706 Mission Street Rendering - Full Height

Despite a couple of lingering lawsuits over the tower’s height and design, Millennium Partners is preparing to break ground on their 706 Mission Street tower project this summer and plan for it to rise a full 510-feet, with San Francisco’s new Mexican Museum designed by Ten Arquitectos at its base.

From the Chronicle’s report:

“We have completed design drawings and released them to the general contractor,” [Millennium Partners Vice President Sean Jeffries] said. “We think we can start in July. We can’t be certain of when the court decision is going to come down so we are going to go ahead and start construction.”

A group of neighbors in the adjacent Four Seasons, an earlier Millennium development, are suing to limit the tower to 351 feet in height, an effort which so far has been rejected by the courts but is on appeal.

Designed by Handel Architects, the 190 condos in the tower will average 2,700 square feet apiece and sales are expected to commence in 2017.

Comments from “Plugged-In” Readers

  1. Posted by Pfffttt

    Another wasted opportunity at a unique/interesting building. Shame.

    • Posted by seriously

      it looks kind of meh, but i trust Handel

      • Posted by ElitistPig

        I’m just curious, I think this tower is just ok, but what counts as a great design? I only see people on here complaining about these towers, I know people like to complain, but what is the standard of excellence here?

        • Posted by Pfffttt

          Standard of excellence/great design? How about something like this.

          • Posted by ElitistPig

            Which of course doesn’t make sense for a residential tower.

          • Posted by Pfffttt

            And it doesn’t make sense because why?

          • Posted by James

            That thing you posted is flamboyant, but does that make it better?

          • Posted by Pfffttt

            Yes, it makes it better, at least visually more interesting. I don’t expect everyone (or anyone) to agree with me. Just sayin’ . . .

          • Posted by SFrentier

            It makes sense in Beijing.

            Personally I don’t like it.

          • Posted by Pfffttt

            What exactly does it mean for a building to make sense?

            The one thing that all people are entitled to, I concede, is their opinion.

          • Posted by Wai Yip Tung

            This first twisted tower may look cool. But do you want the 50 high raises going up to all take some distinctive form?

          • Posted by Pfffttt

            Oh, come on. Where in any of my posts did I say “all” new buildings should look like this?

          • Posted by Swiftamine

            That twisty thing is so contrived…

          • Posted by Pfffttt

            “That twisty thing is so contrived…”

            Um, yeah, it takes imagination to design/build something that’s not a box.

          • Posted by Orland

            Hokey.

          • Posted by whywhywhy

            Oh goodness of all the non-box examples out there how did you end up choosing that boring thing?

          • Posted by StockBoySF

            It may be distinctive, but I doubt it would ever become an icon like the Transamerica building.

        • Posted by gribble

          There are lots of people with differing opinions here. Some want every building taller. Some want every building to be a special work of art. Some want things to look brutalist (OK, not many) while others think everything should be super sleek and featureless. In other words, everybody is a critic and has their pet peeves.

          • Posted by Brian M

            Too many here don’t go as far as you have and just say “I don’t like this building just ’cause. Make it better.”

        • Posted by Sierrajeff

          At least it will block views from the south of that godawful concrete Westin. Hate the building – it’d be a sore thumb in Omaha, let along S.F.

          • Posted by Orland

            Even more so the Park Central Hotel (formerly the ANA and Argent) on Third. My nomination for ugliest building Downtown.

          • Posted by timbad

            think you two are talking about the same building?

    • Posted by Memo-san

      I think the design is reminiscent of the Embarcaderos while blending with the styles of the St. Regis and Paramount without directly competing for attention. It’s demure. This is very appropriate and I’m glad they’re pushing through with the height. Four Seasons be damned.

      • Posted by Pfffttt

        But that’s how we get stuck with the same, same, same, matchy-matchy blandness of boxy structures, one after another, when styles have to blend with existing structures. Why is the Transamerica building so iconic? Because it’s the ONLY one like it.

        • Posted by Brian M

          And as soon as someone “requires” weirdness for the sake of weirdness, the weird forms themselves become banal and trite..A city is not an architetcural theme park. People build “boxes” because they WORK.

          • Posted by Pfffttt

            And buildings that aren’t boxes don’t work because why? No one ever said it’s a “requirement to be weird.” Those are your words. Just throwing a few unique buildings into the mix does not make an entire city “banal and trite.” It just makes it more interesting to look at.

        • Posted by Memo-san

          Actually I’m glad it isn’t unique. It’s sitting directly next to my favorite building in the whole city, St. Regis. I would feel a little threatened if this new tower were to try to be the next up and coming star of SoMA. Let it blend, and St. Regis can retain its splendor as the most unique tower in this section. Not opposed.

      • Posted by Sierrajeff

        I agree, I like it. Vancouver’s become a city of glass towers; maybe we can become a city of white towers… that would completely jibe with the City’s historic feel, and appearance from afar. Look at the City from the Headlands, for instance, and it’s mostly a beautiful white… except that g.d. Bank of America building in all its maroon/brown mediocrity.

    • Posted by Zig

      Looks like s fairly handsome building to me

    • Posted by 4th Gen SFer

      Agree. Awful looking square block.

  2. Posted by foggydunes

    Is this the most recent rendering of the Mexican Museum? I remember a different one with a less “random” facade… more vertical slabs.

    [Editor’s Note: The original design, as linked above.]

    • Posted by shza

      I much prefer the original, at least from the exterior. (I like the lattice and its play on the light in the renderings of the interior.)

      • Posted by foggydunes

        Agree– the rendering in this post makes the museum look super dense/heavy, and the facade treatment feels tacked on. Just my opinion though.

    • Posted by Memo-san

      The original base is much more attractive and inviting than the current block of whatever that is. I mean that’s already been done a few blocks over right? Not cute.

  3. Posted by Me

    A very classy tower. Great soaring height. I approve.

  4. Posted by JayJay

    rich entitled a-holes thinking they own the f’ing views. I think it’s great that the builder will proceed. To the [people] who tried to block it…SUCKERS!!!!!

  5. Posted by knock

    is there any irony in the fact that the inhabitants’ of a handel design are suing to stop another one?

  6. Posted by Comment

    Looks great!

Add a Comment

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

Recent Articles