approved the traffic plan, that seven curb cuts exist on the property while the limit is two, that the LDC defines
parking as a stopped vehicle - which exists on Oviatt Street, that the LDC is not clear on stacking cars, that the
Conditional Use Standards require Safe Routes to Schools - which the proposed drive does not reference, that a
City wide traffic plan has not been developed, the comments of the Comprehensive Plan regarding schools, how
the proposed project is integrated into the surrounding community - which is accomplished by alleviating the
stacking on Oviatt Street, that the Saywell House does have historic characteristics, that the drive around Malson
Field was closed in conjunction with the first phase of the demolition of the 1927 building, that the Saywell
House was in good condition and that it would be part of the Historic District if it were not part of the school
district, that a Conditional Use requires a 50-foot setback from residences - while the proposed project has only
30-feet - if the stacking area is determined to be parking, that public parking should be minimized from the
public view which could be accomplished by additional plantings, where loading spaces will exist, that the light
poles are similar to the approved city light poles, that the proposed light poles match the existing poles on the
driveway, that lower impact lighting may be a conditional use, that a permit was not required for the interior
abatement work on the Saywell House, that the annual budget of the school district is $70,000,000, that no
known events regarding calling the police or security have taken place on the driveway, that the character of the
community is served by reducing the stacking on Oviatt Street, that the proposal does not save significant money,
that a buffer yard is required when abutting a historic landmark, that a neighbor uses the drive to access a private
garage, the definition of a Historic Monument, how the project encourages foot traffic over vehicular traffic, that
the project creates harmony with the existing development by completing the original goal of smooth traffic flow,
that the number of stacked cars varies with the day, that the proposal will make the stacking better but may not
alleviate the stacking completely, that it is unknown what the teacher’s responsibility is when students are being
released, that the abatement process began approximately on the 15th to 20th of April following a professional
assessment, that the house doors were removed to aid in the removal of interior parts, and the Safe Route plans
concerning schools were reviewed regarding crosswalks and bus traffic.
Public Testimony
Cynthina Higgins, 80 N. Oviatt, expressed concern over additional hardscape causing water problems, the
possibility of no left turns onto, or off of N. Oviatt Street, that school buses should not be using N. Oviatt Street
because of children walking to school, and regulating which parents are allowed to drop off children on which
day.
The Commissioners and Ms. Higgins discussed the flooding of Oviatt Street and front yards during heavy rains.
Ms. Susan Newman 2694 Stonebridge Ct., on behalf of the Hudson Heritage Association (HHA), noted that the
traffic study discussed the four options, two of which have not been put in use and would meet the LDC without
additional cost. Ms. Newman also stated that HHA does not favor the demolition of the Saywell House, that three
other historic buildings have been demolished by the school district, that the three-lane driveway will detract
from the neighborhood, and that the school district should put great effort into respecting the historic
neighborhood in which it is located. Ms. Newman is also concerned that the school board has not been involved
in the decision to demolish the historic house.
Mr. Mark Madar, noted that he has restored about seven houses in the historic district, and he is personally
interested in acquiring the Saywell House, but did not know of the desire to sell the house.
Seeing no one else wishing to make Public Comment, Chair Norman closed Public Comments.
The Commissioners, applicants, and staff discussed: The possibility of selling the house as is where it is, that
safety can be accomplished in a variety of ways, that the school district agenda has an agenda item to vote on the
project this night, that the Oviatt Street residents where not contacted regarding the plan, the possibility of
withdrawing the motion to consider other options, that the school board agenda is not complete, that there is not a
signed contract for the demolition of the house, that plans exist to begin the process of removing the ‘stuff’’ on
