Back in 1940, four single-story industrial buildings were built upon 17 acres in west Bayview, a total of just under 450,000 square feet of building space which is currently 96 percent leased and bisected by I-280 in the southern part of San Francisco.


On the market since the end of last year, the LaSalle Industrial Park represents the largest industrial redevelopment opportunity in San Francisco in over a decade.

Considering the site is zoned for development up to 65 feet in height, as is much of the surrounding area, one can’t help but wonder if the real opportunity, however, extends well beyond the site’s redevelopment to a higher class of industrial use.

20 thoughts on “17 Acres of Opportunity in San Francisco, and Then Some”
  1. What’s required to qualify as industrial use? Does it require that manufacturing take place? If so then the sad situation is that you can’t live in SF on the wage of a manufacturing floor employee.

  2. you can live in many affordable areas and drive here within an hour. Why would the people who work at a manufacturing plant in the city need to live in the city?

  3. Oh, okay, Jill. I guess SF is only for the wealthy. All yours then…along with the homeless, drug problems and filth that manage to remain in spite of the hefty price tag of living in the city by the bay.

  4. Jill, are you parodying upper class entitlement and sociopathy, or are you the real deal?
    Qu’ils mangent de la brioche!

  5. Does the Socketsite writer have a specific “higher class of industrial use” in mind, or is he thinking the commenters will come up with something creative?
    Ok, well how about a giant multi-story 3d-printing factory warehouse with delivery-drone landing pads on the roof? Instant-custom products delivered to your door within an hour of ordering? Google, Amazon, who’s up for this?

  6. How about HQ for ‘the Internet of things’, and build prototypes of those things on it. Throw in some 3D printing, delivery drones, etc. and I’m sure you could give it a high tech twist, worthy of an SF-leading-edge moniker. Otherwise….yawn.

  7. 20 years ago when I worked on Custer just north of here I remember the area around the sewage plant as not a nice place to be. Have the odors been eliminated?

  8. “you can live in many affordable areas and drive here within an hour.”
    An hour commute each way is an awful way to live. Clearly you don’t have a family. This reminds me of the mentality on other threads where people tell poor immigrants to just move to Temecula when they get evicted from the Mission.
    The issue though is increasingly if all the bakeries and truck yards and stuff like that are in the East Bay prices go up for San Franciscans. SSF is increasingly filled with biotech so it is getting crowded. I guess the market is best at sorting it all out but it is still concerning.

  9. The market would happily provide housing for folks of lesser means in SF or Marin or San Mateo if we’d let it.
    That would require much higher density and heights close by though, so we can’t have that.
    Everyone just seems to want cheap housing close in for lower income folks, but without changing anything about the things that they like.
    I definitely don’t want folks of any means having to commute an hour each way, which is why I support dropping all height/bulk/density restrictions on zoning. I’m fine with keeping the actually useful pieces of zoning, but the height/bulk/density restrictions are just modern day versions of redlining.

  10. wow is there a progressive element developing on socketsite? i cannot recall having read here any protest against the ideology of high and best use to the highest and best person (economiclly speaking)

  11. “Does the Socketsite writer have a specific “higher class of industrial use” in mind, or is he thinking the commenters will come up with something creative?”
    My intrepetation was that “higher class” was referring to if someone might build something there that made use of the 65 foot height limit it is zoned for compared to the single story buildings that are there now.

  12. Maybe live/work lofts? that’ll work well with the caltrain station planned for Oakdale and the improvements to the water treatment plant (should eliminate any odors). I can’t imagine any sort of manufacturing investing here anymore. too expensive

  13. im not classist. we live in a market based economy, so think the market should sort out who lives where. if tech is providing a ton of new high paid jobs, why is it bad for tech workers to buy homes here. Also, i still dont get why 1 hr commute each way is that bad. I did it for years and so do many others. Over 1 hr gets bad, but 50 mins is not a bad commute. daly city is not too outrageous and neither are many areas of Oakland. I just never understood why people who work in SF have a RIGHT to live there. Capialism is about competition. if a 25 yo google worker outbids a 50yo teacher for a home, who am i to complain?
    rent control also is a big problem that keeps rents abnormally high and it should be at least means tested, so those making over the median ($80K for a family) are no able to qualify. an immediate repeal would bring rental prices down to an equilibrium. Same for prop 13 with home sales.
    also the low building height zoning in many parts of SF create “price” problems. Western SOMA may be the best example of a plan that is WAY underzoned

  14. @Jill Daly City and parts of Oakland may be more affordable when compared to SF but listings there are still getting multiple offers and selling price is often above asking. It’s not so simple. The housing crisis here is regional.

  15. Manufacturing? In San Francisco? Where?
    I can’t say with absolute certainty, but I’m guessing that there hasn’t been much manufacturing happening on a large scale in San Francisco since around the Second World War.

Leave a Reply

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