Under the sublease, as amended by the rider, Urban had five months to convince the City to consent to the sublease. If such consent was not procured, Royal was entitled to keep the security deposit in consideration for not "offering the Premises for sublease to another party and having not received any rent during the five (5) month period." This is an unambiguous expression of the parties' intent. (See W.W.W. Assoc. v Giancontieri, 77 NY2d 157, 162 [1990] [ambiguity "is a question of law to be resolved by the courts"]; see also Ellington v EMI Music, Inc., 24 NY3d 239, 250 [2014] [contract is ambiguous only if there is more than one commercially reasonable interpretation]; Cole v Macklowe, 99 AD3d 595, 596 [1st Dept 2012].) In light of this clarity, the court may not consider parol evidence or the fairness of this bargain.[FN8] (See Schron v Troutman Sanders LLP, 20 NY3d 430, 436 [2013]; Greenfield v Philles Records, 98 NY2d 562, 569-570 [2002] ["if the agreement on its face is reasonably susceptible of only one meaning, a court is not free to alter the contract to reflect its personal notions of fairness and equity"].)