After a half hour delay in the start time for the continuation of the proceedings in the special exception hearing for Roosevelt Field Mall, Chairman Hodges ended his conference with counsel for the mall and counsel for the opposition and called the hearing to order. Hodges joked, "Dinner will be served at 7, cookies and warm milk at 10." This comment was met with groans and gasps from the public. Hodges then added, "It is my intention to complete this case today -- we'll see."

Attorney for the mall Ballen began the proceedings by picking up where the February hearing had left off, the cross-examination of the opposition's traffic expert. Ballen proceeded to ask the witness his opinion of various traffic consulting firms and then asked if he'd read various reports on properties developed in the Hub area, including Bradlees, the present existence of which was later debated. The traffic expert, Solati, commented that he had not been furnished these reports, which prompted Ballen to ask, "So you didn't think it was necessary to prepare for your cross-examination?"

Ballen then debated with the witness over the issue of pass-by credits, which the mall's witness had stated should be 25 and Solati had said should be 15. Pass-by credits represent the number of vehicles that pass a particular site and then decide to turn in, but were not headed to that site initially, rather they were simply passing by and then decided to stop. Solati explained that there are different methodologies for assigning these pass-by credit percentage, and it is his belief that in 1995, when the mall was planning Nordstrom's, their witnesses had then argued that there was a credit of 15, and he did not see that the number would have increased to 25 in those four years; rather they likely would decrease, as the mall becomes a destination and not a chance stop.

The traffic expert for the opposition continued, explaining that since Roosevelt Field Mall is the largest mall on Long Island, and one of the largest in the region, (the Source is the eighth largest at 750,000 square feet, and is only 1/3 the size of Roosevelt Field Mall), that it seemed inappropriate in his mind that the pass-by credit should have only been figured by the mall's witness for the Saks store and not the entire mall area.

Ballen then argued that the traffic on Clinton Avenue heading south actually has nothing to do with the mall, and attempted to elicit an affirmative response from the witness. Spectators in the room, most of whom are residents of Garden City, Uniondale, East Meadow, Mineola, Carle Place, and Westbury all vocalized their disgust with Ballen's comments. Chairman Hodges, clearly in no mood to contend with responses from the crowd, sharply commented, "I don't need editorialization from the audience!"

Bruce Torino, a trustee of the Village of Garden City and an attorney with a practice in Mineola, spearheaded the legal efforts for the opposition of the mall's request for the special exception. In his redirect of the traffic expert he asked Solati to explain the Hub Study that was admitted into evidence by the opposition and how it demonstrates a global view of traffic in the area defined as the Hub (of which Roosevelt Field Mall is a part). He also asked if based on all of the documentation the witness had reviewed for this case regarding traffic in the area if an adequate review was possible, to which Solati responded, "Yes."

Attorney Wallenstein spoke on behalf of his client, a tenant in an office building on Ring Road, claiming that the mall is in violation of SEQR and that without a comprehensive analysis, the taxpayers would inevitably have to fund mitigation in the future. He stated his client believes that it is inappropriate for the mall to plan to "be adding hundreds of thousands of square feet without a complete analysis of the environmental impact" and that his client doesn't "think that they have adequately taken into account the displacement of cars from the loss of parking." He argued that there should be an Environmental Draft Statement required.

Chairman Hodges clarified the Town Zoning Board of Appeal's conference prior to the hearing that afternoon and the discussion the parties had had regarding SEQR during this conference. Hodges said, "For the record, if we find for the opposition and deny on grounds of FAR, then we don't have to address SEQR; if we find no problem with FAR, then we'll have to address SEQR."

Wallenstein was followed by President of the Estates POA Bob Rothschild. He argued that the mall's plans disregard recommendations made by the Nassau County Planning Commission in the Comprehensive Master Plan for proceeding with plans for development. He argued that the mall has not communicated with the municipalities or surrounding communities and their civic organizations. He also said that he and the 1,900 homeowners whom he represents also do not see that this development supports development or existing infrastructure with the least environmental impact, as was recommended, but has exceeded acceptable size. He argued that the impact on county roads, water, sewer systems, and air quality indicate that the mall is overdeveloped and that there is a balance of resources which need to be protected in the area, which would be threatened by further growth of the mall.

Marie Cantonese, of three separate Uniondale organizations, including the Uniondale Community Council, then argued that she is concerned about the lack of safety for the shopper at the mall and that further urbanizing central Nassau will only attract more criminal activity and other problems associated with city life. She argued that the area is already "over-saturated." A spokesperson from the Carle Place Civic Association agreed, stating that the decision to be rendered by the Town of Hempstead Zoning Board of Appeals also impacted the residents of the Town of North Hempstead who live along the north side of the mall. It was stated that trucks headed to and from the mall often cut through streets like Cherry Valley Road, where there are two schools. She urged the Board to not give the mall an exemption, but to "exempt the residents from a noisy urban expanse."

Sue Davis, a Garden City resident, added that she would like to see a moratorium on further development and that the outside of her house, bushes, and lawn furniture need heavy cleaning each year from the black soot that accumulates on them. She argued that water flowing from the mall southeast to Garden City contains pollutants.

Nick Episcopia, a director of the Eastern POA and the chairman of the EPOA's committee to monitor development outside of Garden City, argued that when the Town's own traffic consultant was asked when the .4 FAR was approved if there was something that could be done to improve the Clinton and Stewart intersection, he had testified that there was little or nothing that could be done. Episcopia argued that despite the mall's proposals to improve the intersection, that there is no real solution and that by increasing mall traffic will only make matters worse. He also noted that the 1998 Hub Study "paints a dismal picture of the traffic situation" there. He argued that a major study is needed and that until a "reasonable, generic study" is done that development should be halted.

Other Village residents, Michael Morando, Janet Catcher, Ed Reuper, Gerie Newman, and St. Joseph's School PTA President Anne Gregg, all also testified that the traffic has posed a threat to the children in the Village, not just at Stewart School, but on the residential streets near Stewart Avenue. All commented that the situation has escalated from ridiculous and frustrating to seriously dangerous. Catcher commented that two of her three children did not return to Nassau County after high school graduation, stating that they don't feel like living in an urban environment. Evelyn Pasano added that she sees the "cannibalization of the mall" on downtown business areas as one of the biggest problems facing the County. Villages like Garden City, she noted, are faced with empty stores and an increase in taxes because of the loss to the tax base. She noted that while Roosevelt Field Mall uses the Garden City name and postal code, they are not in the Incorporated Village and pay no taxes to the Village of Garden City.

Torino then called Environmental Expert Grover, who testified that he has overseen the preparation of numerous environmental studies as a Senior Environmental Scientist, and found a number of "serious flaws" in the statement prepared by the mall. He argued that the NY State Department of Transportation's criteria for determining the need for an air quality study does not adequately apply to the Roosevelt Field Mall. He argued that the DOT does not generate traffic, rather it works to control or direct already existing traffic, whereas the mall is a source of traffic. Grover also argued that factors like the "cold start" of an engine after being parked for long periods of time, which gives off more carbon monoxide than usual, and certain meteorological factors were not addressed properly in the study. He contended that the mall is a "big source of carbon monoxide."

It was also stated by the environmental expert for the opposition, that the background concentration in the mall's report was inaccurate. He argued that the speeds used in the model were too high. The letters drafted by the mall contain different speed models, going from 20 mph to 30 mph, which gives them a better rating, and he argued that it was unlikely that the average speed reaches 30 mph in the area of the mall, like on Ring Road, because of the traffic congestion, speed bumps, and potholes along the road, slowing traffic. He stated that the speeds seemed to be changed "arbitrarily," which gave the mall a better rating.

He also argued that noise pollution is a major concern. The Town of Hemsptead Noise Ordinance dates back to the 1970s and the expert did a conversion of the classification system used then into a contemporary model for determining noise levels. After analyzing the Town of Hempstead's standard, he stated that the Town had a standard that would be considered "suburban to rural" and he was "very confident that at any point on the property line of the applicant, one would find that they are in violation of the Town's Noise Ordinance." He added that the mall's addition would be a new reflective surface which could have a serious impact on the noise pollution problem experienced in the area, particularly at Stewart School. (Dr. Wilson, superintendent of schools in Garden City testified at the last portion of the hearing that the noise is a serious obstacle for students and teachers at the school.)

Mayor Tauches then testified, comparing the idea of the Board passing the exception to only make things a little bit worse for the residents to the example, "if one were to go to their parents and say I failed this test, and next time I'll fail just a little bit worse." He noted, "This is not what government is about." Tauches commented that residents of Garden City are "mindful" that they live not only within a Village, but within the Town of Hempstead and the County of Nassau. He and other residents have participated in Nassau County Planning Commission hearing, Hub Study meetings, and the like not out of a "NIMBY attitude," but rather a concern for the future of Nassau County. Tauches asked the Board to view this issue from the perspective of each of the individuals affected, as though it was one of their loved ones stuck in traffic.

Hodges, growing impatient with the discussion of traffic issues, periodically commented on the issue. At one point during the opposition testimony he blurted, "This Board has lived in Nassau County collectively for 300 years! It's not just Roosevelt Field Mall. If I play golf on a Thursday in July and leave Eisenhower Park at 5 p.m., Merrick is backed up to Hempstead Turnpike. If I get off on Stewart Avenue I can forget it. Why am I telling you this? All of us live in the Town of Hemsptead. We're mindful of traffic."

Hodges later commented, "If anybody has a brain in his/her head he/she doesn't go anywhere near Roosevelt Field at 5 p.m. People now go at 9 p.m. or in the morning -- they spread out --" This comment led him to ask the mall's witness Traffic Expert Ivarrone, who had already testified last time, but returned for more redirect, who began testifying following Mayor Tauches, to provide a solid figure of the total traffic from the mall. Ivarrone was unable to provide a total for the year or an entire day. His figures studied the traffic at select points on specific dates and then compared them to the same time and day in years past to demonstrate that there was no significant increase.

Torino was able to follow with questions regarding how many more shoppers would need to shop at Saks to make it the goal $51 million store vs. the current $17 million store on Franklin Avenue in an attempt to create a picture of the new traffic. Ivarrone said he was unable to answer these questions, as they were not part of his study. Also there was a debate about the 2 percent figure Ivarrone had presented to represent truck traffic related to the mall.

President of the MTA and Long Island Bus Yellin read a prepared statement commending Roosevelt Field Mall for its participation in the Hub Shuttle and for creating space for buses with its own budget. He noted that the Mall has worked to improve traffic in the area with its initiatives relative to busing. Torino asked Yellin to name the buses that run from the Mall along Stewart Avenue, but the witness was uncertain.

Torino presented his closing arguments first, stating that Roosevelt Field is the largest mall in the region and that this owner has already come before the Board asking for exceptions to the .4 FAR, which they have gotten. Torino commented that just three years after they had last come before the Board arguing that that was the last expansion needed, they were back. He asked, "When is enough enough? When is big too big?" He also stated, "The applicant would have you believe that this is an insignificant degradation of the quality of life -- do any of the applicants live there?" He argued that to the people who do live there it is not insignificant.

Torino concluded by admitting that he has "a very personal interest" in the issue. His own son is a student at Stewart School and was unable to attend school that very day because of his asthma. The children are affected by the air pollution, danger posed by cars, and noise pollution Torino explained. He urged the Board to keep these very real concerns of the residents of the Town of Hempstead in mind.

Ballen said that while it is difficult to follow an "emotional appeal" and while he may sympathize, "What we are asking for is insignificant." He added that "We did not create this traffic." He went so far as to argue that the Town should never have zoned the mall property as industrial, rather as business, and if not for this blunder in zoning they wouldn't even need to go before the board for the special exception. He called it an "accident of history" and said that they comply with Town regulations in "all but FAR." He called it their "right" to be granted the special exception and concluded precisely as had been done in 1995 when the mall asked for an exception to build Nordstrom's, "It's the last one."

Now both sides need to file Findings of Fact with the Board by March 17 (St. Patrick's Day) as if the Board had already found in their favor. Upon receiving each of these Findings, the Board will announce their decision.