i might have a question of the city attorney that relates to the previous pecker's objection that the resolution violates the charter section 4.113 (2), can you opine? >> certainly, commissioner? i believe the section of the charter referenced by the speaker prohibits the non-recreational or non-park use of park property would require approval of the voter's for use, this includes find chastising the commission will be mainlining that this does serve a park and recreational purpose and that's specifically on page 4 of your resolution, there are several findings where how it will improve access to the park, increase visitor ship to the park and occupy a substantial portion of the park. >> thank you, commissioner low? >> also a question to the city attorney. the eir that was approved in 2008, i believe, was that of an envelope of the union square station? >> i'm not sure i understand that question. it might be directed better to the mta staff. >> mr. fungi? >> commissioners, john fungi, central subway program manager, the eir document that was aprao*fed in 2008 essentially had a 30% des