Architectural Historian Recommends Preservation of 26 Circle Road, Saying, "Don't Throw Out the Baby with the Bathwater"

The owners of 26 Circle Road have withdrawn their application to raze their Dutch Colonial.

The owners originally applied, saying that the home had deteriorated and providing a structural assessment that showed that an addition of a sunroom over a porch was settling and unsafe.

They retained the law firm of Cuddy and Feder along with consultants Emily T. Cooperman and Kyle Toth at PS&S to provide evidence that the home did not meet Scarsdale’s criteria for historic preservation.

However, at the request of the Committee for Historic Preservation, the Village asked their consultant Andrew Dolkart for his assessment and he concluded that the home did meet the criteria for preservation.

In his opinion Dolkart wrote a lengthy history of the Overhill subdivision, where development began in 1905. Reviewing the history of the Overhill neighborhood, Dolkart argues that 26 Circle Road meets the first criteria, which is, “The house is representative of the broad patterns of Scarsdale village history.”

Dolkart says, “As noted previously, it is the suburban development of Scarsdale in the early decades of the twentieth century that is the most significant historical pattern in the creation of the Village and 26 Circle Road is representative of the earliest phase in this broad character defining trend … “What is significant about Overhill is that it is a residential subdivision that marks the beginning of the transformation of Scarsdale into one of the premier suburban communities in the New York metropolitan area.”

Commenting on the homes integrity he concluded, ”The house retains its integrity to a high degree. It has "integrity of location, design, setting, materials and workmanship," to quote a necessary finding in Scarsdale's preservation ordinance. It is on its original site (a relatively small lot in the Overhill Tract); its design is unchanged except for the rear addition that occupies approximately one-third of the rear elevation; its setting is intact (the houses of Overhill are largely unchanged since their construction; its materials are intact; and its workmanship remains untarnished.”

Dolkart also contested Dr. Cooperman’s findings saying, “In her report submitted by Cuddy & Feder, Dr. Emily Cooperman states that in order to make this finding for a property it "must be distinguished in its historic time period as important relative to other properties. There must be some evidence that the individual property in question was historically important within the context of the time in which it was created."

Dolkart corrects her saying, “The criterion in the Scarsdale ordinance does not say this; this is not the standard on which a property should be judged under criterion 1. The criterion states "that the building is associated with events that made a significant contribution to broad patterns of Village, regional, state or national history.” The criterion says nothing about a property being "distinguished in its historic time period." It concerns a broad pattern of history which encompasses the early twentieth-century suburban development of Scarsdale.”

He also notes that one of the home’s owner, Rollin Kirby was a prominent editorial cartoonist who won Pulitzer prizes but he do so after he sold the house.

Last Dolkart commented on the report about the structural integrity of the addition in the back. He said, “As noted, 26 Circle Road retains its architectural integrity to a high degree. The only evident change to the exterior is the rear addition. The engineering report completed by Martos Engineering finds that this porch is structurally unsound. It is clear that the weight of the second-story sunroom has destabilized the addition. This is the argument being made for why the entire house must be demolished. To me, this appears to be a case of "throwing out the baby with the bathwater." The porch and sunroom could either be removed, rebuilt, or shorn up. The bulk of the house would not be impacted by this work. I would recommend that the Village retain an engineering firm that specializes in the preservation of old buildings (Old Structures Engineering or Silman/TY Lin, for example) to assess whether the entire house should be demolished because of the condition of the rear porch and sunroom. This would aid in determining if a demolition permit should be issued.”

Following the submission of the report, the Village received a letter from Cuddy and Feder withdrawing the application to tear down the house.