my name is phillip babich, i'm with the law firm reed smith. we raised three issues on appeal, but the one i want to focus on is our first issue, and that's that the eir should have considered a higher housing density alternative that could have reduced certain environmental impacts on transit, traffic, and air quality to less than significant. and i would also like to briefly address two points raised by appellants sfblu and central soma neighbors that argue that less, not more, housing is required. our first issue is that the eir should have considered a higher housing density alternative to address the significant and unavoidable impacts on certain aspects of transit and air quality. the alternative we suggest would keep the same number of jobs as called for in the plan. in this scenario, there would be a reduction in certain impacts on traffic, transit, and air quality. there is support that higher housing density could lessen these impacts as shown in city planning documents, state planning documents, and the department's response to comme