Planning Commission Meeting: August 14, 2023 - Compatibility Reviews and Ethics Discussion

The Hudson Planning Commission met on August 14, 2023, at 7:30 PM in Town Hall to conduct a public meeting, primarily to review two compatibility/concept plan requests for proposed subdivisions. The meeting included a procedural discussion on the distinction between a public meeting and a public hearing, a conflict-of-interest disclosure by Commissioner Melissa Jones regarding the Canterbury Crossing application, and a compatibility review of the Cottages at Pine Ridge subdivision. No final votes were taken on the applications, as the meeting served as a conceptual review.

Consent Calendar

• Approval of July 10, 2023 Minutes: Approved as amended by a vote of 6-0 (all present).
• Approval of July 17, 2023 Minutes: Approved as submitted by a vote of 5-0-1 (Commissioner Romano abstained, having been absent from that meeting).

Public Comments & Testimony

• Procedural Comment: Mr. Skylar Sutton (2243 Ravenna Street) noted that the printed agenda and mailed notices referred to the meeting as a "public meeting," while city social media and the website called it a "public hearing." He urged the commission to resolve the discrepancy to avoid due process issues. City Solicitor John Kolesar agreed, clarifying that the two agenda items were compatibility reviews—not public hearings—and no final decisions would be made.
• Cottages at Pine Ridge Public Comments:
  • Sharon Papes (553 W. Streetsboro Street) expressed concern about the maintenance of a pond adjacent to her property, particularly regarding vegetation encroachment and future ownership.
  • Judith Rose (499 C W. Streetsboro Street) stated that the wetlands are currently beautiful and that development would create traffic and water problems; she noted worsening flooding over 30 years.
  • Nancy Wides (459 D W. Streetsboro Street) said the area is attractive and that development would diminish its appeal.
  • Ted Huziak (5621 Abbyshire Drive) supported development, arguing that Hudson needs growth for tax revenue and school funding; he also commented on lot width requirements.
  • Sandra Ferek (469 W. Streetsboro Street) highlighted severe flooding in recent years and suggested the land be used for recreation rather than homes.
  • Laura Anderson (5800 Laurawood Drive), a local developer, noted that few lots are available in Hudson and expressed support for working with local builders.
  • Lisa Behm (2178 Middleton Road) praised Prestige Builder Group for their work on her property and supported the project.
  • Janice Kampf (561 W. Streetsboro Street) asked about tree preservation and house locations on lots S-1 and S-2.
  • Laurie Main (489 C W. Streetsboro Street) emphasized that the property is zoned Residential Conservation and urged careful use of the land.

Discussion Items

• Canterbury Crossing (PC 2023-676) – Conflict of Interest and Deferral: Commissioner Melissa Jones disclosed that she owns property adjacent to the proposed 34-lot subdivision. She stated that she had requested an advisory opinion from the Ohio Ethics Commission (OEC) on August 13, 2023, regarding whether she must recuse herself and whether she could then participate as a private citizen. The OEC indicated an opinion would be issued within 45 days. John Slagter, attorney for the applicant, argued that Ms. Jones should recuse herself due to due process concerns, noting that her husband had previously testified on the project. After discussion, Commissioner Norman moved to defer the compatibility review to the October 9, 2023, Planning Commission meeting to await the OEC opinion. The motion passed 5-0 (Ms. Jones recused). Staff clarified that the 120-day review period for the application (filed July 17, 2023) could be extended up to 60 additional days under the Land Development Code.
• Cottages at Pine Ridge (PC 2023-555) – Compatibility Review: City Planner Nicholas Sugar introduced the application for a 13-lot single-family subdivision on a 71.78-acre parcel, part of a previously platted (2009) but unbuilt subdivision. Applicant Chris Brown (Prestige Builder Group) presented the plan, noting that the back portion would be dedicated as open space conservation. He agreed to address several staff recommendations, including revising lot orientation, preserving existing vegetation, and potentially eliminating lot 11 if a buffer agreement with Hudson West Condominiums could not be reached. Commissioners discussed:
  • Lot sizes: Ms. Norman questioned whether the proposed 1.3-acre lots met the intent of the Open Space Conservation subdivision, which allows smaller clustered lots to preserve open space. She suggested reducing lot sizes to about half an acre.
  • Stormwater management: Commissioners emphasized that detailed engineering plans for water runoff and flooding mitigation would be critical, especially given existing issues at Hudson West.
  • Open space use: Ms. Norman pressed for a clear plan on how residents would access and enjoy the conserved open space (e.g., trails, viewing platforms) and whether it would be private or public.
  • Wetland delineation: The applicant noted that the Army Corps of Engineers had not yet issued a jurisdictional determination; wetland boundaries may have expanded since 2009.
  • Access and orientation: Issues with the entrance location (400-foot spacing requirement) and building orientation were discussed; the applicant agreed to modifications.
  • Amenities: Commissioners encouraged creative amenities such as a boardwalk or elevated viewing platform for birdwatching, rather than a clubhouse.

Key Outcomes

• Canterbury Crossing: The compatibility review was deferred to the October 9, 2023, Planning Commission meeting to allow the Ohio Ethics Commission to issue an advisory opinion on Commissioner Jones’ conflict of interest. No substantive discussion of the project occurred.
• Cottages at Pine Ridge: No formal action was taken; the meeting served as a conceptual review. Commissioners provided extensive feedback to the applicant, including recommendations to reduce lot sizes, improve stormwater plans, enhance landscaping buffers, and clarify open space ownership and access. The applicant is expected to revise the plan before submitting a preliminary subdivision application.
• Procedural Clarification: The City Solicitor confirmed that compatibility reviews are public meetings, not public hearings, and no final decisions are made at this stage.
• Staff Update: A special Planning Commission meeting was announced for August 28, 2023, and a workshop on the Land Development Code is planned for late September.