301 Battery St
301 Battery St is a 8-story building in Downtown San Francisco with 72% of its floor area within daylight reach of a facade. This screen estimates 148 homes and scores it 68 out of 100 for office-to-residential conversion suitability.
CA-11 · Screened 2026-10-12 · Worth a feasibility study
No address point in San Francisco’s records falls inside this footprint, so it is named by the closest one that no other screened building claims — usually a site entrance, but check the outline on the plan below before relying on the street number.
Where 301 Battery St is
Its block in Downtown San Francisco, drawn from San Francisco's own building outlines and street centerlines.
- Already housing
- Not screened
- 301 Battery St
This building does not pencil at default assumptions, even with a modeled RESIDE Act grant.
Every floor carries 7,596 sq ft of windowless core — area that must be gutted, seismically braced and sprinklered but can never be rented as an apartment. Across 7 residential floors that is 53,170 sq ft of cost carrying no revenue.
Modeled conversion metrics for 301 Battery St, 2026-10-12.
| Suitability scoreWorth a feasibility study | 68 / 100 |
|---|---|
| Storiesfrom 148 ft LiDAR (2010) height ÷ 12 ft floor-to-floor | 8 |
| Floor plateper floor, from the city footprint | 27,517 sq ft |
| Daylight efficiencyshare within 35 ft of a facade | 72% |
| Deepest interior pointviability threshold is 80 ft | 58 ft |
| Windowless coreper floor — renovated but never rentable | 7,596 sq ft |
| Estimated homesat 750 sq ft average | 148 |
| Conversion cost$405/sq ft all-in on 192,622 sq ft | $78.0M |
| Gap before grantshortfall against completed value | $23.8M |
| Modeled RESIDE grantbelow the statutory cap | $8.9M |
| BuiltSan Francisco's own record of the construction year | 1924 |
| ZoningChinatown | C-3-O |
| Opportunity Zonenot in a 2018 designated tract | No |
The plan: window line, shape and floor rhythm
35 ft of exterior wall for each home the screen estimates — enough for two- and three-bedroom homes across the plan.
The typical floor has 746 ft of exterior wall, and across 7 residential floors the building carries 5,223 ft of it in total, divided among the 148 homes this screen estimates.
Its plate is moderately compact at 0.62: a squarish plan, with enough perimeter for a conventional double-loaded corridor. How window line and plate shape are measured.
At the model’s 750 sq ft average, the plan works out at about 21.1 homes per floor, repeated on every residential floor, since this building's outline does not change as it rises.
Why 301 Battery St scores 68 out of 100
Daylight efficiency 65, Interior depth 56, Scale 99, Finance 68 — each out of 100, then weighted.
Score components for 301 Battery St. Points are the subscore times its weight.
| Component | Subscore | Weight | Points |
|---|---|---|---|
| Daylight efficiency72% of the floor area within 35 ft of a facade, scored from 40% up to 90% | 65 | 45% | 29.2 |
| Interior depthdeepest interior point 58 ft from a facade, scored from 80 ft down to 40 ft | 56 | 25% | 13.9 |
| Scale148 estimated homes, scored from 0 up to 150 | 99 | 15% | 14.8 |
| Financeremaining gap is 19% of conversion cost, scored from 60% down to 0% | 68 | 15% | 10.2 |
Most of what it earns comes from daylight efficiency, and what holds it back most is interior depth, at 56 out of 100: deepest interior point 58 ft from a facade, scored from 80 ft down to 40 ft.
Built in 1924
San Francisco records this building as going up in 1924, which puts it in the interwar stock.
As a rule, steel or concrete frames with punched windows and plates still narrow enough for daylight to reach the middle, often with high ceilings. Among the most convertible stock there is, and the reason so many early conversions were of buildings this age. 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 72% daylight figure above deserves.
What the conversion would cost
$405 per square foot all-in across 192,622 sq ft of converted floor, or $78.0M in total — about $527K for each of the 148 homes.
All-in cost per square foot for 301 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 53,170 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 148 homes is $54.2M.
What would have to be true
A $23.8M gap before any grant, $15.0M after the modeled one. The smallest single change that would close it: average unit size 20% down.
The shortfall before any grant is $23.8M. Closing it from the value side means each of the 148 homes finishing at $527K rather than the $366K the model assumes — 44% more. Closing it from the cost side means getting all-in cost down from $405 to $281 per square foot.
A modeled RESIDE grant of $8.9M moves that threshold to $467K a home. That is still above the $366K assumed, leaving $15.0M uncovered, which is why the grant does not unlock this one.
Nor do all four levers have to move. For 301 Battery St, one alone would close the gap at:
Single-assumption flip points for 301 Battery St, each holding the other three at their defaults.
| Average unit sizethe binding constraint — the least this building would need | 20% downto 600 sq ft |
|---|---|
| Completed value per home | 28% upto $467K |
| Conversion cost per square foot | 30% downto $182/sq ft |
All four are sliders in the survey, where 301 Battery St re-scores against your own numbers.
How it compares in Downtown San Francisco
301 Battery St ranks 153rd of the 205 buildings screened here, against a median score of 87.
Its floor plate is better lit than 14% of them, and shallower than 34% of them at its deepest interior point. On size it is the 104th 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 Chinatown and the C-3-O zone
12th of 12 in Chinatown, 78th of 88 zoned C-3-O — the comparison that shares its rules, rents and streets.
San Francisco places 12 of the screened buildings in Chinatown. 301 Battery St ranks 12th of them against a median score of 80. 11 score 70 or more, their median deepest interior point is 54 ft from a facade against this building’s 58 ft, and together they would hold an estimated 2,335 homes. The group’s top scorer is 505 Sansome St, at 99.
88 of the screened buildings are zoned C-3-O. 301 Battery St ranks 78th 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 58 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: 30 Ofarrell St
The screened building closest to 301 Battery St in converted floor area is 30 Ofarrell St: 195,667 sq ft over 7 stories, against 192,622 sq ft over 8 here.
301 Battery St scores 68 to its 55, and with the size held roughly equal most of that lead comes from interior depth: 56 out of 100 here, 18 there (deepest interior point 73 ft from a facade, scored from 80 ft down to 40 ft). On the money they sit in the same place: each falls short even with the modeled grant. The two stand about 3,100 ft apart.
Would it qualify for a RESIDE Act grant?
The model awards 301 Battery St $8.9M, 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 301 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.
- 450 Sansome St16 stories · 93% daylit · 133 estimated homes · scores 94/100 (Strong candidate)about 160 ft away
- 241 Battery St30 stories · 79% daylit · 408 estimated homes · scores 72/100 (Strong candidate)about 180 ft away
- 483 Sacramento St10 stories · 89% daylit · 98 estimated homes · scores 90/100 (Strong candidate)about 200 ft away
- 280 Battery St23 stories · 84% daylit · 311 estimated homes · scores 83/100 (Strong candidate)about 320 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.