>>president david chiu: cloogz, colleagues, any questions? supervisor mar? >> again, i'm going to be brief. on the necessity you are saying based on the third party, i appreciate we are doing that now, you looked at the data provided by the third party analyst and that included i believe you said this as a micro macro site that would help the gap that you said the study showed. you also emphasized that there is multiple compatibility reasons that you cited and one is less intrusive to have these nine antennas on the ground floor than to have a number of poles that we have no control over and that at & t has this discretion to put up in the right away along the street right outside in the spots of the area. can you give that analysis again what that alt if ernative would be once this is rejected. >> if this were rejected the care could pursue different sites in the neighborhood and distribute antenna systems to be mounted to utility poles which is a concern to san francisco where you often have bay windows two 2 feet from those poles. state law referred to as