Planning Commission Meeting: June 12, 2023

The Hudson Planning Commission met on June 12, 2023 at 7:30 PM at Town Hall. The primary agenda item was a compatibility review/concept plan for Canterbury Crossing, a proposed 36-lot single-family subdivision under Open Space Conservation Use (OSCU). After extensive staff presentation, commission questioning, and public testimony, the applicant voluntarily withdrew the application, acknowledging the plan was not compatible as presented.

Consent Calendar

• Approval of Minutes (May 8, 2023) – Approved as amended (6 ayes, 1 abstention – Ms. Jones was not present at the previous meeting).

Public Comments & Testimony

• Skylar Sutton (2243 Ravenna Street) stated the proposal does not meet density requirements, citing 1207.06G and 1205.05D1. He argued that including a separate parcel and claiming only 2.89 acres of wetlands (vs. 8 acres in a 2018 study) inflates density. He said the subdivision should be treated as two separate OSCU developments, and that the plan does not evoke a small rural village as required. He expressed concerns that stormwater will be illegally diverted onto his property and threatened legal action.
• Dana Zahuranec (2161 Ravenna Street) questioned lot sizes versus proposed large homes, viewed the project as two separate developments, and raised concerns about increased stormwater and traffic on Ravenna Street.
• Rebecca Trudeau (6292 Stow Road) noted the applicant ignored staff suggestions, expressed concern about loss of privacy if a road or trail runs along her property, and said the proposal would have prevented her from purchasing her home.
• Haley Arnold (6378 Canterbury Drive) urged commissioners to hold the developer to the Land Development Code to preserve rural character, and expressed stormwater and traffic concerns.
• John Pelletier (6266 Stow Road) questioned calling it one development, asked about road connections, and doubted that $1,000,000 homes evoke a small rural village feel.
• Brian Hetrick (6782 Pheasants Ridge) noted difficulty traveling on Stow Road and the strain on city services, and suggested waiting for the updated Comprehensive Plan before approving growth.
• Nova Buchanan (6312 Stow Road) stated she was not contacted by the developer, voiced concern about a road reducing her privacy and property value, and questioned how salt spray might affect her well (10 feet from the south property line). She also questioned the process of converting a residential lot into a road and noted the uniqueness of District 2.
• Tony Havlicek (6328 Stow Road) expressed concern about heavy traffic on Stow Road, proposed housing density, and water runoff onto his already soaked property.
• John Osco (6100 Stow Road) noted a stream that backs up onto his property and may worsen, and said wildlife could be harmed.
• Lee Cosma (2242 Ravenna Street, Hudson Equestrian Center) questioned plans to mitigate damage to Brandywine Creek and asked when the wetlands survey was done, noting the land is wet even in drought.
• Matthew Jones (2233 Ravenna Street) concurred with others about water issues and said the development is not compatible with the rural character that drew his family to the area.

Discussion Items

• Staff Presentation – Nicholas Sugar explained the three-step subdivision process and noted the public notice incorrectly labeled the meeting as a public hearing. He said no rezoning or variances are proposed, and the property is identified in the Comprehensive Plan as a candidate for low-impact cluster development.
• Applicant Presentation – Chris Brown (Kuchar LLC/Prestige Homes) proposed a 36-lot OSCU subdivision on Ravenna Street. He described 29 buildable lots, with denser lots on the north side and larger estate lots on the south. He noted the Army Corps of Engineers would determine wetlands, and that the applicant sought guidance before committing to additional studies and costs.
• Commission Questions & Discussion
  • Density calculations were questioned: the applicant included a parcel (lot 36) owned by a third party, and wetlands may be larger than claimed. Staff noted the density verification is needed.
  • The commission and applicant debated whether the proposal represents one or two subdivisions, given Ravenna Street bisects the property. Several commissioners expressed the view that it should be treated as two separate developments.
  • Traffic and entrance location were major concerns: the proposed Stowe Road entrance was criticized due to high traffic volumes (9,700 vehicles/day on Stow Road, 1,700 on Ravenna). Commission recommended moving the entrance to Ravenna Street.
  • Stormwater: multiple residents detailed flooding issues. The assistant city engineer noted the project will be held to a 25-to-1 standard (stricter than city base code). The applicant acknowledged the need for further study.
  • Wetlands discrepancy: the applicant's 2.89-acre delineation contrasted with an earlier 8-acre study. Staff said a jurisdictional determination from the Army Corps is required.
  • Compatibility with OSCU intent: commissioners questioned whether the plan preserves natural character and clusters homes, as required. Ms. Norman argued it is not a true open space conservation design and would fail a conditional use analysis.
• Commissioner Observations – Mr. Furbee initially found the concept compatible, but later agreed major issues remained. Mr. Vaughan noted the north side would likely need to be reduced to about 19–20 units to meet density and open space targets if treated as a separate subdivision.

Key Outcomes

• Application Withdrawal – After commissioners stated the plan as presented was not compatible and that rejection was likely, applicant Chris Brown voluntarily withdrew the application. The chair confirmed the withdrawal, allowing the developer to revise and resubmit without being subject to rejection timing restrictions.
• No Formal Vote on Compatibility – The withdrawal rendered the motion to reject moot.
• Next Steps for Applicant – The commission encouraged the developer to: verify density calculations, obtain an Army Corps wetlands determination, move the street entrance to Ravenna Street, improve stormwater management, and redesign as two separate OSCU developments if appropriate.
• Staff Updates – Greg Hannan reported reaching out to universities for a planning consultant; a special workshop for commissioners is expected in August. The city arborist will be included in future staff reports. Upcoming applications include Western Reserve Academy turf fields and Hudson Country Club golf cart barn.
• Future Commission Matters – The chair suggested commissioners may email clarifying questions to staff in advance to streamline meetings, though Ms. Romano expressed concern about transparency. The meeting adjourned at 10:22 PM.