10th and Mission: 7/27/09 (www.SocketSite.com)
Once again, the 12-story Mercy Housing project on the northeast corner of 10th and Mission should be completed by August. Current reality above and as rendered below.

10th and Mission Mercy Housing Rendering

Soon to be 136 affordable apartments for families with household incomes ranging from 15% to 45% of the area’s median, a 5,400 square foot youth/family center, and 3,000 square feet of ground-floor neighborhood retail space where the King Diner once stood.

10th and Mission: Before (Image Source: MapJack.com)

Affordable Family Housing Rising (And Rendered) At 10th And Mission [SocketSite]

38 thoughts on “A 10th And Mission Triptych In Reverse For Mercy Housing Rising”
  1. Maybe some market rate projects will take some architectural hints…the building looks great! I hope they follow through with the red!

  2. personally, i hope other architects DON’T take any architectural hints from this building. While it’s fine for a subsidized housing project, and i don’t hate it.
    It’s essentially a bunch of gimmicks thrown together. I’d prefer to see more toned down, yet intelligent design for the rest of the city. There is actually enough of this disney-esque style architecture in the city already. my $ .02

  3. I dunno Gabriel, I wandered upon this building the other day and I was struck by the streamline moderne swagger of that fin and the way the building turns the corner. This is SOOOO much better than what was there before, and yet another example of how the non-profit housers tend to design better looking stuff than a lot of the market rate. Reminds me of the glory days of MHDC under Daniel Hernandez (but I’m dating myself).

    “Looks great. What a major facelift for the area.”
    “Kudos to the developer, the city, and the neighborhood for getting this done.”
    “Maybe some market rate projects will take some architectural hints…the building looks great! I hope they follow through with the red!”
    wow…..this is sad. I’m hoping these comments were made by the architectural team and do not represent the thought of the community.
    This building tries to hard. It appears that the architect pulled out every “trick” from their bag. The waves on the front facade refer to what exactly? And the big vertical “swoosh”?….is this a nike town?……..what a disaster.
    I’m guessing this architectural team will tell you they used these “moves” and colors to “break down the scale”….a common fall back to obsurd gestures.
    it’s everything i hate about the marriot and intercontinental….it’s loud, obnoxious, and lacks any wholistic idea.
    Personally, I prefer King Diner over what was there. A great greasy spoon for an after-the-bar burger.

  5. I agree, this place is pretty cool. More of this, less of the boring stuff please. How do subsidized housing projects get to skirt the usual planning restrictions that are imposed on market rate developers?

  6. Oh yes. The voice of “If it does not perfectly implement my vision of architectural wonder, I’d rather have the tiny, dumpy 1970 fast food shack (or a parking lot, or a service station, or a dumpy 1967 supermarket)” crowd has been heard from. Unbelievable. Just unbelievable.

  7. I’m with you Mugatu. It’s a mini version of the Marriott. Pretty embarrassing. Bring back the old diner and the vacant lot. I’m glad poor folks will have a home but it’s no work of art.

  8. I like it. It’s a relief this building will add much needed people and energy to the community. I live at the Soma Grand, and we definitely need more of a mix of people on Mission and Market Streets, not dilapidated empty structures and empty lots/holes!
    Mugatu/94114, please point us to examples of modern architecture you admire, that have a reasonable chance of being built in SF, and that serves a higher purpose (affordable housing, community building, green construction, etc.).
    Now I’d like to see how true to the renderings the Trinity Plaza will turn out. I think it rather promising — so far. 1900 units is a *lot*, though.

  9. WTF?
    From a basic planning perspective — land use, height, etc — it’s a fine building.
    From an architectural perspective — what a f—ing joke. This building is awful. “Streamline moderne”? What are you smoking? This building looks like an architecture student on a budget pulled an all-nighter and just crammed a bunch of crappy cheap materials together on a model, throwing in dozens of pointless and awful setbacks and fins. Pathetic.

  10. Architecturally this building is a FAIL. Too many moves, too little cohesion. Angles, curves, gimmicks and tricks galore. Yikes! I hope that Architects and Developers DO NOT hold this building as an example of good Architecture.

  11. Wow, and I thought I had a little bit of taste. Everyone’s entitled to their opinion. I still like it. Maybe I’m reacting to a drive I took through Mission Bay the other day. I got really bored with boxes. It doesn’t bother me that this thing is just a little bit jazzier. Masterpiece, no…but it’s no jukebox marriott either.
    I’m actually quite surprised by the vehemence of some of the posters. It’s pretty banal really…a box modified with some swooshes on the corner.

  12. once again: intelligent design would be something that stands the test of time — which is of course debatable and subjective. but this building will most likely NOT stand the test of time. so therefore i stand by my original comment — it’s a bunch of gimmicks all wrapped into one building.
    it’s brand new — and it already fails at representing 2009. it could’ve been built in the early 80’s. it’s not contemporary. like i said i don’t hate this building and i applaud Mercy Housing. i just don’t want to see more of this sort of thing going up.

  13. ‘Hating’ this design? I understand that feelings towards architecture are subjective but ‘hating’ this? The big parking lot with old fast food joint is preferable? Exactly what does anyone expect a non-profit organization to pull off?
    I like it. It will look fine in 50 years. I don’t love it but I can certainly see the ‘moderne’ elements and appreciate the added moderate income housing this will provide.
    Of all the bad architecture that exists and has been built in SF (and commented on this site) this is some of the vitriolic commentary I’ve read. Very odd.

  14. Mugatu —
    Please point out a recent (last 10 years) building from Mission Bay (Mission Blah) that would be better to have to look at every morning on your walk to work? Yeah, that’s a low standard, but given the opportunity to create a neighborhood de novo, Mission Blah is an architectural fail.
    I don’t love this building, but they at least tried to break up the slab-sided monotony of current permissible SF construction. The wavy bit on corner helps. The contrived colors do not. I actually like the “current” photo with its concretes and stuccos in different shades of curing.

  15. My kudo’s where for the fact that this got done. A small restaurant and big parking lot where torn down and put to much better use for the neighborhood and city, something that didn’t happen at Stanyan and Haight.
    The building itself isn’t great it isn’t terrible, but does seem to, from the pictures, fit into the existing area.

  16. If you want a real taste of hell, try taking a stroll down there. Its a war zone, and this pile of crap won’t help. Its called “mercy” housing because when you stand in front of it you think “mercy there sure are a lot of drug addled and seedy looking zombie people milling about around here.”

  17. and now the “this neighborhood (heck, every neighborhood) is only inhabited by crackhound zombies” contingent represents.
    This comment thread has reached a Nirvana almost equal to SFGate!

  18. Justin: you’re not the only one — its a pathetic pile of pure 80’s crap.
    It’s hard to believe that so many SocketSite posters find this to be good or even acceptable architecture for this city. This puts the bar at the bottom of mediocrity. People, go look at, or better yet visit, Holland, Denmark, Spain, Switzerland or Japan and see the abundance of great contemporary urban housing design that puts this to absolute shame.
    The acceptance of this hackneyed drivel of a ‘design’ as being OK is really saddening, and maddening. SF deserves better…

  19. I recently worked accrost the street from this building and I think it looks pretty cool compared to other bland develpoments in the city. The big issue is that the neighborhood is hell on earth! Honestly, I could never live there and can’t imagine how the folks over at SOMA grand are adapting. It’s all pot clubs, liquor stores and homeless shelters in that neck of the woods.

  20. Joel, the building is not “fine” — its far from it; and the attitude that this pile is ‘fine’ constitutes the root of the problem of continued mediocre architectural quality in SF.
    The main feature of those extruded ‘piano curves’ is such a lame, formulaic cliche move its not even funny.
    Do this city a favor and please inform yourself by looking at well-designed buildings of this type being built elsewhere.

Leave a Reply

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