Preview
FILED: WESTCHESTER COUNTY CLERK 06/11/2021 03:29 PM INDEX NO. 54241/2021
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 25 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/11/2021
Exhibit 2a
FILED: WESTCHESTER COUNTY CLERK 06/11/2021 03:29 PM INDEX NO. 54241/2021
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 25 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/11/2021
October 27, 2020
06151-0003
Lawrence O. Graham, Esq.
Cuddy& Feder LLP
445 Hamilton 145 Floor
Avenue,
White Plains, New York 10601
RE: 11 Dolma Road (Request forCertificate of Appropriateness)
CHP Memorandum Decision response
Dear Mr. Graham:
The purpose of this letteris to provide my comments on the Memorandum Decision from Adam
Lindeñbaum, the chair ofthe Committee forHistoric Preservaticñ tothe Scarsdale Building Department
dated October 5, 2020 regarding whethGr the prcpertcyat 11 Dolma Road meets the definitionof
historicalimportance as itis presented inthe Scarsdale Code ("Lindenbaum memo"). I also address
selected comments made in the September 29th of the CHP that preceded the Lindenbaum
issating
. memo. In this I
letter,make reference tomy previous correspondence to you on thismatter: specifically,
lettersof 2020 August 205 ("August and September 28th("September
my May 15, ("May letter"), letter"),
which
letter") have previously been submitted tothe Village ofScarsdale in connection with thismatter.
Significance"
Page 2: The first
section, addressing the "Level of seems to suggest that an assessment
of a level of significance of properties relative toone another is required under the Scarsdale code,
which is notthe case. This section of theLindenbaum memo invokes the 2012 Reconnaissance Survey
(and ericñêcusly citesthe author as solely Andrew Dolkart,which is incomplete and failsto note the
lead authors, Li Saltzman Architects). The Lindenbaum memo asserts that "the importance of the
Survey."
Dolma Road neighborhood iswell documented inthe 2012 Reconnaissance
In fact,the2012 Reconnaissance Survey makes no assertions with respect to the historical
importance
of the Dolma Road development, and identifiesno Scarsdale criteriafor importance
historical for the
area. Convêñticñally, a Reconnaissance-level survey (Phase IA) does not,infact, make evaluations of
historicalimportance, and only identifiesproperties that might possess historicalimpsitance by virtue
of factors such as age. The assessment of historical
importance (significance)is the conventional role
of an Intensive-Level Survey (Phase II),which has yet to be performed, along with landrñarking of
individual properties and districts
that conventionally resultfrom a Phase IIstudy. Inaccordance with
Areas"
this standard methodology, the 2012 Reconnaissance Survey identifies"Potential Study and
Landmarks"
"Petêñtial Individual and does not evaluate properties for the historicalimportance, only
points out that these properties should be evaluated. To construe the report as having conducted and
justifiedthisevaluation isincorrect.
What is noted with regard to Dolma Road inthe 2012 Reconnaissance Survey (p. 7-43) are the
houses" lots," "exclusive"
"substantial on "large thatwere and built"forwealthy businessmen and their
families."
As I have noted previously inconnection to Scarsdale Criterion 2 in my May wealth
letter, is
not synonymous with historicalimportance and I would hope that the privilegsof historicwealth would
not be confused with significance.In a similarvein, large size per se has no historicalimportance: just
because a building is bigger does not mean that itis more historicallyimportant. In additiüñ, the
"exclusive"
nature of these and other devs|cprasñts were part of a pattern of segregated suburbs
intended to allow wealthy, white, Protestant homebuyers to escape the New York City inthe boom
period of construction of Scarsdale and itsasighbor communities between World War I and the Great
67B Mountain Blvd Ext
Depression, as I noted inmy August letter.
PO Box 4039
Warren, NJ 07059 Significance"
In Connection to the"Level of discussion inthe Lindenbaum memo, the size ofthe lotand
t. 732.560.9700itSSetting ("Unique and impressive") are noted. The Lindenbaum memo spends considerable time
discussing the size of the property in this section,suggesting that thisis somehow a factor in its
historicalimportance. As already noted in connection to the size of the house the
itself, scale of its
11 Dolma Rd - 0001
FILED: WESTCHESTER COUNTY CLERK 06/11/2021 03:29 PM INDEX NO. 54241/2021
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 25 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/11/2021
Lawrence O. Graham, Esq.
11 Dolma Road (Request for Certificateof Appropriateness)
Response to CHP Memorandum Decision
October 27, 2020
Page 2
setting has no bearing on the Village of Scarsdale's criteriafor historicalimportâñcs; neither does
"unique" "impressive."
whether a property is or
Pp. 2-3: Although Walter Collet isnot invoked as thebasis ofhistorical importance under the Scarsdale
the
criteria, Lindenbaum memo includes the statement that "the CHP findsthat Collet's
construction of
house."
11 Dolma contributes to the of
integrity the materials and workmanship of the
This is a misconstruction of the concept of integrity.During the CHP September meeting, it was
asserted that there isa distinctionbGtwGGñ the evaluation of historicalimportance under the Scarsdale
code and listingin the National Register of Historic Places. Designation by listingin the National
Register and evaluation of historicalimportance under the Scarsdale code do take place at different
levels ofgovernment, but there is a directlink between the Scarsdale code and the National Register
regulation in thewording of the Scarsdale code, which initsessential wording and structure mirrorsthe
National Register regulations and National Park Service guidance on the regulations. The code
includes the language of both the relevant federal regulation (36 CRF 60.4) in the inclusion of the
concept of integrityand itsspecific aspects and much of the wording and general structure of the
"master"
definition of historical
importance inthe Scarsdale Criteria.In addition,the definitionof inthe
Scarsdale code comes verbatim from National Park Service's guidance on the appkatbñ of the
concepts of the criteria and integrity,as Inoted in my May letter.Because of this mirroring, the
conceptual framework that underpins the National Register isnecessarily relevant.
As I noted inmy August letter,
integrityis the abilityof a property to convey its historicalimportance
(significance) and iseither present or absent. My previous letters have extensively documented the
reasons I am not of the opinion that 11 Dolma Road meets the Scarsdale criteria.
Thus, inthe terms of
the ordinance, in my opinion it has no historicalimportance and therefore the concept of integrityis
irrelevant because there isno sigñif|cance to convey. As I have also documented, particularlyinmy
August if one
letter, does assert that the 11 Dolma Road house has historicalimportance, then it cannot
be construed as retaining integritybecause of theextensive alterations to it.Regardless, Collet's
"contribute"
construction of the 11 Dolma Road house could not to itsintegrity.
Pp. 3 -6, regarding the finding ofthe 11 Dolma Road house as the work ofa master. I have previously
"recognitions"
documented my opinion on how JuliusGregory failsto merit thisstatus. The noted in the
greatness"
Lindenbaum memo do not constitute the "generally recognized thatis required fora finding
of the status of master inthe Scarsdale code. Instead, they constitute the publications that would be
associated with a good, successful practitioner ofthe period, which isthe way Ihave desciibed Mr.
Gregory both inwriting and in CHP presentations. There were many of these practitioners,and their
work the
fills architectural periodicals of the period. Simple quantity of publication, a topicwhich was
brought up in the September CHP meeting as an argument foridentifyingJulius Gregory as a master,
does not indicatethat the work was seen as the work ofa master. The vast majorityof the publications
noted in the Lindenbaum memo include images of Gregory's projects without eve!uation or
commentary: the projects are simply illustrated.
This isstandard forsuccessful architects of the period
as I have previously noted.
As I noted in remarks and presêñtation in the September CHP meeting, one project - the
my only
Charles E. Chambers House and Studio, 4670 Waldo Avenue, Riverdale, builtin 1918 -was accorded
extensive publication and evaluation by the professional architectural press. No other subsequent
project received thislevel of attention.I have previously discussed the issue of Gregory's awards. The
essay provided by Ms. Cefola does not provide any documentation for these. I also previously
addressed Andrew Dolkart's assertions quoted inthe Lindenbaum memo inmy September letter.
Itiscertainly the case thatan architectcan be recognized for more than one building type or scale as
Mr. Lindenbaum notes. As my presentation in the September CHP meeting made clear, Mr. Gregory
could, and did design buildings ina range of historicizingstyles and within a range of scales. I would
note, as I have previously, that thiswas standard fare for many successful architects inthisperiod and
neither exceptional nor per se a mark of the statusof master, as was suggested in theSeptember CHP
meeting. As my research and presentation documented, the type ofbuilding illustratedin contemporary
publicationsdesigned was the scale and proportion ofa cottage - as I have
by Gregory overwhelmingly
Letter
P:106t5110003ReportsW-EnviACRMlMisc Road
RepestlDraftsit
t Dolma response
toLindenbaum
memo10.27.20.ducx11 Dolma Rd -0002
FILED: WESTCHESTER COUNTY CLERK 06/11/2021 03:29 PM INDEX NO. 54241/2021
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 25 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/11/2021
Lawrence 0. Graham, Esq.
11 Dolma Road (Request for Certificateof Appropriateness)
Response to CHP Memorandum Decision
October 27, 2020
Page 3
previously noted. Thus, while he may have designed any number of buildings in various styles,an
evaluation of the status ofmaster requires three steps: the of
first these isrecogniticñ of an architect's
work, and the second isthat that recognition isgeneral, and third,that thatgeneral recognition is of
grsatñêss. The published record indicates that Mr. Gregory's work was recognized, and the number of
projects published indicate that thatrecognition was general. In the published record, however, none
were evaluated by hiscontemporaries as exceptional other than the Chambers residence. Facilitywith
more than one style isnot an appropriate basis for an assessment of an architect as a master inand
"greatness"
of itself,as I have noted. Because the definitionof requires explicitrecognition of that
character of work over a body ofwork (notjust one project),I re-assert my opinion that thisrecognition
was not achieved by the documents cited here with regard to Gregory's larger houses.
Finally,if oneaccepts the notion that Gregory isa master, and that,therefore, recognition is key tothat
status, itiscrucial to note that the house at 11 Dolma Road was never rêcagaized historicallyinany
publication that evaluated itsimportance as a design. As I have previously noted, thetwo publications
of thisproject were promotional or quasi-promotional in nature: the period newspaper account of the
Lyon house describes itin terms ofquantity (e.g.,seven bathrooms) rather than quality,and the only
other printappearance of the house was ina work by the developer on his projects.
There was discussion atthe CHP Septernber meeting about how buildings are equivalent toworks of
fine artin terms of recognition of importance. As I discussed in my August letter,the recognition of
aesthetic or technical mastery inthe work of a historic painter or sculptor (forexample) who has
previously been under-recognized isan actof connoisseurship, not of research and analysis of historic
documentation and earliercritical
reception. Evidence ofthe latteris what isrequired foran analysis of
historicalirñpertâñce that is,in tum, necessary for general recognition ofgreatness that isrequired for
a property to meet Criterion3. Inaddition, while buildings may have artistic
qualities in their
aesthetics,
they are not primarily works of fineart.Instead, they are primarilypractical structures that must serve
human physical and psychological needs firstand foremost. There isno true correlation between work
by a fine artist
in varying media, as was discussed in theCHP September meeting, and building styles.
In thework of Mr. Gregory and his contemporaries, stylisticdetailsof differenttypes were often applied
to buildings with very similar volumetric organization, while a found object assemblage sculpture isa
fundamentally differentthing materially from a cast bronze, for example. The abilityto work inthese
very differsñt media on the part of a sculptor is not equivalent to an architect using patterned brick
instead of stucco or cut stone as exterior cladding on an L-plan residence or choosing toplace the
dovecote at the end of the elevationof a differentvolume than the lastdesign.
Pp. 6-7, regarding Scarsdale Criterion4. I have previously documented at length the reasons I am not
of the opinion thatthe 11 Dolma Road house does not meet Criterion 4. I would also note that the
concept ofintegritymakes no distinctionas to whether alterationscan be seen by the public. If a design
isdeemed tohave historicalimportance, then the design as a whole must be considered, and cherry-
picking aspects of itis incongruent, contrary to Mr. Lindenbaum's assertions. If a historicdesign
constitutes the basis of histcrica|importance, then that design must be present in itskey components.
Alterations thattake away substantial aspects of thatdesign, likethe changing of a building'svolumes,
rooflines,and window IGcaticñs, as wellas large additions, remove the iñtegrityof thedesign, no matter
"sympathetic" "sympathetic"
how those changes might be. Thus, whether an alteration is is immaterial
if it changesor removes key features as I have noted because of the extensive chañges tothat historic
design. I discussed thisin greater detailinmy August letter.
Very TrulyYours,
PAULUS, SOKOLOWSKI AND SARTOR, LLC.
Emily T. Cooperman, M.S., Ph.D.
11 Dolma Rd - 0003
Senior Architectural Historian
P:\06151W003\Repertavi-Emrir\CRM\Misc
Letter
Report)DrsRatti
Dolme response
Road toLindenbaum
memo10.27.20.doc×
Preview
FILED: WESTCHESTER COUNTY CLERK 06/11/2021 03:29 PM INDEX NO. 54241/2021 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 25 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/11/2021 Exhibit 2a FILED: WESTCHESTER COUNTY CLERK 06/11/2021 03:29 PM INDEX NO. 54241/2021 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 25 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/11/2021 October 27, 2020 06151-0003 Lawrence O. Graham, Esq. Cuddy& Feder LLP 445 Hamilton 145 Floor Avenue, White Plains, New York 10601 RE: 11 Dolma Road (Request forCertificate of Appropriateness) CHP Memorandum Decision response Dear Mr. Graham: The purpose of this letteris to provide my comments on the Memorandum Decision from Adam Lindeñbaum, the chair ofthe Committee forHistoric Preservaticñ tothe Scarsdale Building Department dated October 5, 2020 regarding whethGr the prcpertcyat 11 Dolma Road meets the definitionof historicalimportance as itis presented inthe Scarsdale Code ("Lindenbaum memo"). I also address selected comments made in the September 29th of the CHP that preceded the Lindenbaum issating . memo. In this I letter,make reference tomy previous correspondence to you on thismatter: specifically, lettersof 2020 August 205 ("August and September 28th("September my May 15, ("May letter"), letter"), which letter") have previously been submitted tothe Village ofScarsdale in connection with thismatter. Significance" Page 2: The first section, addressing the "Level of seems to suggest that an assessment of a level of significance of properties relative toone another is required under the Scarsdale code, which is notthe case. This section of theLindenbaum memo invokes the 2012 Reconnaissance Survey (and ericñêcusly citesthe author as solely Andrew Dolkart,which is incomplete and failsto note the lead authors, Li Saltzman Architects). The Lindenbaum memo asserts that "the importance of the Survey." Dolma Road neighborhood iswell documented inthe 2012 Reconnaissance In fact,the2012 Reconnaissance Survey makes no assertions with respect to the historical importance of the Dolma Road development, and identifiesno Scarsdale criteriafor importance historical for the area. Convêñticñally, a Reconnaissance-level survey (Phase IA) does not,infact, make evaluations of historicalimportance, and only identifiesproperties that might possess historicalimpsitance by virtue of factors such as age. The assessment of historical importance (significance)is the conventional role of an Intensive-Level Survey (Phase II),which has yet to be performed, along with landrñarking of individual properties and districts that conventionally resultfrom a Phase IIstudy. Inaccordance with Areas" this standard methodology, the 2012 Reconnaissance Survey identifies"Potential Study and Landmarks" "Petêñtial Individual and does not evaluate properties for the historicalimportance, only points out that these properties should be evaluated. To construe the report as having conducted and justifiedthisevaluation isincorrect. What is noted with regard to Dolma Road inthe 2012 Reconnaissance Survey (p. 7-43) are the houses" lots," "exclusive" "substantial on "large thatwere and built"forwealthy businessmen and their families." As I have noted previously inconnection to Scarsdale Criterion 2 in my May wealth letter, is not synonymous with historicalimportance and I would hope that the privilegsof historicwealth would not be confused with significance.In a similarvein, large size per se has no historicalimportance: just because a building is bigger does not mean that itis more historicallyimportant. In additiüñ, the "exclusive" nature of these and other devs|cprasñts were part of a pattern of segregated suburbs intended to allow wealthy, white, Protestant homebuyers to escape the New York City inthe boom period of construction of Scarsdale and itsasighbor communities between World War I and the Great 67B Mountain Blvd Ext Depression, as I noted inmy August letter. PO Box 4039 Warren, NJ 07059 Significance" In Connection to the"Level of discussion inthe Lindenbaum memo, the size ofthe lotand t. 732.560.9700itSSetting ("Unique and impressive") are noted. The Lindenbaum memo spends considerable time discussing the size of the property in this section,suggesting that thisis somehow a factor in its historicalimportance. As already noted in connection to the size of the house the itself, scale of its 11 Dolma Rd - 0001 FILED: WESTCHESTER COUNTY CLERK 06/11/2021 03:29 PM INDEX NO. 54241/2021 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 25 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/11/2021 Lawrence O. Graham, Esq. 11 Dolma Road (Request for Certificateof Appropriateness) Response to CHP Memorandum Decision October 27, 2020 Page 2 setting has no bearing on the Village of Scarsdale's criteriafor historicalimportâñcs; neither does "unique" "impressive." whether a property is or Pp. 2-3: Although Walter Collet isnot invoked as thebasis ofhistorical importance under the Scarsdale the criteria, Lindenbaum memo includes the statement that "the CHP findsthat Collet's construction of house." 11 Dolma contributes to the of integrity the materials and workmanship of the This is a misconstruction of the concept of integrity.During the CHP September meeting, it was asserted that there isa distinctionbGtwGGñ the evaluation of historicalimportance under the Scarsdale code and listingin the National Register of Historic Places. Designation by listingin the National Register and evaluation of historicalimportance under the Scarsdale code do take place at different levels ofgovernment, but there is a directlink between the Scarsdale code and the National Register regulation in thewording of the Scarsdale code, which initsessential wording and structure mirrorsthe National Register regulations and National Park Service guidance on the regulations. The code includes the language of both the relevant federal regulation (36 CRF 60.4) in the inclusion of the concept of integrityand itsspecific aspects and much of the wording and general structure of the "master" definition of historical importance inthe Scarsdale Criteria.In addition,the definitionof inthe Scarsdale code comes verbatim from National Park Service's guidance on the appkatbñ of the concepts of the criteria and integrity,as Inoted in my May letter.Because of this mirroring, the conceptual framework that underpins the National Register isnecessarily relevant. As I noted inmy August letter, integrityis the abilityof a property to convey its historicalimportance (significance) and iseither present or absent. My previous letters have extensively documented the reasons I am not of the opinion that 11 Dolma Road meets the Scarsdale criteria. Thus, inthe terms of the ordinance, in my opinion it has no historicalimportance and therefore the concept of integrityis irrelevant because there isno sigñif|cance to convey. As I have also documented, particularlyinmy August if one letter, does assert that the 11 Dolma Road house has historicalimportance, then it cannot be construed as retaining integritybecause of theextensive alterations to it.Regardless, Collet's "contribute" construction of the 11 Dolma Road house could not to itsintegrity. Pp. 3 -6, regarding the finding ofthe 11 Dolma Road house as the work ofa master. I have previously "recognitions" documented my opinion on how JuliusGregory failsto merit thisstatus. The noted in the greatness" Lindenbaum memo do not constitute the "generally recognized thatis required fora finding of the status of master inthe Scarsdale code. Instead, they constitute the publications that would be associated with a good, successful practitioner ofthe period, which isthe way Ihave desciibed Mr. Gregory both inwriting and in CHP presentations. There were many of these practitioners,and their work the fills architectural periodicals of the period. Simple quantity of publication, a topicwhich was brought up in the September CHP meeting as an argument foridentifyingJulius Gregory as a master, does not indicatethat the work was seen as the work ofa master. The vast majorityof the publications noted in the Lindenbaum memo include images of Gregory's projects without eve!uation or commentary: the projects are simply illustrated. This isstandard forsuccessful architects of the period as I have previously noted. As I noted in remarks and presêñtation in the September CHP meeting, one project - the my only Charles E. Chambers House and Studio, 4670 Waldo Avenue, Riverdale, builtin 1918 -was accorded extensive publication and evaluation by the professional architectural press. No other subsequent project received thislevel of attention.I have previously discussed the issue of Gregory's awards. The essay provided by Ms. Cefola does not provide any documentation for these. I also previously addressed Andrew Dolkart's assertions quoted inthe Lindenbaum memo inmy September letter. Itiscertainly the case thatan architectcan be recognized for more than one building type or scale as Mr. Lindenbaum notes. As my presentation in the September CHP meeting made clear, Mr. Gregory could, and did design buildings ina range of historicizingstyles and within a range of scales. I would note, as I have previously, that thiswas standard fare for many successful architects inthisperiod and neither exceptional nor per se a mark of the statusof master, as was suggested in theSeptember CHP meeting. As my research and presentation documented, the type ofbuilding illustratedin contemporary publicationsdesigned was the scale and proportion ofa cottage - as I have by Gregory overwhelmingly Letter P:106t5110003ReportsW-EnviACRMlMisc Road RepestlDraftsit t Dolma response toLindenbaum memo10.27.20.ducx11 Dolma Rd -0002 FILED: WESTCHESTER COUNTY CLERK 06/11/2021 03:29 PM INDEX NO. 54241/2021 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 25 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/11/2021 Lawrence 0. Graham, Esq. 11 Dolma Road (Request for Certificateof Appropriateness) Response to CHP Memorandum Decision October 27, 2020 Page 3 previously noted. Thus, while he may have designed any number of buildings in various styles,an evaluation of the status ofmaster requires three steps: the of first these isrecogniticñ of an architect's work, and the second isthat that recognition isgeneral, and third,that thatgeneral recognition is of grsatñêss. The published record indicates that Mr. Gregory's work was recognized, and the number of projects published indicate that thatrecognition was general. In the published record, however, none were evaluated by hiscontemporaries as exceptional other than the Chambers residence. Facilitywith more than one style isnot an appropriate basis for an assessment of an architect as a master inand "greatness" of itself,as I have noted. Because the definitionof requires explicitrecognition of that character of work over a body ofwork (notjust one project),I re-assert my opinion that thisrecognition was not achieved by the documents cited here with regard to Gregory's larger houses. Finally,if oneaccepts the notion that Gregory isa master, and that,therefore, recognition is key tothat status, itiscrucial to note that the house at 11 Dolma Road was never rêcagaized historicallyinany publication that evaluated itsimportance as a design. As I have previously noted, thetwo publications of thisproject were promotional or quasi-promotional in nature: the period newspaper account of the Lyon house describes itin terms ofquantity (e.g.,seven bathrooms) rather than quality,and the only other printappearance of the house was ina work by the developer on his projects. There was discussion atthe CHP Septernber meeting about how buildings are equivalent toworks of fine artin terms of recognition of importance. As I discussed in my August letter,the recognition of aesthetic or technical mastery inthe work of a historic painter or sculptor (forexample) who has previously been under-recognized isan actof connoisseurship, not of research and analysis of historic documentation and earliercritical reception. Evidence ofthe latteris what isrequired foran analysis of historicalirñpertâñce that is,in tum, necessary for general recognition ofgreatness that isrequired for a property to meet Criterion3. Inaddition, while buildings may have artistic qualities in their aesthetics, they are not primarily works of fineart.Instead, they are primarilypractical structures that must serve human physical and psychological needs firstand foremost. There isno true correlation between work by a fine artist in varying media, as was discussed in theCHP September meeting, and building styles. In thework of Mr. Gregory and his contemporaries, stylisticdetailsof differenttypes were often applied to buildings with very similar volumetric organization, while a found object assemblage sculpture isa fundamentally differentthing materially from a cast bronze, for example. The abilityto work inthese very differsñt media on the part of a sculptor is not equivalent to an architect using patterned brick instead of stucco or cut stone as exterior cladding on an L-plan residence or choosing toplace the dovecote at the end of the elevationof a differentvolume than the lastdesign. Pp. 6-7, regarding Scarsdale Criterion4. I have previously documented at length the reasons I am not of the opinion thatthe 11 Dolma Road house does not meet Criterion 4. I would also note that the concept ofintegritymakes no distinctionas to whether alterationscan be seen by the public. If a design isdeemed tohave historicalimportance, then the design as a whole must be considered, and cherry- picking aspects of itis incongruent, contrary to Mr. Lindenbaum's assertions. If a historicdesign constitutes the basis of histcrica|importance, then that design must be present in itskey components. Alterations thattake away substantial aspects of thatdesign, likethe changing of a building'svolumes, rooflines,and window IGcaticñs, as wellas large additions, remove the iñtegrityof thedesign, no matter "sympathetic" "sympathetic" how those changes might be. Thus, whether an alteration is is immaterial if it changesor removes key features as I have noted because of the extensive chañges tothat historic design. I discussed thisin greater detailinmy August letter. Very TrulyYours, PAULUS, SOKOLOWSKI AND SARTOR, LLC. Emily T. Cooperman, M.S., Ph.D. 11 Dolma Rd - 0003 Senior Architectural Historian P:\06151W003\Repertavi-Emrir\CRM\Misc Letter Report)DrsRatti Dolme response Road toLindenbaum memo10.27.20.doc×