A principal member of B.I.T.I., LCC, the firm which hopes to build row houses in downtown Roslyn expressed his frustration with the lack of progress on receiving the necessary permits to begin construction on the plan.

Meanwhile, Village of Roslyn Board of Trustees members reiterated their support for the project, while a spokesman for both the Roslyn Landmark Society and the Roslyn Preservation Corporation continued to voice their concerns over the row house plan.

All this took place at the Aug. 16 public meeting on the plan, which drew another large crowd to Village Hall.

The big news is that B.I.T.I. is willing to reduce both the size of the units planned for the site and the number of units themselves.

William Cohn, a principal for B.I.T.I. said the firm was willing to reduce the number of units from 126 down to 80. He said that it would have been possible to build up to 160 units on the site. As such, lowering the number to 80 represented, he said, a "substantial cut" on the part of B.I.T.I.

Otherwise, Cohn communicated his firm's unhappiness over recent events concerning the housing plan. He was especially upset for the decision by both the Historic District Board and the Planning Board to call for a building moratorium. Calls for such a moratorium, he said, amount to "bad faith" on the part of those two boards. "How do you get a fair hearing?" he asked, in light of those declarations.

On the other hand, Cohn said that B.I.T.I.'s plans to reduce both the size and number of the units represents good faith efforts on his firm's part.

"[We] tried to follow [the] layout patterns that were recommended by the [board's] consultant," he said.

Cohn added that there was a "temptation" on B.I.T.I.'s part not to pay for a promenade, but the firm has decided to fund such a project.

In all, Cohn urged the board to "expedite the process" and "get going with [a] SEQRA" study. In addition, the board should "take a stronger hand" and do something about the "renegade boards."

Finally, Cohn declared that the board should "worry about retribution" if things fall apart. B.I.T.I., he said, is willing to take matters to the Federal District Court if they are not successful in making progress on the plan in "a brief period of time."

Neither the village attorney nor board members wanted a confrontation with the B.I.T.I. attorney.

John Spellman, the village attorney, said that the board should not take a position of "point-counterpoint" concerning Cohn's complaints. Spellman said that Cohn's remarks represented a "mind-set of the applicant" and that the board should not "take it as a threat," but instead as comments that took on "some degree of desperation." Spellman also noted a letter submitted to the board by the Roslyn Chamber of Commerce, one that contained findings by a licensed real estate appraiser on the value of the property.

Board members were similarly low-keyed. Mayor John Durkin suggested that the board should simply continue to review B.I.T.I.'s application. Deputy Mayor Nolan Myerson praised the new plan, adding that there was a "real possibility" for more progress in the near future.

As in the past, local residents and organizations expressed their own concerns over the project.

Once again, Jefferson Mansell, read a letter from both the Roslyn Landmark Society and the Roslyn Preservation Corporation.

The letter, Mansell admitted, was drafted before B.I.T.I. announced planned reductions in the number of units for the site. Mansell said that he was pleased to see such changes, calling them "positive steps" in the right direction.

The letter, in part, urged the board to do everything possible to "minimize the impact of this proposed development ... on the village, its historic resources and the quality of life of its residents."

Toward that end, the board should "require a detailed analysis of the existing visual character of the area utilizing photographs, site line diagrams, cross-sections and any other material that will identify impacts on existing views and the overall appearance of the area," the letter stated.

Concerning traffic, zoning and density issues, both organizations said that the board needs to update the village Master Plan. Such an update would allow the Plan "to be consistent with applicable law, to focus on preserving and enhancing the historic district and to keep pace with any and all of the various environmental changes to the area." Currently, the letter stated, "[the] Master Plan does not address Roslyn's inclusion in the Heritage Trail, a designation it received after the plan was adopted."

Guy Frost, a longtime resident of the village, claimed that row houses aren't needed in Roslyn. He told The Roslyn News that the village already is hemmed in by apartment developments. He feared that the B.I.T.I. project would increase traffic and along with the Forest City Daly project, block views of Hempstead Harbor.

In the near future, the board hopes for an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) on the B.I.T.I. plan. Board members decided to wait until Tuesday, Sept. 20 for continued hearings on the development.