Board of Appeals Considers Fate of Cudner-Hyatt House
- Details
- Hits: 4867
Concern about the fate of the Scarsdale Historical Society’s 18th century building attracted a crowd to the Zoning Board of Appeals meeting at Scarsdale Village Hall on Wednesday night March 14th.
The Board of Directors of the Scarsdale Historical Society has filed an application to remove the variance that requires Cudner-Hyatt House to operate as a museum. They contend that removing the variance would allow them to explore ways to make this property financially viable and permit the Historical Society to continue their work. According to the Board, with the variance in place they are having trouble exploring alternative uses for the building and having serious negotiations with others who could take over the property. They looked into moving the building, and leasing it to another group but have not had any success.
In recent years the building has seen little use as it appears that there are no longer people in the community willing to invest their time, money and energy to produce the fairs and educational events that were formerly the lifeblood of the Society. According to the Board, the house is “no longer relevant to the community.” They argue that the Historical Society does not need to “own real estate to accomplish their mission.” Maintenance of the house is draining the Society’s funds, leaving them without resources to pursue other projects such as the digitization of historic issues of the Scarsdale Inquirer or awarding grants for the study of the Scarsdale history.
Speaking in support of the application were many who have previously fought to protect the Village’s historic assets. Society Board Member Carolyn Mehta said, “There is not much at the society that is Scarsdale based history. Right now the Society’s funds are being spent on building maintenance. We have events and fairs but no one comes. Lifting the variance will free funds for the society to do what it wants to do.”
In a written statement, Lucas Meyer, who has served on the Society’s Board for ten years said, “Despite my lifelong commitment to historic preservation I cannot ignore the fact that the ongoing maintenance of the building is beyond the scope and financial ability of the Scarsdale Historical Society. I also trust that this board understands the Society’s Board of Trustees has been extraordinarily thorough in its year-long deliberations, and that we are completely united in our decision.”
Linda Blair, who has served on the Committee for Historic Preservation and the BAR said “ I am a steward of the past but a believer in appropriate use. Though I love old things I understand what is happening now. Free this board to do what they need to do.”
However others urged the Zoning Board of Appeals not to act in haste. Speaking on behalf of the Scarsdale Forum, VP Dan Hochvert asked that the Attorney General make a determination on the variance before the Board of Appeals takes action. He also requested that the Society continue to maintain the house while awaiting a decision. A statement from the Scarsdale Forum’s Executive Committee on the house was issued under expeditious treatment and presented to the Board of Appeals.
Lena Crandall urged the Board of Appeals to refer the matter to the Village Board to do its own study to see if another group is willing to operate the house as a museum. She said, “We need another Eda Newhouse to come along with energy and imagination.”
Former Historical Society President Eda Newhouse called the application “shocking and absurd.” She told that board that when she ran the Society there were 25 people on the Board of Directors as well as scores of others on the Advisory Board. and that they “had a party every year and worked hard to find ways to keep the money coming in.” She also asked the Board of Appeals to give the item more time on the agenda, saying, “You are shortchanging the Historical Society to say what we think in such a short time.”
Former Mayor Ed Morgan spoke on behalf of the Scarsdale Arts Council. They also submitted a statement supporting the position of the Scarsdale Forum. He said, “When the trustees granted the variance they believed it was a landmark worth saving. The Attorney General can get involved at any time. Other neighborhoods have recently saved their historical societies. I don’t have all the answers but it is premature to say there are no answers. We endorse the recommendations made by the Scarsdale Forum and ask you to wait until the Attorney General can get involved.”
When the current president of the Scarsdale Historical Society returned to the table he said, “I want to thank everyone who came tonight. This is the most interest we have had in the Society in years. I agree with what was said. We are dealing with a zoning issue. We want to look for opportunities in the best possible way. As a responsible board we continue to look for options. Grant this so that we can continue to do our due diligence.”
What's To Become of Cudner-Hyatt House
- Details
- Hits: 13503
Controversy is brewing over an application by the Scarsdale Historical Society to convert the Cudner Hyatt House on the Post Road from museum to single-family home. The house was built between 1734 and 1754, predating the Revolutionary War. Strapped for funds, the Historical Society wishes to sell the 18th century building that it has used as a museum since it was granted a variance in 1974.The Society has applied to the Scarsdale Zoning Board of Appeals to amend that variance and revert the building for use as a single family residence. A decision on the application was held over at the Board’s February 8th meeting and is on the agenda for the March 14, 2011 meeting.
Despite the challenges of paying for the property, some are not in favor of clearing the way for the demolition of this historic building. The Scarsdale Arts Council contends that the house is “one of Scarsdale’s greatest heritage treasures,” and “has been the focus of community attention for more than two and half centuries.” It was originally part of a 200-acre farm that extended from the Post Road to the Bronx River. More recently, “Generations of Scarsdalians, including thousands of school children, have visited Cudner-Hyatt and participated in a wide range of activities centered there,” and furthermore, a Historical Resources Survey of Scarsdale acknowledges that Cudner-Hyatt house is a “likely landmark for designation.” The house already has historic site recognition form Westchester County, the State of New York and the national government.
In a statement from the Scarsdale Forum’s Executive Committee issued under expeditious treatment, two recommendations are made, both of which are endorsed by the Scarsdale Arts Council.
First, the Forum recommends that the Board of Appeals hold off a decision on the matter until the Historical Society informs the N.Y.S. Attorney General of their application.
Second, that the Society continue to maintain and the house and make it available for public use while the decision is pending.Since the N.Y.S Attorney General is responsible for supervision of charities in the state the Forum contends that they should have the opportunity to address the matter and possibly find a white knight to save the property. They urge the Society to maintain the house in the interim to “avoid irreparable harm” and to seek ways to save it and use it.
In a rather cryptic message on the Scarsdale Historical Society’s Facebook page, a post says:
There's a lot of chatter about the Society's application to lift the variance at 937 Post Road to return it to its original as of right single-family residential use. We probably agree with you. We also care about the buildings and lifting the variance is not intended to destroy them. Let us know your concerns or thoughts.
The matter will be considered by the Zoning Board of Appeals at Scarsdale Village Hall on Wednesday March 14 at 8 pm.
Wake-Up Westchester! Why people need to band together to stop DAS rollout NOW
- Details
- Hits: 9599
Here is a letter to Scarsdale10583 submitted by Deborah Kopald, a nationally recognized public health advocate, who will be discussing DAS (and how to stop it) as well as other wireless transmitters and devices on Wednesday, February 29th from 7:30-9:30 p.m. at Wainwright House in Rye.
In 1993, the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) recommended that cell towers be placed away from schools and hospitals. A few years later, 40 scientists at the Harvard and BU Public Schools of Health called cell towers a public health emergency. Those following these developments would have been hard-pressed to wonder whether the CPUC recommendations shouldn’t also apply to residential zones and areas that people frequented and worked at. There was reason for concern—the literature on people living near radar, tv and radio towers showed negative health consequences to those in close proximity; cell towers represented the first time that the population at large would be exposed ubiquitously and continuously to microwave radiation.
In the intervening years, many forward-thinking municipalities structured ordinances that stipulated that cell towers be kept away from homes and schools and placed in industrial areas before residential zones in the name of protecting property values (since the Telecom Act of 1996 prevents regulation on the basis of radiation emissions and health effects). Literature conducted on health effects of cell towers has indeed borne out what was feared; those in proximity show elevated rates of negative health- from sleep problems, to cardiovascular dysfunction to cancer. The movie Full Signal chronicles the health problems of those living close to transmitters around the world.
Since the prescient CPUC recommendation, at least 15 countries or international bodies have issued advisories on wireless devices and/or transmitters. Israel bans new transmitters from residential areas and has put a moratorium on the 4G network. Some governments have warned citizens not to abandon their landlines, to hold cell phones away from heads and bodies when not in use, to restrict children’s use of cellphones and not to install Wi-Fi. Independent scientists assert that cellphones are linked to brain tumors, brain damage, and cognitive dysfunction and that being in close proximity to a wireless transmitter regularly is also a problem, especially for children whose brains, eyes, immune systems and other organs are more susceptible to the effects of microwave radiation than adults’.
Obviously holding a cell phone to your ear is usually the most intense exposure people receive at a given time—although sitting next to a very high powered Wi-Fi transmitter on public transportation can expose you to the same amount of radiation as talking on a cell phone. But a 2009 Swiss study showed that people in urban areas were getting more cumulative radiation from moving in and out of areas with transmitters than they were getting from daily use of their cell phone. In other words- radiation exposure from Wi-Fi exposure in school will exceed most children’s cell phone exposure over time. In any event, we do know that the levels of Wi-Fi in many schools are as high as if there were a cell tower on the premises and the levels working at Wi-Fi enabled laptops are even higher.
Meanwhile, technology continues to be rolled out at a pace that outstrips our ability and willingness to regulate it, the distinction between a device and a transmitter is increasingly collapsing, and the radiation in peoples’ homes, work and schools is increasing as the microwave radiation-emitting transmitters are placed closer to areas that people spend time in and higher powered devices are perched on people’s laps- or at least at their desks or on their bed-side tables.
Wi-Fi, smart meters (devices placed on the side of homes by utilities to measure electricity that obviate the need for meter-readers) and portable hotspots—even the use of wireless devices on trains (where the metal structure magnifies the effect of the radiation emitted by so many people using their wireless devices simultaneously in an enclosed space) – exceeds the amount of radiation people were exposed to by most of the cell towers that have been rolled out in the last 15-20 years. Since radiation exposure is more a factor of proximity than total power output, what happened between early attempts to site cell towers responsibly to the current explosion of in-building radiation systems and devices that produce radiation exposures well in excess of the amounts people are exposed to from cell towers (and were right to be concerned about)?
Even the cell towers are being placed closer in closer- on utility poles right outside peoples’ homes. This has occurred all over California (often in neighborhoods with multi-million dollar homes, in Long Island, and is starting to happen in Westchester, especially in communities with weak transmitter-siting ordinances on the books. The cell transmitters-on-poles phenomenon, known as DAS, or Distributed Antennae Systems, are exposing more people to more radiation in their own neighborhoods than they were ever exposed to by most cell towers due to transmitter proximity.
Expensive neighborhoods are no longer a refuge from an effective occupational exposure to microwave radiation. This is outrageous, and people need to stand up and fight DAS comprehensively before it affects their individual street or neighborhood. The Telecom Act of 1996 promotes ubiquitous phone coverage, which has generally been achieved. Nowhere in the text does it guarantee corporations the right to ubiquitous coverage of so-called “enhanced services” so iPhones and their ilk can receive high-speed data transmissions in every nook and cranny. There is a reason why Israel put a stop to 4G; that country fears the radiation emissions are problematic for public health.
High speed data should be transmitted by wire, and people and institutions should be encouraged to connect via wire indoors. What is the marginal benefit of being able to do heavy computing in your basement or yard, when you could do it at a wired computer in your home office with no exposure to microwave radiation? People need to ask themselves this question- if not for themselves, than for the sake of creating a safe environment for their children. Because the federal government will not take steps to protect public health in this country (while Europe has done extensive studies, our government cancelled studies they did with industry in the 90’s that were showing extremely negative health consequences of microwave radiation and then issued less-reliable animal studies in 1999 that didn’t get started until 2010 and won’t be completed before 2014), people need to work with municipal officials and state regulatory bodies to question the appropriateness of DAS and put a stop to it before it becomes ubiquitous. Any less means the loss of the right to control the levels of microwave radiation in one’s own home.
In other words, the failure to speak out means people are handing rights over to the wireless industry that they are not necessarily entitled to. If people do not rise to the occasion, and DAS is allowed to become ubiquitous, it will be harder to stop it and subsequent proliferations of other transmitters that will expose people to even higher levels of radiation.
Consider: the EPA Radiation Protection Division stated that no standards exist for long-term exposure to microwave radiation. The Federal Interagency Working Group on Radiofrequency Radiation states that the standards for pulsed radiofrequency are NOT protective of human health. But the agencies tasked with standards setting, health review and public advisories are paralyzed by bureaucratic inaction.
The rollout of DAS is an unprecedented power grab by utilities; since the pulsed microwave radiation coming out of transmitters is odorless, colorless and tasteless, most people are not aware there is a serious issue afoot. Many of those that do realize the magnitude of the issue make a feeble protest effort when it is too late and the contracts are practically signed. Meanwhile, the EU and the Council of Europe have called effectively for transmitter-free zones in and around schools, hospitals and old-age homes.
Perhaps Winston Churchill was wrong when he said “America eventually gets things right after exhausting all the other possibilities”, because while we should be addressing failed public policy that already exposes people to unacceptable and uncontrolled levels of radiation, we are in the process of increasing our exposures further. People should not wait around for a pronouncement by the U.S. government but take immediate action at the local level.
Editor’s note: A decal such as the one at right may someday indicate buildings free of wireless technology, while the decal on the top would indicate that a building contains wireless transmitters.
Edgewood 4th Graders Inspired by Pianist at Grace Church
- Details
- Hits: 4912
Edgewood 4th graders were treated to a special mid-day concert at Grace Church, White Plains this past Wednesday featuring an artist internationally recognized for her talent as a concert pianist. Leann Osterkamp, who just turned 21, entertained William Reilly and Joann Mraz’s classes for just under an hour and then spent a good 20 minutes taking questions from the audience.
Osterkamp was born in Boulder, Colorado and has performed as a solo and chamber artist across the U.S. and Europe (including the Kennedy Center in Washington, D.C., the Baryshnikov Center in New York City and the Prosels Castle in Vols am Schlern, Italy). Most recently Miss Osterkamp was the 2010 Finalist in the New York International Piano Competition. She came as a guest in the Downtown Music at Grace* (White Plains) concert series, which sponsors free noonday concerts each Wednesday throughout the year.
Downtown Music’s musical director and founder Tim Lewis felt that this particular concert would connect with young people as Leann 
Osterkamp grew up doing many of the things that Scarsdale’s children do (soccer, gymnastics, band) and then pursued her passion for playing the piano. The Edgewood 4th graders learned during the question & answer session that Miss Osterkamp, curiously enough, included in her musical “arsenal”: the kazoo, the xylophone (she was part of her school’s marching band) and the trumpet. The piano, the audience would learn, was something that she’s been studying since she was 7 years old. 10,000 hours later Leann Osterkamp can claim to be one of the rising stars in the world of classical music (a student in the audience asked her whether or not she had put in that many hours of practice time – ostensibly this child was told by his music teacher that that was what it would take to get to Julliard – where Osterkamp is currently studying under Julian Martin).
The actual program included pieces by Debussy, Beethoven and Chopin. Between each selection Miss Osterkamp took time out to speak about the music and encouraged the children to use their imaginations while listening (the Debussy piece – “Poissons d’or” (goldfish) – was of particular interest). Despite the sophisticated nature of the music being performed, it was clear that the children were engaged (many were actually fingering imaginary keyboards along with the music). The Q&A session ran over the allotted time (Miss Osterkamp was visibly delighted at the level of enthusiasm). The concert ended with the presentation of flowers by students from Mr. Reilly and Ms. Mraz’s classes.
4th grade teacher William Reilly and Principal Scott Houseknecht get much credit for supporting this outing (the first group of local students to have attended this concert series). Reilly, an actor with an extensive Broadway background, was quick to accept an invitation to expose the children to such a high level of musical talent. Principal Houseknecht , the creator of the “Classical Café” – a music series dating back almost 10 years (which was designed to create a forum for elementary school students to perform in front of their peers) was also very supportive of providing the children with this cultural opportunity.
Funding for the transportation of the children was underwritten by ArtsWestchester with funds from Westchester County. The free noonday concerts will take place every Wednesday until the end of May ( www.DTMusic.org ). Please contact Tim Lewis at 949-0384 for further information.
Letter to the Editor: Developer Dupes Village
- Details
- Hits: 3974
To the Editor: 
Regarding the recent article relating to the home built in Saxon Woods by a developer that received a pass by the Boards and Building Department of Scarsdale we here in Edgemont are experiencing the same lack of enforcement and regard for our home and existing neighborhood.
The owner/builder (who is actually in telecommunications and not a builder by profession) purchased the lot on 201 South Healy Avenue and is attempting the same "duping" here in the town of Greenburgh. The builder received a permit to build a modest one-family residence on a small lot which he has, without permit or approval, substantially increased in size and scope and moved structures and walls all without going before the boards for permission to deviate from the approved plans. Depending on the day, the home is either for his family or for sale - it has been on and off multiple listings.
He has harassed us regularly for almost two years, damaged our private property, towed my car from my driveway while we were away on vacation, made verbal threats, thrown my garbage can every Monday and Thursday for three months, threatened my wife twice with his construction vehicle and dumped dirt on my wife's head with his bobcat from behind. At a recent meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals he slapped a female neighbor in the face and was arrested. He is aggressive and violent towards us because we are documenting his unlawful building and trying to get the town to see what he is doing.
What is the point of land use Boards and Building Department inspectors? Apparently you may now purchase property and build whatever you want? Why aren't these boards and town officials enforcing the 
laws and codes in place to protect existing property owners and neighborhood integrity? Why must the existing homeowners police the builders? And why after issues are brought to the town's attention are they ignored? We have supplied an enormous amount of documented proof that what is being constructed is not what was approved and yet while the town spins their wheels, he continues to build...now he is claiming financial hardship because instead of being stopped when it was a mere foundation, he has been allowed to continue at "his own risk". So he has continued, banking on the idea that now that so much has been built, the town won't make him take it down.
There is no reason why any of this should be happening, yet it is; and although we are disgusted that we have had to endure this man's reign of terror, we will not be bullied and allow our home to be devalued nor allow his constant threats to deter us.
If we don’t take a stand then all of you should be prepared should something change next door to you.
Mark Gordon
13 Elizabeth Street
Scarsdale, NY
