Dobbs Ferry trustees continue public hearing on proposed tree-code changes; planning board review requested

Dobbs Ferry trustees on May 13 kept open a public hearing on proposed changes to the village'tree code and asked that the matter be reviewed by the village planning board before a final vote.

The revisions under consideration would lower the threshold for regulated trees, create an administrative tree-removal permit process handled by the building department, allow shrubs in some cases to substitute for required tree replacement, and expand the village'tree fund as an option for replacement when on-site planting is not feasible, Valerie Manastra, principal planner with Nelson Peltman Voorhees, told the board.

Why it matters: the planning and building staff, along with the Tree Commission and Conservation Advisory Board, told trustees the changes are intended to close ambiguities in the current code and give homeowners and reviewers clearer paths for emergency removals, replacement planting, and enforcement.

The draft changes would reduce the diameter at breast height (DBH) that triggers regulation from 8 inches to 6 inches, Manastra said, and establish an administrative permit so building-department staff can screen removals and determine whether an application should go to the Tree Commission. She also said the draft would permit shrubs (7- to 10-gallon stock) to be used in-lieu of some tree replacement requirements and broaden how the village tree fund can be used if on-site replacement is impracticable.

The board heard several public comments. Longtime Dobbs Ferry resident Vincent Coolahan asked the board to make the code's emergency-removal language more prominent, saying the current placement buried a clause that allows emergency action when a police officer, firefighter or public-works official determines a tree is dangerous. He asked the board to "bring it right up front" in the section for clarity. Manastra and trustees said the emergency waiver already exists in the current code and can be moved higher in the emergency-procedures subsection to reduce confusion.

Other commenters raised storm-related concerns and the pace of post-storm cleanups. Manastra and village staff explained the draft creates an administrative removal path so the building department can quickly record and review downed or dead-tree removals without routing routine emergency or clearly exempt cases to the Tree Commission. Trustees and staff acknowledged they will consider additional language to address large storm events and cleanups so the permit process does not slow necessary emergency work.

Trustees and staff also discussed how off-site replacement or payment into the village tree fund would work. Manastra said payment into the fund is an option when a property cannot physically accommodate required replacements; the Tree Commission would recommend where off-site plantings should be made, but final acceptance of donations and expenditures remains a decision for the Board of Trustees.

The board voted to adjourn and continue the hearing to June 10, 2025 at 7:30 p.m. so the planning board can review the draft and return comments.

What's next: trustees asked staff to bring clarified language about emergency removals, and the planning board's written comments will be added to the record before the hearing closes.

Sources: public hearing testimony and the planning consultant's presentation at the May 13, 2025 Board of Trustees meeting.