we chose not to upzone them for housing. because in reality, we really do not want to encourage that much more housing of places where people are driving 30 and 40 miles per hour. and we want to allow housing, and the help the measurement will help preserve it, but we do not want to encourage it. we will upzone this sso, but we want to knowledge the reality of these blocks. our sli is becoming our slia during knowledge of the arts. we're actually allowing extra height in buildings of their devoted to arts uses. it is to encourage the use of the buildings and also to allow the arts community to flourish. this is a particularly unflattering picture of our sso district. this is on seventh street and towns in. we have upzoned this to 80 feet. this is going to be our office generator. we want to encourage height and jobs, regardless on towns in street, that is fine. it is our buffer to caltrain. lastly, one of the most important things is our large sites. we have a number of very large sites in western soma. half an acre, 1 acre,

the neighborhood was -- we will accept height, but we do not like the idea of the whole area be a upzoned uniformly. the task force looked carefully at where they could really achieves some of the neighborhood goals in terms of development to serve the city and region and create when it comes to the community benefit programs, we would like to see perhaps some greater flexibility than and the policy adopted back in october of last year as relates to in kind provision of community benefits only on those large lots. smaller parcels, pay your fee, provided a kind of you want to, but when it comes to these half acre or 3 acres sites, we would like to see that reflect an opportunity to build more community benefits on site. i don't know how many of you have ever been to savannah, in the old part of savannah, every single bloc has a park square. we know through the nexus study that there is never going to be enough money that we could economically unviable the fund through a community benefits program to provide as much part space as is needed in this neighborhood to serve this residential popu

get it down for whatever reason, and and other potential willing owners of land will not have the upzoning to get it done. >> in principle, we would agree with you. proposal is based on a detailed assessment of what are realistic development sites in the area, and they are actually very limited. if we sat down together and looked at it, we would probably not find other major development sites in this vicinity that would potentially have billings of this scale, and i think we are pretty comfortable that this represents the best opportunities, even if some of them are delayed for a certain time because those particular owners cannot build for a certain amount of time. we anticipate that this is a long-term plan. the horizon of this plan is 20 or 30 years, so we do not anticipate all of this will happen in the five years after the plan is approved. i think, you know, we see that is the case in rincon hill and other places. everyone gets entitled to live thereafter, and it takes a while for everything to get bill. >> i found opportunity sites. does the eir allow for total -- greater f.a.r.'s t