140 Battery St
140 Battery St is a 14-story building in Downtown San Francisco with 85% of its floor area within daylight reach of a facade. This screen estimates 155 homes and scores it 83 out of 100 for office-to-residential conversion suitability.
CA-11 · Screened 2026-10-12 · Strong candidate
Also addressed as 235 California St, 241 California St, 245 California St, 255 California St, 259 California St and 295 California St: San Francisco’s address records place all 7 on this one footprint.
Where 140 Battery St is
Its block in Downtown San Francisco, drawn from San Francisco's own building outlines and street centerlines.
- Already housing
- Not screened
- 140 Battery St
This building does not pencil at default assumptions, even with a modeled RESIDE Act grant.
Every floor carries 2,013 sq ft of windowless core — area that must be gutted, seismically braced and sprinklered but can never be rented as an apartment. Across 13 residential floors that is 26,167 sq ft of cost carrying no revenue.
Modeled conversion metrics for 140 Battery St, 2026-10-12.
| Suitability scoreStrong candidate | 83 / 100 |
|---|---|
| Storiesfrom 200 ft LiDAR (2010) height ÷ 12 ft floor-to-floor | 14 |
| Floor plateper floor, from the city footprint | 13,194 sq ft |
| Daylight efficiencyshare within 35 ft of a facade | 85% |
| Deepest interior pointviability threshold is 80 ft | 57 ft |
| Windowless coreper floor — renovated but never rentable | 2,013 sq ft |
| Estimated homesat 750 sq ft average | 155 |
| Conversion cost$405/sq ft all-in on 171,527 sq ft | $69.5M |
| Gap before grantshortfall against completed value | $12.7M |
| Modeled RESIDE grantbelow the statutory cap | $9.3M |
| BuiltSan Francisco's own record of the construction year | 1958 |
| ZoningFinancial District/South Beach | C-3-O |
| Opportunity Zonenot in a 2018 designated tract | No |
The plan: window line, shape and floor rhythm
39 ft of exterior wall for each home the screen estimates — enough for two- and three-bedroom homes across the plan.
The typical floor has 459 ft of exterior wall, and across 13 residential floors the building carries 5,973 ft of it in total, divided among the 155 homes this screen estimates.
Its plate is compact at 0.79: close to a square or a circle, the most efficient envelope an office can have and the least generous one for apartments: little perimeter to divide among homes. How window line and plate shape are measured.
At the model’s 750 sq ft average, the plan works out at about 11.9 homes per floor, repeated on every residential floor, since this building's outline does not change as it rises.
Why 140 Battery St scores 83 out of 100
Daylight efficiency 89, Interior depth 57, Scale 100, Finance 92 — each out of 100, then weighted.
Score components for 140 Battery St. Points are the subscore times its weight.
| Component | Subscore | Weight | Points |
|---|---|---|---|
| Daylight efficiency85% of the floor area within 35 ft of a facade, scored from 40% up to 90% | 89 | 45% | 40.3 |
| Interior depthdeepest interior point 57 ft from a facade, scored from 80 ft down to 40 ft | 57 | 25% | 14.2 |
| Scale155 estimated homes, scored from 0 up to 150 | 100 | 15% | 15.0 |
| Financeremaining gap is 5% of conversion cost, scored from 60% down to 0% | 92 | 15% | 13.8 |
Most of what it earns comes from daylight efficiency, and what holds it back most is interior depth, at 57 out of 100: deepest interior point 57 ft from a facade, scored from 80 ft down to 40 ft.
Built in 1958
San Francisco records this building as going up in 1958, which puts it in the post-war stock.
As a rule, the period when plates got deep and facades became curtain wall: sealed glazing, lower floor-to-floor heights, and mechanical systems designed around a sealed box. Conversions here usually turn on whether the windows can be made to open and whether ceilings survive new plumbing. That is the era’s general tendency rather than a finding about this building — the model reads an outline and a height, and can see nothing inside — but it is the first thing an architect would want to know, and it colours how much confidence the 85% daylight figure above deserves.
What the conversion would cost
$405 per square foot all-in across 171,527 sq ft of converted floor, or $69.5M in total — about $448K for each of the 155 homes.
All-in cost per square foot for 140 Battery St: base cost plus the code work a change of use triggers.
| Base conversion cost | $260/sq ft |
|---|---|
| Seismic retrofit (change of use) | $45/sq ft |
| Plumbing risers to every unit | $40/sq ft |
| Operable windows and glazing | $30/sq ft |
| Additional egress stair | $18/sq ft |
| Fire sprinklers (NFPA 13R) | $12/sq ft |
| All-in | $405/sq ft |
That cost is charged across every converted square foot, including the 26,167 sq ft of windowless core, which has to be gutted, seismically braced and sprinklered like the rest of the building and then earns nothing. Against it the model sets a completed value of $366K a home, which for 155 homes is $56.7M.
What would have to be true
A $12.7M gap before any grant, $3.4M after the modeled one. The smallest single change that would close it: average unit size 5% down.
The shortfall before any grant is $12.7M. Closing it from the value side means each of the 155 homes finishing at $448K rather than the $366K the model assumes — 22% more. Closing it from the cost side means getting all-in cost down from $405 to $331 per square foot.
A modeled RESIDE grant of $9.3M moves that threshold to $388K a home. That is still above the $366K assumed, leaving $3.4M uncovered, which is why the grant does not unlock this one.
Nor do all four levers have to move. For 140 Battery St, one alone would close the gap at:
Single-assumption flip points for 140 Battery St, each holding the other three at their defaults.
| Average unit sizethe binding constraint — the least this building would need | 5% downto 709 sq ft |
|---|---|
| Circulation efficiency | 6% upto 85% |
| Completed value per home | 6% upto $388K |
| Conversion cost per square foot | 8% downto $240/sq ft |
All four are sliders in the survey, where 140 Battery St re-scores against your own numbers.
How it compares in Downtown San Francisco
140 Battery St ranks 113th of the 205 buildings screened here, against a median score of 87.
Its floor plate is better lit than 44% of them, and shallower than 35% of them at its deepest interior point. On size it is the 102nd largest by estimated homes. The full survey of all 205 buildings ranks and maps every one of them, and the list by address links each to its own page.
Within Financial District/South Beach and the C-3-O zone
94th of 165 in Financial District/South Beach, 58th of 88 zoned C-3-O — the comparison that shares its rules, rents and streets.
San Francisco places 165 of the screened buildings in Financial District/South Beach. 140 Battery St ranks 94th of them against a median score of 88. 121 score 70 or more, their median deepest interior point is 47 ft from a facade against this building’s 57 ft, and together they would hold an estimated 40,456 homes. The group’s top scorer is 870 Market St, at 100.
88 of the screened buildings are zoned C-3-O. 140 Battery St ranks 58th of them against a median score of 89. 76 score 70 or more, their median deepest interior point is 44 ft from a facade against this building’s 57 ft, and together they would hold an estimated 21,444 homes. The group’s top scorer is 266 Bush St, at 100.
Its nearest match in size: 130 Bush St
The screened building closest to 140 Battery St in converted floor area is 130 Bush St: 175,166 sq ft over 14 stories, against 171,527 sq ft over 14 here.
140 Battery St scores 83 to its 100, and with the size held roughly equal most of that shortfall comes from interior depth: 57 out of 100 here, 100 there (deepest interior point 28 ft from a facade, scored from 80 ft down to 40 ft). On the money they part ways: 130 Bush St pencils only with the modeled RESIDE grant, while 140 Battery St falls short even with the modeled grant. The two stand about 600 ft apart.
Would it qualify for a RESIDE Act grant?
The model awards 140 Battery St $9.3M, on the assumption it qualifies. Whether it does, no published dataset can say.
That figure assumes the building meets the Act’s vacant-and-abandoned test, which turns on code-enforcement and receivership records no city publishes.
It does not sit in a 2018 designated Opportunity Zone, so it would not draw that Section 201 priority.
Other buildings screened near 140 Battery St
The 4 closest the screen also covers, from 160 ft away. They are the colored outlines on the plan at the top of this page.
- 201 California St17 stories · 83% daylit · 211 estimated homes · scores 83/100 (Strong candidate)about 160 ft away
- 100 Battery St7 stories · 90% daylit · 73 estimated homes · scores 90/100 (Strong candidate)about 170 ft away
- 191 Battery St10 stories · 100% daylit · 77 estimated homes · scores 93/100 (Strong candidate)about 180 ft away
- 100 Pine St33 stories · 83% daylit · 396 estimated homes · scores 81/100 (Strong candidate)about 220 ft away
A screen, not a feasibility study, from outlines and heights rather than plans: the method and how to correct a figure. If you know this building’s interior, you know what this model cannot see.