Nearby residents raised issues of parking and lighting at a meeting on a new 20-unit housing development coming to the Mission District at 606 Capp St., currently a parking lot and the location of the Monday night pre-application meeting.
“When would this lot no longer be available to those of us parking here?” one resident asked developer Joe Toboni.
The parking lot on the site — which will close in 12-18 months when the project breaks ground — was bought by Toboni last summer and has some 25 spots for residents, businesses, and Zipcar. In keeping with the city’s transit-first policy, Toboni’s project will have no parking.
“I don’t know if you’ve tried to park [in this neighborhood],” said a property owner whose building abuts the planned development. “It’s very hard. Sometimes you have to turn around many times.”
Michael Leavitt, the architect for the project, said the city is “pushing [them] hard” to trade parking for housing, particularly given the site’s location around the corner from Mission Street.
Toboni expanded on that answer, saying he’s seen many new buildings with half-empty parking garages because residents are opting for app-based transportation, ride-sharing, or buses and bikes.
“They’re taking Lyft, they’re taking Zipcar on the weekend, they’re using public transit,” said Toboni. “That’s how it’s going now with the younger group.”
“So the building is being targeted towards younger people?” asked Erick Arguello, a member of the merchants association Calle 24. He and Eddie Stiel — a frequent advocate for 100 percent affordable projects at meetings for market-rate developments — were the only two in the group of eight attendees who raised issues of affordability.
Toboni said that the building was “not necessarily” targeted at anyone, but that he sees more 20 and 30 year olds coming to San Francisco than 40 or 50 year olds. “It seems most of the people coming into the city are younger,” he said.
This project will have 18 market-rate units and two below-market-rate units, the latter fulfilling the developer’s obligation under city law to build 12 percent affordable on-site. Twelve of those units are one-bedrooms and eight are two-bedrooms — one of each for the affordable units — and are modestly-sized at 520-680 square feet for a one-bedroom and 850-980 square feet for a two-bedroom.
All will be rentals — like his other two developments in the neighborhood — though they will be owned by Toboni as condominiums and could be sold in the future, something Toboni said he is not planning.
Asked to name a possible rental price, Toboni said he would know more when his 17th and South Van Ness project goes online but did say they would likely be cheaper than his “high-end” units at 799 South Van Ness because they are smaller by a couple hundred square feet.
Toboni — a native San Franciscan whose son also manages his development firm — has developed over a dozen projects in San Francisco in the last 30 years, with three more coming to the Mission in the next few years. Most are single-family homes — with the exception of the planned Mission apartment complexes and a 40-unit building at 4770 Mission St., which houses mostly low-income tenants — and his firm focuses on “high end building and luxury development.”
Alongside 606 Capp St., Toboni just broke ground on 27 units at 600 South Van Ness near 17th Street and is in the early stages of planning for 73 units at 799 South Van Ness near 19th Street, both of which are corner lots.
The two projects have a mixed history of opposition. A poorly attended meeting for 799 South Van Ness was held last week and was uncontroversial, while the meeting for 600 South Van Ness held last year saw pushback when Stiel and Arguello railed against inadequate outreach by the developer and the sight of another fully market-rate development coming into the Mission. That project just broke ground earlier this month.
But talk of the housing crisis was in short supply on Monday, most attendees wondering how the project would affect their nearby properties. There was talk of a possible blocked fire exit from a next-door building — something Toboni said they would investigate with the fire department — and lack of lighting to next-door units.
“Your building’s going to be four stories, so that might be affecting the light,” said the property owner with the abutting building. “Did you consider lowering the building?”
They had, and Leavitt pointed out a downgrade in height near the end of the complex, where the light might be blocked. Residents from another next-door building also wondered whether their light would be cut off, and though the development has a planned light well on both sides, part of that well is not aligned with the windows next-door and may block light.
“It looks like I’ll be dark in that little corner,” said one resident.
And another raised the issue of dust and noise from the nine-month long planned construction time. Toboni explained that noise should only be an issue for half that time and that dust would be prevented from spreading with plastic sheeting, as is normal with such construction.
“It’s a real simple building to build,” said Toboni.
Permits for environmental review will be filed at the Planning Department in the next week, Leavitt said, which might take six months to a year to wind through the system. Toboni said the nine-month long construction period would likely start in 12-18 months, meaning a finished building is unlikely before mid-2018 — barring significant community opposition.
At four stories, the development goes up to the height limit for the area — like buildings next-door and across the street. Toboni said he did not seek to use the state’s density bonus law — which would allow him build up another two stories — because of surrounding heights.
“You’re looking at this neighborhood here, and the last thing I’d want to do is put up a 65-foot building,” Toboni said. “I think when you have a corner lot, [a taller building] makes sense. But this is gonna fit in with that building over there and that over there.”
