Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Planning board opens public hearing on 237 Martin Avenue air‑rights subdivision; vote delayed pending legal review

June 17, 2025 | White Plains, Westchester County, New York


This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »

Planning board opens public hearing on 237 Martin Avenue air‑rights subdivision; vote delayed pending legal review
The City of White Plains Planning Board opened a public hearing on an application to subdivide the air‑rights parcel at 237 Martin Avenue into two tax lots but did not vote and instead adjourned the hearing, citing the need for formal legal advice.

The application proposes to split the existing single tax lot above the City Center Garage so that one parcel would contain the recreation deck serving the residential condominium and the other would serve the commercial tenants including the New York Sports Club and Summit Apartments. The board took public comment but deferred formal action because counsel had not confirmed whether allegations raised about the transaction affected the board's ability to act.

Michael Starvaggi of Blakely, Platt & Schmidt, representing the condominium interests, told the board the subdivision is “quite straightforward” and “involves no new development.” He urged the board not to delay, saying the parties intend clean conveyances once the subdivision is approved. Steven Linde, an attorney with Sills, Kumis & Gross representing KRG White Plains City Center LLC (a subsidiary of Kite Realty Group), told the board the lack of final subdivision approval has prejudiced Kite: because the property remains a single tax lot, Kite’s parcel has been subject to a mortgage held by Banco Popular that the bank has agreed to release only after the subdivision is recorded.

Chair John Iores said the board would hear public comments but would not vote until legal counsel had provided a formal opinion about the outstanding allegations. The board subsequently closed the public hearing and adjourned it for further review; no vote on the subdivision was taken at the meeting.

Board members noted the application has appeared several times and that an earlier filing had been defective. Applicants and their counsel asked the board to proceed at the earliest opportunity once counsel’s advice is supplied.

Don't Miss a Word: See the Full Meeting!

Go beyond summaries. Unlock every video, transcript, and key insight with a Founder Membership.

Get instant access to full meeting videos
Search and clip any phrase from complete transcripts
Receive AI-powered summaries & custom alerts
Enjoy lifetime, unrestricted access to government data
Access Full Meeting

30-day money-back guarantee

Sponsors

Proudly supported by sponsors who keep New York articles free in 2025

Scribe from Workplace AI
Scribe from Workplace AI