mr. heppner and his supervisor peskin. we took a stab at this a couple of years ago through the residential expansion threshold. many people opposing the suppose that also. we endure many aspects of doubt that i liked and thought were good. so, we get that this is a contentious issue. i agree with the goals that were laid out here. straightforward process, eliminate loopholes for demo, promote density and discourage monster homes. i don't think it gets there. it may be gets there on eliminating loopholes on definition. i don't think it does a good job at all on the other items. i get it is difficult in some of these things are competing against each other. there are no definitions of monster homes, i know you kind of focused on this 1200 square-foot, which i think is a good sized unit. it is typical of these three flat buildings or for flat buildings. but if we are going to preserve our h1 zoning, 1200 square-foot is not allow for a family. i invite you to spend time with my three teenagers, and my mother who lives with us

mr. heppner because he worked hard and his heart is really in the right place. i hope that you know, people appreciate that and that we proceed and everybody is happy in the end. thank you, very much. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> i have a mental clock. >> overhead as well. and i have copies of this to to handout. because you can't see the whole thing, you are not seeing the top. this is a notice of pre application meeting. i want you to notice the date. july 3rd at 6:00 p.m. what is the address of the project? the project is one block south of what the ground breaking was this afternoon for the city. this and folsom. how many years did they say here? it's really obscured. a lot of units. i've never seen the nerve of a person having a pre-app meeting at 6:00 the eve of a holiday. july 3rd, is july 4th. at 6:00 no one is there. they're going out of town for a long weekend. including the planning department. this kind of manipulation provokes people sometimes saying we got to change it in the rules. they should be able to change it by strict humiliation.

mr. heppner worked so hard on this. both of these commissions have seen my list of 70 projects that show an average increase of $3 million. in the last four or five years, because they screwed the demo merger rules. 70 projects. mostly in knowy valley. i think the legislation has these new definitions of demolition that were referenced in the building code -- or referenced by the planning code in the building code and they suggest that you are all going to work together and that's a good thing. i think all the regulatory aspects of the legislation are really good in dealing with the bad actors. we can all agree that a vertical expansion, especially with a facade removal, is a demolition. and that is the reality and that is mostly on my list. and that's what needs to be taken care of. i do worry about the tenants. i think the flat policy is good. i'm glad it's there. i hope it stays there. i worry about the 75% interior demo of multi-unit buildings because i think it's a way that tenants can be forced out. i'm not really