that's within the phase 2 area that includes 107 units, the design architect for that project are davis baker and paula tagert as well, what we're here to discuss today is block 10 which is a 72 unit affordable project also within phase 2, it's in the bottom portion of the map that you see right there. this is really the crux of the hunters view redevelopment project, it's the heart of the community, it's going to serve as the main community space for all of the residents in hunters view and the broader neighborhood. there will be a mixed income daycare facility as well as central property management operations for the new hunters view and a relatively large community room and other sort of activity spaces for residents as well as members of the larger community, so we're excited about block 10, it's bringing tobt the neighborhood and i'll let daniel provide more information on the specifics of the design. i'm maip to take any questions as well. >> thank you. >> good afternoon, commissioners, thank you for giving me the opportunity to present the project. we were here a few months ago talking

davis. i focus on trade issues so this is bringing it back to that discussion. for mr. baker, i want to make sure i understood your comment, which was that you suggested that if we were to call out the europeans when they come over with trade negotiations, somehow that when they invoke privacy and we realize it's actually for their own economic interests, that somehow advances the debate? i'm not quite sure how it does. europeans will come back and say ok, it's for my economic self-interest. so what? o me it seems like 256-bit encryption and end using encryption and more transparency goes a lot further in making end roads with american companies in europe than calling out europeans for being demeckly self-interested. -- economically self-interested. >> here's my concern. they are seeking to influence u.s. policy by threatening the u.s. companies with a loss of the safe harbor. the legal basis for that is not existent. the whole theory of the safe harbor is you can sign up by contract to treat your european customers as though they were governed by european law even though the

davis. i focus on trade issues, so this is actually bringing that back to that discussion. for mr. baker, i want to make sure i understood your comment, which is that you suggested that if we were to call out the europeans and come over to trade negotiations, somehow that would be -- when they invoke privacy and we realize it's actually for their own economic interests, that somehow advances the debate. i'm not quite sure how it does. the europeans will come back and say, okay, it's for my economic self-interest, so what. for me, it seems like 256-bit encryption, and you know, end end use encryption and more transparency goes a lot further in making inroads with american companies in europe than calling out the europeans for being economically self-interested. >> you know, here's my concern. they are seeking to influence u.s. policy by threatening u.s. companies with a loss of a safe harbor. the legal basis for that is nonexistent. the whole theory of the safe harbor was, you can sign up by contract to treat your european customers as though they were governed by european law, even thoug