and the problem i'm having -- mr. iona, maybe you can answer this question, if the commission takes the continuance and goes ahead with the motion that the project sponsor's architect will redesign the project to meet the 1998 plans, guess this is a city attorney question, if we take that motion, does that mean that they are forced into doing exactly what those plans depict? >> well, at what point can they then come back and reapply for a permit that shows the current building? just for clarity, that's why i got up and asked for clarity about what the commission was directing. but what i am hearing is that the motion is to continue in order for the project sponsor to revise their project to -- to redesign their building to comply with the '98 condition that was approved in 1998. i am also hearing in the meantime until september 22, if there is an alteration that is somewhere in the middle that can be achieved that the d.r. requester is satisfied with and the d.r. is withdrawn, that it doesn't need to come back here. that's