i've just like principley just sitting as a commissioner, i never have and never will approve anything which is just a verbal description of a scheme. i believe we're obligated to have fully dimensions and fully rendered drawings in front of us to support it. i'm all for a project, and reiteration of what is being verbally described today, that is, 40 feet and 4 stories would be what i would need to do in order to support it. it would require also like the three-dimensional, et cetera, et cetera. i don't think that we have the ability to just, by word, negotiate an outcome. this needs to be through a document, and i make a motion to continue this until the architects and his developer has time to render it out using this new approach to design this project. >> second. >> i'm not going to support the motion. i mean, i think if you look in these plans right here, instead of level 0 to 4 to 6 of the fully -- 0 to 4 to 5. so what we'll have is the top floor -- we have the plans that are what is being proposed for a three story notch from the top floor. i think we're just amending it by red