Don’t you dare demo this Dolma Road domicile!
The Committee for Historic Preservation nixes a homeowner’s wish to raze a Tudor manse.
BY DEBORAH SKOLNIK
What follows is a summary of the January 21, 2025 meeting of the Committee for Historic Preservation.
They came, they exhibited, they argued. Despite it all, architect Miguel Sostre and the owner of 17 Dolma Road couldn’t convince Scarsdale’s Committee for Historic Preservation to allow them to raze the English Tudor home on the property.
Sostre began his presentation by saying he’d been asked by Scarsdale Development to assess the property. “I believe it does not rise to the standard of significance relating to the Village preservation ordinance,” he said. “The house was not designed by a recognized master architect and it is not one of the finest examples…in fact, it's one of the smallest homes on Dolma Road, and its scale is in direct contrast with most of the homes in that neighborhood.”
Lack of defining details cited
The architect contended that the home is hardly in the English style. Among other reasons, he argued, “The details that identify that period are sparse [in this home]; only the heavy entrance and the decorative arches on the windows [are nod to these] historic roots.”
Sostre also called out the jarring clapboard shiplap siding (a type of siding similar to that used in ship construction) on the garage, as well as the pyramid-shaped skylight over part of the addition in the back. “The material and the shape of the additions are in direct contrast with the house,” he argued. In addition, he said, “The ceiling height on the first floor is eight feet…the only space that is nine feet is the living room.”
Can you spot the hidden items? The garage and a partial view of the addition in the back, capped with a pyramidal skylight.
Homeowner points to numerous problems
Alissa Kirk, the homeowner, spoke next. “I found this property off market…this is going to be our personal home,” she said. “I'm not looking to make this 10,000 square feet whatsoever; we have a small family.” Her original intention, she explained, “was actually to just do an addition and to restore the home.” Once she and Sostre began seriously assessing the house, however, “…it was like, ‘Oh my God, the ceilings are eight feet tall’…” she said.
Kirk echoed Sostre’s point that the house is only 3,500 square feet. “It looks much bigger, but the garage is actually a part of the inside. So it’s 3,500 square feet, on a street where all the homes are 9,000 square feet…it's a really small home,” Kirk said. Ultimately, she and Sostre decided that additions wouldn’t be enough of an update. “Stylistically, architecturally, it didn't make any sense,” Kirk contended. As for preserving the house as a historical specimen, she remarked that it was already tampered with in the 1980s.
“It’s not like a gorgeous, beautiful, huge Tudor where everything is just amazing.”
“So, whatever English style [the house had], which wasn’t as significant as some of these homes are, basically in the Eighties was diluted by a garage addition, a kitchen addition [the round clapboard structure, and the patio addition,” Kirk pointed out. “Then the mudroom has a plastic-looking thing.” The issues continue, she added. “The garage is plastic, I don’t know, some PVC stuff…and then the plumbing and electrical are 100 years old.”
To bolster her case, Kirk referred to a letter from Andrew Scott Dolkart, an expert hired by Scarsdale to assess the home’s significance relating to the building preservation ordinance. Dokart, too, noted that 17 Dolma is the smallest house on the street. “Getting the historical letter back, I feel like, I mean he’s the expert,” Kirk said. She promised not to take down lots of foliage. “What I would like to put back there is something of a French-English period,” she shared.
“Why should we listen to you?”
Committee Chair Kevin Reed posed a frank question to Sostre. “So, I'm going to ask this bluntly just because I'm too tired of thinking of the right words: Why should we listen to you?,” he said. And I don't mean that hostile. I mean, you're giving us your opinion and I've seen you before this committee a bunch of times and you're obviously a prominent architect in the area. But if you want us to accept your opinion as to why this isn’t a Tudor that's worth preserving, tell us about your background. What makes you qualified to make that assessment?”
Sostre said he has 20 years of experience working in Scarsdale and cited his aesthetic. “Yes, I do a few modern farms and other things, but where I cut my teeth was classical architecture,” he replied. When Reed pressed further, pointing out that Sostre was just giving the substance of his opinion, Sostre referred back to his extensive work experience. “I think the historian that you hired also said it wasn't a good English manor house….I don't know what is about me that you could cite, I don't know about a Yale or Harvard pedigree, I just know architecture, I know classical architecture, and this is classical architecture, this is English manor, but it doesn't rise any level of preservation,” he replied.
On the side A side view of the home.
A period piece
The design of the house was not the only thing the Committee needed to consider: Another factor is whether 17 Dolma Road is representative of a period of development in Scarsdale. Reed expounded upon this fact. “If I read [Dolkart’s] opinion, at least my opinion is that he says this house may be worth preserving because it was part of that broad pattern. Suburbanization occurred in Scarsdale between the wars. Folks from the city moved up from the city and settled areas of Scarsdale, in particular like the Dolma Road area that this house is a part of. So what would be your response on that?” he asked Sostre.
“Then this whole swath should have been preserved,” Sostre replied. “Just because something happened in a time period, I don't think that really lends credence to why something should be preserved.” Committee Member Amy Laurence had a ready counterargument. “Scarsdale is known for its Tudor architecture. That’s what draws a lot of people to the town. Articles will highlight the Tudor elements of the architecture,” she stressed.
Part of a dying breed
Laurence also expressed disappointment in the dwindling number of Tudors in Scarsdale today. “What we appear to be doing now is systematically destroying all those those elements, whether in the more beautiful houses like this one, the grander ones, or also the smaller neighborhoods like Edgewood. I don't know, I guess it's my opinion that a really good architect would find a way to work with the existing Tudor structure to add an addition if that's what was required. It might take a little more thought and effort, but I would've hoped that it would've been worth the effort to do so.”
Committee Member Jack Miller took a slightly different stance. “I think the fact that we are discussing this so intently says that this home is worth reviewing more than 9 out of 10 houses that come through,” he said. “In the neighborhood there are homes that are new, rehabbed or could be rehabbed. There is no true overlay for this area.” Committee member Lauren Bender shot down Sostre and Kirk’s complaint about the size of the home. “Something that Miguel [Sostre] said is something [the Committee] sort of talked about before, we hear it again and again [that houses are] too small for a lot. This is how these homes were built. They were not built to maximize every square foot of the entire acreage block, which is something that we see now.” She also said that 8-foot ceilings are no cause for complaint, as that is the height of the majority of home ceilings.
Almost out of sight The Committee felt the additions to the back of the house are not a concern, since they can’t be seen from the street. In fact, the house itself is barely visible in a street view.
After several more minutes of discussing the details of the house, the Committee voted to reject the request to demolish it, with one member dissenting. Sostre and Kirk were told they can appeal to the Village Board of Trustees. Kirk asked whether it would make a difference if they proposed to demolish just 50 percent of the home…what happens next remains to be seen.