As we first reported two years ago:

Plans to double the size of the 68,500-square-foot Mission District office building at 2300 Harrison Street, which was leased to Lyft before their move to China Basin, are in the works.

As proposed, a five-story addition would rise over the building’s current parking lot to the south. In addition to a replacement garage for 41 cars, the addition would yield an additional 26,600 square feet of new office space and 3,000 square feet of new retail space on the corner of Harrison and Mistral.

And as envisioned, the top two floors of the addition would consist of nine two-story townhomes, ranging in size from 1,200 to 2,000 square feet, with two or three bedrooms apiece.

Since redesigned by BAR Architects to leverage California’s Density Bonus Law, the refined plans for the 2300 Harrison Street site now call for a six-story addition to the existing building, which would yield a total of 24 new apartments – a mix of 14 one-bedrooms and 10 twos – over 27,000 square feet of additional office space, 3,600 square feet of ground floor retail (or potential arts space) and an enclosed garage for 41 cars and 31 bikes, as newly rendered below.

And tomorrow, San Francisco’s Planning Commission is slated to approve the refined plans for the redevelopment, across from Mission Cliffs, as proposed.

Comments from “Plugged-In” Readers

  1. Posted by Bobby Mucho

    Long time coming! Excited for more infill and side street activation in this area.

    • Posted by Anonymous

      Now if only they could infill on the PG&E and other lots just north of this project.

      • Posted by not sure why this is all caps

        Presumably this will happen if either (1) PG&E sells to the city or (2) their property tax gets adjusted to current market value. Fingers crossed.

        • Posted by Outoftown

          In some counties public utilities don’t not pay property tax – do they in San Francisco?

          • Posted by Brahma (incensed renter)

            In other states and counties, public utilities aren’t headed into chapter 11 bankruptcy. Presumably PG&E will be liquidating assets, like the aforementioned underutilized parcel, in order to pay their outstanding debts or the bankruptcy trustee will do so on their behalf.

      • Posted by Bobby Mucho

        Seeing the PG&E lots from above, on Google maps/satellite view, is quite revealing. The 3-4 city blocks they’re using as parking lots for their trucks as well as a half block just north for Xfinity trucks is atrocious.

        • Posted by cynthia

          We need higher property taxes on flat lots used for car parking. I’m looking at you Office Max, Best Buy, Safeway.

          • Posted by leningrad

            there should be no property tax on parking lots to encourage more parking so people don’t have to spend 15 minutes or more cruising streets to find parking.

          • Posted by bachman_erlich_overdrive

            Gavin Newsom plans to eliminate sales tax on tampons and diapers (This is true. This is not a joke. I heard it on the radio.) Women also use parking lots so no property tax on parking lots s equally promote gender equity. (I’m still unclear how womanly-specific the tax carve outs will be: Bras but not underwear generally? Maybe vajazzling supplies?)

            Also, the asymmetric pitched roof building-hiding-behind-the-other-building thing they drew, is not good. As someone here described a different building recently, it looks “basic AF.”

            “I just heard that Lyft lost a billion bucks last quarter. We have an app like that in real estate development – has a catchy name. Ready for it…. CITY RUN AFFORDABLE HOUSING”

          • Posted by cynthia

            @leningrad The idea is to discourage underutilization of property in a city that desperately needs housing and, arguably places to store unused cars. Using an entire lot to store a few dozen cars should be strictly discouraged. Multi-story garages, on the other hand, are a bit more viable given the circumstances.

          • Posted by cynthia

            @bachman No idea what you’re insinuating, but taxes are frequently used as a means to offset damages and waste.

            In the case of tampons, diapers (as you’ve mentioned) we’re already taxed plenty with breastfeeding and having to carry nasty little Erlichs around inside of us. I’m sure you can give us a break on the cost of diapers and hygiene products.

          • Posted by Rstr

            Totally agree. There should be a state-wide tax on parking (per surface parking space) and it should be steeeep AF. Surface parking is a huge waste of resources and space, it should be discouraged with all means possible.

        • Posted by dijon

          Perhaps bankruptcy will force them to sell!

        • Posted by Jeffrey W. Baker

          Hey if you think that’s bad Caltrain has a 17-acre rail yard smack in the middle of the city, parts of which have never been used for any legitimate operating purpose. Some of it is regularly used as employee parking. They have 12 tracks for a service that only enjoys 5 trains per hour at most and usually just one. It’s the biggest waste of space anyone can imagine.

  2. Posted by Rstr

    Next up to be re-developed in this area?

    1. That huge gateway-to-hell muni garage on 16th & Folsom.
    2. The Potrero Center, ick!
    3. “Best” Buy. Why this was ever built, I have no idea!
    4. FoodsCo…get the hell out of here.

    There’s so much underutilized land around here, and this neighborhood is smack dab in the middle of everything! Build, baby, build. (hope, hope…fingers crossed).

    • Posted by curmudgeon

      Fine on all your points but we actually need muni garages in San Francisco. And it actually helps when they are centrally located too (if they are at the end of the line then you can’t get service to the OTHER end of the line and need lots of redundant parking/servicing garages). Sorry it’s not pretty.

      • Posted by Anonymous

        Agree that we need the yards and that placement matters, but ideally they’d be put underground and other things built on top, as has been suggested with the Potrero Yard.

Add a Comment

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

Recent Articles