. >> thank you commissioner steve collier representing the tenants 1049 market street.o facts. i think the basic argument by the requester is that when the building code says the most current legal use that means they can put down the heel use if even it hadn't been used as was as for 20 years. which is the case here. clearly the stokes case said that's not the rule. the stokes case, they specifically did talk about a defective permit because the permit holder this claimed they had a vested right in that permit. it is on point. there's no manifest in justice ú3n' here or in the extraordinary circumstances. showing the overhead the permit application >> it sees here there's nothing on this permit that would lead you to believe that there was anything in offices floors one through five. in permit holder agrees that that's the reason they got permit that they never state that in the permit itself. therefore it never went through planning review and therefore, it was defective. it hasn't been used since 1995. the housing inspector indicated on the overhead educated that he