. >> i think the concern from commissioner fung is regarding, you knower, who's watching the candy store on the notification, correct? >> i think it's alternative sites, sorry. >> go ahead. >> what i understand and you know, i have a question that was raises by the appellant's counsel too to ask the department, what other potentially preferable sites there may have been within the 300 foot radius that they had to work with. i mean, what makes this spot preferable to any other location that may or may not have been proposed? >> there has been multiple applications from at&t to the department for surface mounted facilities as noted as at&t rep s*entdive ts, they have 168 approved locations, some of the locations were determining the placement as it remits to building frontages, the intent has been to place these in area, in a right-of-way kind of dead end streets, those kind of locations or along frontages where there are no entry ways or windows that would create, you know, some visual impact to the residents or the merchant in these kind of cases. from a technical perspective, okay, yes,