and if there is no upzoning, there is no additional benefits. the city gets wider, richer and more unequal as these places aided by the hub and central soma push out working class black and brown people. appreciate your time and consideration. thank you. >> vice president koppel: thank you. next speaker, please. >> sue hester. i am really wanting to commend my friends from the mission from what they just said. there is a lot of truth to what they said about this plan. what is on the overhead is the projects that were approved. and here, you have market and vanness, otherwise known as 1 oak. here, you have the building right across from the planning department that was approved probably four years ago. market and vanness got approved two years ago, and when there is a rezoning provision, they're planning on approving the height limit for a project -- pardon me, for a parcel that has already been approved, and i just noticed it for the first time when she talked about it today. this is -- this is all right approved. it's going to go from -- it's p

we are making it more high risk to do upzoning. so, while i have a slight preference for the mayor's upzoning, please make sure that either, both, or one of them makes it to the ballot. we need to do this at the ballot in order to make sure the e.i.r. is not subject to all the nonsense. and broadening affordability, more projects as federal and local funding is limited, growing it, more complicated projects that use a variety of income types. and the mayor's proposal allows for more of those cross subsidies so we can spend less. i was middle income when i lived on my friend's couch for months. and i was middle income when i lived in a bug-bite in fested warehouse apartment that had sort of been converted into something habitable. middle income people need housing. when i was facing being a single income person in san francisco who was middle income, where was i supposed to live? i run a non-profit. we have so much tech money, i make $75,000 a year. it sucks. thanks. >> hi. my name is julian pressman, i have been in non-profit my wh

i want to say i'm thrilled that there are two ordinances that countenance, upzoning the rest of the city, 80% of the city's subsidized housing in the last ten years has been built in two supervisor districts, which means nine supervisor districts split the other 20% and that's wrong. it's economic segregation, it is wrong. so i cannot tell you how thrilled and proud i am that this body is competing to move forward with something that will facilitate integrating all the rest of the neighborhoods. and echo what laura said, keep your eyes on the prize. if we mess this up and can't get this before the voters, something a real goal for everybody here will be lost. i have noticed that supervisor peskin will characterize the fighting as fighting between the board and the mayor and i think the public is going to feel, is going to interpret it that way. that really is what it looks like. up here, there was a lot of discussion before public comment but there were no points raised, actually. there was a lot of purposeful confusion between allowed and requires, the mayor's charter amendment allows p

context, when we're actually talking about making our regulations much more per missive, relative to upzoning and demolition of existing housing. >> commissioner moss. >> thank you. for mr. hepner again, please. a lot of the upcoming rehabs, as we've called them, that the housing bond is going to pay for, are hope s.f. projects. i'm just wondering if you believe any of those, what might be full demolitions will be affected. >> i think it's a good question. if they're like-for-like replacements and actually rehabilitating housing stock that needs to be rehabilitated, that's not in the crosshairs of this legislation. >> commissioner hillis. >> just a question for planning staff on mergers and conversions. it's my sense that we've seen less and less of these, because of the controls we've put in place. do you have any data? i know this ordinance goes into some detail on changing definitions and adding additional controls to that. but do you have data on how many vergers or conversions we've seen or approved or disapproved? because i don't recall. >> sure. >> or at least i recall ra dwindling num