy to see a plan here, but given the size of that lot I’m disappointed it’s only 44 units. Would have loved to see them utilize the state density bonus law to try to match the height of the five-story building across the street and double the units. If you Google Earth the lot it’s huge.

    • Posted by Tamas

      Yeah, I’m really surprised they’re only going for 44 units. It’s a huge lot that’s the full depth of the block. It would be great to have this be 5 floors.

    • Posted by SocketSite

      The project as proposed rises to the height limit for the site as currently zoned. And in fact, the proposed density of 44 units is two (2) more than principally allowed without the approval of a Planned Unit Development (which would allow for a maximum of 58).

  7. Posted by Bruce Colman

    per the Nextdoor Neighbor site for the Marina district, local activists are planning to fight this, arguing that the neighborhood needs parking more than housing – parking for merchant-access, as near as I can tell. I hope the YIMBY folks get behind the project.

  8. Posted by Maura

    Just more housing to accomodate the upper income peter pans that we are all tired of. One more building to add to the “gated community”. Nothing for families, seniors or middle class aka the working poor. I would rather look at the bank and tree.

    • Posted by Michelle

      I couldn’t agree more. It is out of control. Don’t recognize my city anymore.

    • Posted by Mark

      There are beautiful places to live outside of the Bay Area bubble that are aesthetically pleasing and more affordable…and have great jobs.

    • Posted by primeminister

      The definition of NIMBY.

      • Posted by Mark

        Wrong. NIMBYs don’t want any change. Maura addresses a concern for housing for families, seniors and disappearing middle class. That’s hardly NIMBY. At least she puts more emphasis on it than the progressives who continuously make SF unaffordable for more and more residents.

        • Posted by primeminister

          Please read the final sentence.

        • Posted by spencer

          she prefers a tree over housing. i think shes a full fledged nimby. building housing for new people keeps them from taking away housing that someone with less means currently occupies. agree need more affordable housing but market rate housing is still a net good.

          • Posted by Creamsicle Chevrolet

            No, she prefers a tree over *this* proposed project. Read it again. If she were a real NIMBY, she’d oppose *any* housing project for that spot.

  9. Posted by A Christie

    That’s one ugly building; Corporate housing for corporate slaves. The architects version of the college prank: How many people can we fit in a phone booth?

    • Posted by SocketSite

      As a matter of fact, the one-bedrooms would average around 650 square feet, the twos around 1,000 square feet with two baths, and the threes around 1,100 square feet with two baths as proposed.

      And yes, the plans include a common roof deck fronting Chestnut Street along with multiple mid-block courtyards to provide light, air and sheltered patio space between the units.

  10. Posted by derrysf

    Despite the fact that no one is being displaced, this project will be DR’d into oblivion.

Add a Comment

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