Despite Neighbors’ Protests, Subdivision is Approved

by Meg Yergin -

On April 23, 2025, the Planning Board (PB) approved a controversial application to subdivide the lot of a single family-home located at 308 Melbourne Avenue.  Multiple neighbors implored the Board by email and in public comments to deny the subdivision request during the review of this application that started in February 2024.

Residents told the PB that the anticipated additional building and loss of mature trees resulting from the subdivision will increase flooding in a neighborhood known to have significant groundwater flood issues.  They informed the Board that the 2012 development of the subdivision on Pine Street led to increased flooding on Melbourne and they expect this subdivision to do the same.  See previous Article HERE.

PB Determines Subdivision is Code Compliant and Consistent with the General Public Welfare

At the April 23 meeting, PB Chair Seamus O’Rourke, referred to the considerations the PB must evaluate when reviewing a subdivision request under Section A348-21 (see HERE) of the Village Code.  These considerations include “Whether the proposed use will be in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the Zoning Ordinance and consistent with the public health, safety and the general welfare [emphasis added].”

Members of the PB acknowledged the issues raised by the neighbors at the April 23 meeting.  However, the three voting members of the Board concluded that they did not have grounds to deny the application under the Code.  This was despite the requirement noted above that the PB should consider the impact that the subdivision has on the health, safety and general welfare of the public.  (At the April 23 meeting, one PB member was absent and another abstained.) 

Code Compliance Considerations

Once the subdivision goes into effect, the lot with the existing home will lose its driveway and will no longer be compliant with the Village Code’s off-street parking requirements under  Section 342-56 (see HERE) as the existing driveway stretches across what will be the new second lot.

The applicant provided the PB with a plan for building a new driveway, but this plan requires the removal of a Village tree.  Removing the tree will require the approval of both the Village Manager and the Tree Committee, neither of which has been obtained.

In addition, it is currently unclear if the applicant requires a Special Permit from the Zoning Board of Appeals to park cars in the proposed driveway to be located in the front yard of the existing home which is otherwise prohibited by Code under Section 342-54.B(1) (see HERE). The PB’s resolution includes a condition stating that it would be up to the Building Department to determine if the driveway is approved or if it requires a Special Permit.

Despite the lack of required off-street parking and the missing approvals for the driveway plan, Deputy Village Attorney Mary Desmond advised the PB at the April 23 meeting that “as far as zoning, this [plan] is zoning compliant and it’s not a consideration before the Board.”

Following Desmond’s reasoning, any lot in the Village could be considered Code compliant when reviewed by land use boards as long as there is an intent to request a variance or required Village approval in the future.  Generally, site plan applications are not sent to the PB until after variances have been obtained.

Village Trees and Flood Mitigation

During the PB’s review, the applicant’s arborist, Michal Nowak, made the case that the Village tree that needs to be removed to make way for the new driveway is unsafe.  The applicant’s attorney, Paul Noto, referred to it as a “dead tree” at the April 15, 2025 PB meeting.  This assessment bolstered the applicant’s assumption that the Village will remove the tree.

However, Desmond informed the PB at its April 15, 2025 meeting that the Village investigated the tree and “recognized that it’s not 100% healthy” but that it doesn’t pose an imminent danger.  A recent photo of the tree accompanying this article shows an abundant number of leaves growing from its branches.  According to Tree Committee Chair Beverley Sherrid, the tree simply requires appropriate pruning and fertilization for its health to improve.

Delay in Signing Plat

Because the applicant told the PB that it does not want to implement the conditions of the resolution at this time, the PB designed a path forward in which the Board approves the application, but the Chair does not sign the plat officially changing the existing lot to two separate lots that is required to be filed with Westchester County until a later date.

According to this plan, the applicant does not need to add the new driveway and infiltration system until there is a plan in place to sell the second newly formed lot.  At that time, the applicant will be responsible for meeting all conditions of the resolution and the PB chair will then sign the plat.

As a result, it is unclear if the subdivision has truly been finalized since the request has been approved by the PB, but the plat remains unsigned.

Neighbors Turn to the Mayor and Board

Following PB’s decision, residents spoke at the Board of Trustees (BOT) meeting on April 28, 2025 to complain that Village land use boards are not listening to residents.

Several told the BOT that flooding is the number one issue in the Village and the issue is exacerbated by subdivisions and increased development, so they wonder why the application was approved.  One Melbourne resident asked, “What can you do as trustees to strengthen the laws so that they have some standing?”

Another Melbourne neighbor asked why Village taxpayer dollars may be used to take down a tree that benefits only one homeowner to the detriment of the community.  Village Manager Kathleen Gill informed the BOT that the Village has not approved the removal of the tree but will retain an outside arborist to confirm whether the tree is a danger and needs to be removed.

________________________________________________________________

How Trees Help Prevent and Manage Flooding 

Tree experts report that large trees help prevent and manage flooding for the following reasons:

1)    Tree canopies intercept rainfall and prevent it from immediately reaching the ground.  By delaying the flow of water to the soil, trees help mitigate the risk of surface water runoff and subsequent flooding.

2)    Trees promote healthy soil ecosystems, which in turn increase soil porosity and its ability to absorb water.  In contrast to compacted soils, tree-covered areas are more effective at soaking up rainfall, reducing surface water and preventing it from flowing into river systems too quickly.

3)    Trees can dramatically reduce surface water runoff as their root systems anchor the soil, preventing erosion and landslides, which can lead to the siltation of rivers and a reduced capacity for water flow.  By slowing down the flow of water across the landscape, trees help prevent flash flooding during heavy rains.

4)    Trees absorb large volumes of water through their root systems.  This process, called transpiration, reduces the overall amount of water in the soil and groundwater, which helps to manage flooding.

5)    Trees slow down the rate at which water enters river systems, allowing for more gradual increases in river levels during periods of heavy rainfall.  This delay reduces the risk of downstream flooding, particularly in areas prone to flash floods.

Source: See HERE.