the appellant stated -- [no audio] when it comes to thhealth, limis were established. in detail. we have a city process which i have described before. the appellant stated they are not appealing these antennas due to health concerns. i will not review that unless requested by the board. between the existing federal laws and regulations in the guidelines put in place by the board and commission, review is largely limited to aesthetic concerns. in addition, the project was satisfied sections 3 -- must satisfy section three. it is compatible with the neighborhood. that is the process these facilities go through. let's look at the fourth topic. in this instance, why did the commission find this project to be appropriate? in this case they met all the commissions criteria. looking at desirability and compatibility, it is important to upgrade the infrastructure to keep up with changing technology. on the location, this was the number one most preferred site in the city. when it comes to siting, the antenna is indoors, not visible from the public right-of-way. the commission