OpenPublica

Accountability starts with access.

© 2026 · Filed for the public record

Use casesAboutAPIPrivacyTermsLinkedIn
Home/Hudson, Ohio/Planning Commission
OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD
Record of Proceedings

Hudson Planning Commission Meeting – December 9, 2024

Planning Commission — Monday, December 9, 2024
BodyHudson, Ohio
SessionPlanning Commission
DateMonday, December 9, 2024
StatusFILED
Video Record
0:00 / 2:07:33

Original source
Transcript — VerbatimClick a timed line to jump · ⧉ to share it
0:00

It is 730 on Monday, December 9th, and I'd like to call this duly noticed meeting of the Hudson City Planning Commission to order.

0:10

Mr.

0:11

Sugar, could you please call the roll?

0:13

Yes.

0:14

Mr.

0:14

Inamerado?

0:15

Here.

0:16

Ms.

0:16

Smith?

0:17

Here.

0:17

Mr.

0:17

Stoley?

0:18

Here.

0:18

Mr.

0:19

Vaughn?

0:19

Here.

0:20

Ms.

0:20

Norman.

0:21

Here.

0:22

The next item on the agenda is the swearing in of anyone, including staff who intends to deliver testimony to this commission this evening.

0:30

If you intend to speak and present testimony, would you please stand, raise your right hand?

0:36

And at the conclusion of the traditional paragraph answer, I do.

0:40

Do you swear or affirm under the penalty of perjury that the testimony you will be giving tonight will be the truth, whole truth, and nothing but the truth?

0:49

Thank you.

0:49

You may be seated.

0:53

Our next item on the agenda is the approval of the minutes from the previous planning commission, November 18, uh 2024.

1:02

Are there any corrections or adjustments that the commissioners wish to bring to our attention?

1:08

Motion to approve.

1:11

I'm gonna make one typographical, if you don't mind, Mr.

1:15

Stolly first.

1:16

On page three, there is a statement in the paragraph, which is the fifth from the bottom that begins, Mr.

1:24

Hannon.

1:25

And the second line says required for a multi-tenant.

1:29

This should be a tenant, not a tenant, like something you believe in, a tenant who runs your property.

1:36

Other than that, I would entertain Mr.

1:38

Soley's motion to approve of that correction if I have a second.

1:42

Second.

1:43

Thank you.

1:44

Any further discussion?

1:47

Mr.

1:47

Sugar, would you please take the vote?

1:49

Mr.

1:50

Inamerado?

1:51

Yes.

1:51

Ms.

1:51

Smith?

1:52

Yes.

1:52

Mr.

1:53

Stoley?

1:53

Yes.

1:54

Mr.

1:54

Vaughn?

1:54

Yes.

1:55

Ms.

1:55

Norman.

1:56

Yes.

1:57

The motion to approve the minutes with that correction passes with a vote of five to zero.

2:04

The next item on the agenda is public discussion.

2:07

Are there any members of the public who are here this evening who wish to address the planning commission about a topic which is not on the agenda this evening?

2:19

I see none.

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting
Planned Development██████████████████████22%
Land Use Regulation███████████████████19%
Growth Management████████████12%
Affordable Housing███████████11%
Procedural████████8%
Engineering And Infrastructure████████8%
Public Comment██████6%
Public Engagement████4%
Stormwater Management███3%
Summary of Proceedings

Hudson Planning Commission Meeting – December 9, 2024

The Hudson Planning Commission met on December 9, 2024, at 7:30 PM at Town Hall. Acting Chair Sarah Norman presided over the meeting with five members present (Norman, Stolle, Vaughan, Innamorato, Smith) and two absent (Romano and Nystrom). The commission addressed a text amendment to the Land Development Code, a major site plan for a 29‑unit townhome development, the Growth Management Annual Report, a council check‑in, and the 2025 meeting schedule.

Consent Calendar

  • Approval of Minutes (November 18, 2024): The minutes were approved as amended (one typographical correction) by a vote of 5–0.

Public Comments & Testimony

  • No members of the public spoke during the public discussion period or during the public hearing for the major site plan.

Discussion Items

  • Text Amendment (PC 2024-1085): Staff presented an amendment to LDC Section 1206.05 to provide greater flexibility for non‑conforming residential properties to rebuild or expand. The amendment was revised to align with a related section (1206.05(e)(1)) as requested at the November 18 meeting. Commissioners expressed satisfaction with the revisions. The commission voted 5–0 to recommend the amendment to City Council.
  • Major Site Plan – Preserve of Hudson (PC 2024-1186): The applicant (Triban Investment/Knez Homes) proposed 29 townhome condominium units (six buildings, ~1,900 sq. ft. each) on a 12.5‑acre parcel zoned District 3 (outer village residential) and District 7 (office overlay). Staff reviewed revisions made since November 18, including updated landscaping, lighting, stormwater outlet direction, and access easements. The applicant stated the estimated sale price would be in the upper $400,000s to $500,000s. Commissioners discussed price point, design compatibility, the lack of first‑floor master suites, traffic study results (maximum 15 peak‑hour trips), and the future development of the commercially zoned front portion. No public testimony was offered. After deliberation, the commission approved the site plan 3–2, subject to nine conditions (e.g., protective fencing, revised landscaping and lighting plans, public open space fees, access easements, and addressing city engineer comments). Voting Aye: Stolle, Vaughan, Smith. Voting Nay: Norman, Innamorato.
  • Growth Management Annual Report: Staff presented the 2025 report noting minimal housing starts (one new single‑family unit in 2024) and the City Manager’s recommendation not to reactivate the allocation system. Commissioners supported the recommendation unanimously (5–0) and discussed potential revisions to the Growth Management chapter of the LDC, including conflicts in the code and the exclusion of senior housing.
  • Council Check‑In 2025: Staff outlined the annual check‑in with City Council scheduled for January 28, 2025. Commissioners discussed goals, including the LDC rewrite and recommending updates to the Comprehensive Plan.
  • 2025 Planning Commission Schedule: The draft schedule was approved 5–0.

Key Outcomes

  • Text Amendment Recommendation: Approved 5–0 to forward to City Council.
  • Major Site Plan Approval: Approved 3–2 with nine conditions. The applicant must meet all conditions before a zoning certificate is issued; no clearing or construction may begin prior to the pre‑construction meeting.
  • Growth Management Recommendation: Supported 5–0 the City Manager’s recommendation not to reactivate the Growth Management System for 2025.
  • 2025 Meeting Schedule: Approved 5–0.
  • Next Steps: The January 2025 meeting will occur even without applications (to elect officers and finalize goals). Planning Commission will receive monthly updates on zoning certificates to monitor growth.

Meeting Transcript

It is 730 on Monday, December 9th, and I'd like to call this duly noticed meeting of the Hudson City Planning Commission to order. Mr. Sugar, could you please call the roll? Yes. Mr. Inamerado? Here. Ms. Smith? Here. Mr. Stoley? Here. Mr. Vaughn? Here. Ms. Norman. Here. The next item on the agenda is the swearing in of anyone, including staff who intends to deliver testimony to this commission this evening. If you intend to speak and present testimony, would you please stand, raise your right hand? And at the conclusion of the traditional paragraph answer, I do. Do you swear or affirm under the penalty of perjury that the testimony you will be giving tonight will be the truth, whole truth, and nothing but the truth? Thank you. You may be seated. Our next item on the agenda is the approval of the minutes from the previous planning commission, November 18, uh 2024. Are there any corrections or adjustments that the commissioners wish to bring to our attention? Motion to approve. I'm gonna make one typographical, if you don't mind, Mr. Stolly first. On page three, there is a statement in the paragraph, which is the fifth from the bottom that begins, Mr. Hannon. And the second line says required for a multi-tenant. This should be a tenant, not a tenant, like something you believe in, a tenant who runs your property. Other than that, I would entertain Mr. Soley's motion to approve of that correction if I have a second. Second. Thank you. Any further discussion? Mr. Sugar, would you please take the vote? Mr. Inamerado? Yes. Ms. Smith? Yes. Mr. Stoley? Yes.

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI
TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com