We consider defendants' petition to permit an interlocutory appeal from an order of the district court which held them responsible for racially segregated conditions in the Cleveland schools and directed them to submit proposed instructions to a special master to be appointed to devise a remedial plan. Petitioners were also enjoined from discriminating on the basis of race in the operation of the Cleveland schools, from creating, promoting, or maintaining racial segregation in any facility in the Cleveland school system, and from proceeding with any planned construction of new facilities not now underway without specific review by the court. 422 F. Supp. 708 (N.D. Ohio 1976). This order was stayed by a single judge of this court pending the requested appeal. 549 F.2d 1046 (6th Cir. Ohio 1976). We also consider plaintiffs' motion to vacate the stay and plaintiffs' memorandum in opposition to defendants' petition for permission to appeal. The restraints placed upon defendants by the district court's order are neither severe nor costly. The order does not compel defendants to perform any particular act, except to participate in the formulation of a remedial plan. The direction to assist in the development of a remedy is not by itself appealable. See Milliken v. Bradley, 468 F.2d 902 (6th Cir. 1972); Taylor v. Board of Education, 288 F.2d 600 (2d Cir. 1961). Furthermore, the prohibition against racial discrimination is already imposed by the Constitution. However, the direction not to proceed with the construction of new facilities is appealable as an injunction under 28 U.S.C. Â§ 1292(a) (1).