The San Francisco Planning Commission is scheduled to vote today on plans for the potential 46-story tower at 536 Mission Street in SoMa, San Francisco. The meeting comes amid recent news that Golden Gate University sold the downtown property for $31.6 million earlier this week. Lincoln Property Company and McCourt Partners are jointly responsible for the proposal.
536 Mission Street office iteration, rendering by SOM
536 Mission Street office iteration pedestrian view, rendering by SOM
536 Mission Street sidewalk view, rendering by SOM
The developers are seeking approval for two 46-story variants, a fully commercial iteration and a mixed-use iteration with offices and housing. The office variant will rise 752 feet tall and include nearly 1.35 million square feet of office space and 4,210 square feet of retail. The three-story basement garage will include parking for 218 bicycles and 64 cars.
Within the commercial variant, the joint venture is considering two further options that balance office and laboratory space. The first option features 813,214 square feet of office space and 403,518 square feet of laboratory space. The second option will offer 555,390 square feet of office space and 661,342 square feet of laboratory space.
The mixed-use variant is expected to rise to around 698 feet, yielding 1.17 million square feet, including 643,500 square feet of offices, 521,450 square feet of housing, and 4,380 square feet of ground-level retail space. Parking will be provided in a four-level basement for 184 cars and 297 bicycles. The project will feature 385 apartments, ranging in size, with 64 studios, 221 one-bedrooms, 60 two-bedrooms, and 40 three-bedrooms. 47 floors.
536 Mission Street office variant elevations, rendering by SOM
536 Mission Street mixed-use variant south and west elevations, rendering by SOM
Golden Gate University, image by Andrew Campbell Nelson
Skidmore Owings & Merrill designed both versions, with no changes since our previous coverage. The mixed-use iteration will split the lower 21 floors into offices, with 25 residential levels on the top floors. The rectilinear tower will feature two articulated setbacks to produce terraced open space for office employees. Residential amenities will be included on the 22nd and 47th floors. Plans for the office iteration show a sculpted tower arching away from the narrow Ecker Street alleyway.
Elsewhere in San Francisco, McCourt Partners entered a joint venture with Related California to lead the development of an office tower at 530 Sansome Street. Earlier this year, the city published the Historic Resource Evaluation, which determined that one of the existing structures is eligible for historic designation as an example of Late Modernist and Brutalist architecture.
536 Mission Street commercial variant aerial view, rendering by SOM
536 Mission Street mixed-use variant aerial view, rendering by SOM
Construction is expected to take around four years from groundbreaking to completion, with foundation work expected to start a year after demolition, and vertical construction starting 18 months after demolition. If built, 536 Mission Street could become the fifth or sixth-tallest building in San Francisco.
The San Francisco Planning Commission is scheduled to meet today, Thursday, September 10th, starting around noon. For more information about how to attend and participate, visit the city website here.
Subscribe to YIMBY’s daily e-mail
Follow YIMBYgram for real-time photo updates
Like YIMBY on Facebook
Follow YIMBY’s Twitter for the latest in YIMBYnews
One of these is the obvious answer that will also help rejuvenate a dead junk of the city. It’d be a major boost to nearby establishments with 400 units.
Or we can go down the route of providing lab space even though an entire tower dedicated to the use sits 80% vacant. We can see the empty floors of 415 Natoma St. Or most of the emptiness of 1450 Owens St. in a trendy neighborhood. Even try the 6+ lab space facilities hugging 101 south of SF.
Do the housing if you want a guaranteed tenant occupying a majority of your project within the year of opening.
Housing is the only type of real estate that is still in shorting.
Offices and retail continue to be in surplus.
This design compares unfavorably with SOM’s two tower Hudson West development in Manhattan which is subtle and actually has created a new city destination. Couldn’t it have a little more dialogue with the neighboring buildings? I always love all the developer specs about what the new building will be. One thing it definitely will be is a large new office building in a city with a very high office vacancy rate. Hope springs eternal for real estate developers…
Oh look, another glass box! And the YIMBros are all about to climax! Yes, build more skyscrapers! We. Must. Pack. In. More. Tech. Bros. Leave no AI Techbros behind is what I say.
The Bay Area needs 40 million more people. Now! Build it!
Fluffy’s answer to a financial district:
Victorian row houses on the same block as some of the world’s most expensive real estate.
We never did say he was sharp.
I don’t know if you have noticed, but San Francisco has one of the best-preserved and largest financial districts in the nation. Have you ever seen Montgomery Street between Market and Washington streets or California Street between The Embarcadero and Kearny Street? Nary a Victorian rowhouse to be seen.
So we’re actually going to analyze things with the level head?
Shall we revisit the first comment you shat out?
If lucky, by unit count and numbers, this tower will maybe get close to 700 residents (not even). A far far far cry from that original number you must’ve sat on your thumb to find.
???? I am sorry, but I don’t understand you. But yes, we need more tech bros, amirite?
They pay more in taxes to this city than your miserable a**. 😂
Try contributing to something.
I can see why no one likes YIMBYs. Sheesh.
Who needs YIMBYs when CA’s congressional representation further slips away?
Clean Air? Clean Water? Protected Federal Land? Accountability?
F*ck all that. Fluffy’s aesthetics aren’t met. Maybe they’ll construct you a tacky arch like Dear Leader’s.
Definitely not giving off “Michael Petrelis” vibes.
You have to be pretty into SF local governmental/public feedback history & minutia to get to get this reference – love that I do. Wouldn’t it be great if it actual was him??
Move to Livermore, you’ll feel better.
Maybe I should move to your hometown and tell your people what to do with their city?
You need to start taking your medication.
Just remember, this knuckle dragger literally believes that surface parking lot at 469 Stevenson formerly used as valet parking for Nordstrom is better as is than as 500 units of housing, 100 of which would have been subsidized. We’re dealing with a eugenics enthusiast who is dumber than roadkill here.
Sorry Anymouse, are you mad?
No, that wasn’t me who wanted to save the parking lot. You’re thinking of someone else.
No, you literally were and still are against the development of that surface lot. You’re just a lying, racist, nativist scumbag. And on top of all that you’re a pathetic loser in both the personal sense and the political sense.
Anymouse, no, you are incorrect. I support developing parking lots in principle. You are either stupid or lying, or both.
You have a very unpleasant personality. I am getting definite incel vibes here. Par for the course for you YIMBros I guess.
Absolute madness to consider more commercial space with all that remains empty in San Francisco. WE NEED AFFORDABLE PLACES TO LIVE to be built. I grew up in this City and am saddened that you have to be rich to live here. This is not the SF I knew and love!
How many stories? Mixed use? 385 units (64 studios, 221 – 1bdrm, 60 2-bdrm, 40 3-bdrm) and space for 184 cars and 297 bikes. The other one has a “3-story basement underground” but space for 218 bikes and 64 cars. You expect that all of the residents and workers will bike or walk in. This is downtown SF not downtown Beijing…. yet. Aren’t there a sufficient number of TOWERS on Mission St? The Planning Commission should be re-named the “STUFF THE CITY Commission”.
I recommend yoga for you. Maybe a psychiatrist.