Re: The recent article entitled "More Discussions on Roslyn Landing," (The Roslyn News, Dec. 21, 2006) we must take exception to Trustee Nolan Myerson's comments that the entire meeting was "premature." As your reporter stated, "BITI Development recently submitted their FEIS and hopes to receive final approval from the BOT." The reason this meeting was timely and not "premature" is that without community input into BITI's preliminary plans Roslyn is likely to be stuck with another monstrosity along the lines of Sterling Glen.

Just as the size, design and impact fees (or lack thereof) of Sterling Glen will be an embarrassment to Roslyn for generations to come, so with the BITI project if we do not voice our opposition to the plans thus far. It is precisely because there has been so much opposition that changes are now being considered. Let us not forget that the BITI project has been before the board of trustees for over two years. During this time none of the appointed boards, Planning, Zoning or Historic District, have been included in the process as originally promised by the BOT. Instead, the public has been presented side plans that take over part of the zoned commercial district and forever seals our village within its own narrow confines. The public is neither confused nor misinformed, we know exactly what is happening here. Both BITI and the BOT need to understand that we are not going to settle for a back-room deal that leaves our village with a further reduced downtown, a worsening traffic situation and most disheartening of all the permanent severing of our village from its waterfront.

As for the straw man argument that a builder has the right to build on their property as long as it is within the zoning codes, we would like to remind our elected officials that they were elected as advocates for our village. It is within their power to influence all site plans for the best advantage of the existing community. We have only one opportunity to get this right, to create a cohesive waterfront that enhances the economic vitality and value of its uses, the adjacent downtown and the entire village. We only ask that our elected officials look over the master plan one more time and incorporate the vision of that document. Then the public would not find it necessary to have these "premature" discussions.

Michael and Andrea Kauffman