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

City of Hudson Planning Commission Meeting Summary – March 9, 2026

Planning Commission — Monday, March 9, 2026
BodyHudson, Ohio
SessionPlanning Commission
DateMonday, March 9, 2026
StatusFILED
Video Record
0:00 / 4:15:32

Original source
Transcript — VerbatimClick a timed line to jump · ⧉ to share it
0:02

The time is now 7:30 on Monday, March 9th, 2026, and I would like to call this regularly scheduled and duly noticed meeting of the Hudson Planning Commission to order according to the open meeting act of the Ohio Revised Code.

0:18

Mr.

0:18

Sugar, would you please call the roll?

0:21

Yes, Ms.

0:21

Obert.

0:22

Here.

0:23

Mr.

0:23

Enerado.

0:24

Here.

0:24

Ms.

0:25

McCoy.

0:25

Here.

0:26

Miss Romano.

0:28

That's out.

0:30

Ms.

0:30

Norman.

0:31

Here we have a quorum with four of seven members present.

0:34

I did not get any notice that Mr.

0:36

Romano would be missing.

0:38

Um, and so we will look forward to his arrival later.

0:41

For the city tonight, we have Greg Hannon, Nick Sugar, and Marshall Pitchford.

0:46

At this point in the agenda, I'm going to ask all of the people who intend to address the planning commission tonight to be sworn in.

0:53

If you're expecting to deliver testimony or comment to the planning commission, please stand and raise your right hand, including staff.

1:01

Do you swear or affirm the testimony you will give tonight will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?

1:07

If so, please say I do.

1:09

Thank you.

1:09

You may be seated.

1:11

Also, in case you missed my announcement about signing in, if you are delivering testimony or comment to the planning commission, please sign in legibly on the sheet, which is at the back of the room, and um we will get your name spelled correctly.

1:25

Hopefully, I'd like the record to reflect that Mr.

1:27

Romano has arrived at 7 31, and we still have a quorum of five of seven present.

1:33

Thank you for arriving, Mr.

1:34

Romano.

1:37

Well, I I informed Ms.

1:38

McCoy that in the event she needed a break, we would actually have to formally stop if you weren't here.

1:44

So great.

1:47

All right, our next item of business is item number four, approval of minutes.

1:52

These are the minutes from the previous planning commission meeting of February 9, 2026.

1:58

Were there any corrections or additions that the planning commission members wanted to bring to the attention of staff?

2:08

I had only um two locations.

2:12

Um page three first.

2:22

So I'd like to suggest that we uh make it read the following.

2:26

Um this is an insertion near the end of that first line of paragraph number three, um, high density residential, which prompted PC's October 2025 request for a 90-day moratorium on new applications and at the end of that sentence while it discussed those revisions among others, and then on page five.

2:58

Um I think for clarity we should insert the reference.

3:03

This is in the second full paragraph.

3:05

The paragraph begins further discussion in the last line.

3:09

There's a subsection B7, but if we would put 1204.02, it would be more clear for the public to read it.

3:17

And then finally, um the third paragraph after that begins Ms.

3:22

Katie Banke.

3:23

And I think to preserve the dignity of her identity, we should spell her name the German way instead of the Anglicized way.

3:30

B E H N K E.

3:32

Those are the only changes I had.

3:34

Do we have um a motion to pass the minutes as amended?

3:40

Motion to pass.

3:41

Thank you, Ms.

3:41

Ober.

3:42

We have a motion to pass the minutes of the February 9 meeting as amended.

3:45

Do we have a second?

3:47

Second.

3:47

Thank you, Mr.

3:48

Romano.

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting
Land Use Regulation██████████████████████████████████████38%
Planned Development█████████████████████21%
Engineering And Infrastructure██████████████14%
Transportation Safety████████8%
Procedural███████7%
Public Engagement███████7%
Public Safety███3%
Economic Development█1%
Environmental Protection█1%
Summary of Proceedings

City of Hudson Planning Commission Meeting Summary – March 9, 2026

The Hudson Planning Commission met on Monday, March 9, 2026, at 7:30 PM at Town Hall for a regularly scheduled meeting that lasted until 11:45 PM. The agenda included a conditional use and major site plan for Western Reserve Academy's Wang Innovation Center addition, a conceptual site plan review for a day care center, a discussion on the proposed District 11 zoning code amendment, a continuation of the density discussion, and a second reading on subpoena power. The meeting featured extensive public comment, detailed deliberation, and several votes.

Consent Calendar

  • Approval of February 9, 2026 Minutes: Approved as amended (5-0, with two members absent).

Public Comments & Testimony

  • Cynthia Curtin (1102 Cutler Lane, former Planning Commission chair) opposed creating District 11, arguing the Comprehensive Plan does not designate the area for mixed-use or residential, recommends light industrial and commercial uses to generate income tax, and prioritizes traffic concerns. She urged the Commission to recommend Council reject the changes.
  • Andrew Meldrum (290 Aurora Street, representing Hudson Heritage Association) stated the District 11 proposal undermines the Comprehensive Plan, which was developed through extensive public input (over 1,500 residents). He noted the Plan designates the area as light industrial flex and does not envision the proposed uses. He urged adherence to the Plan.
  • Susan Newman (2694 Stonebridge Court) emphasized that the Comprehensive Plan's mixed-use reference on page 68 applies to a broader corridor, not the proposed District 11, and its future land use diagram (page 69) does not show a large mixed-use development. She requested that zoning changes align with the Plan and that the community have a full understanding of the proposal.
  • Patrick Hagin (5834 Martin Drive) expressed concern about increased neighborhood traffic from a proposed daycare and asked about water/sewer extension.

Discussion Items

WRA Wang Innovation Center Addition (PC 2026-72)

  • A conditional use and major site plan request to construct a two-story addition (approximately 7,620-8,000 square feet, two levels totaling about 16,000 square feet) to the existing Wang Innovation Center. The building will house AI labs, robotics, digital media, a food science lab, and a stadium-style seating area. The project is located at 130 North Oviatt Street within the historic district (District 4).
  • Key issues discussed: stormwater management (enlarge existing north pond), sidewalk extension on North Oviatt Street, tree preservation (especially Norway spruces), construction logistics on a tight site, donor’s request for contemporary elements (glass box entry), and the cafe’s potential impact on downtown businesses (student-run, part of curriculum).
  • Staff recommended continuing the application to the April 13, 2026 meeting to finalize details on stormwater, sidewalk/street trees, and tree protection. The Commission voted 5-0 to table the application.

Day Care Center Conceptual Site Plan (PC 2026-73)

  • A conceptual site plan for The Learning Experience (TLE) daycare at Streetsboro Street and Terex Road (District 6, Western Gateway). The 10,000-square-foot building would serve up to 170 children, with 45 parking spaces and a 5,000-square-foot playground (Hudson requires 6,000 square feet). The 2.4-acre site contains wetlands (Category 1) and is under purchase agreement.
  • Major concerns: traffic – left-turn issues onto Terex Road, queueing, and impact on nearby church traffic; building orientation and architectural quality for a gateway site; stormwater retention pond with fence facing 303; compliance with District 6 design standards; and tree preservation.
  • The Commission voted 4-1 (Norman dissenting) to continue the concept plan to April 13, 2026, requiring further study on traffic, wetlands, and tree preservation responses to staff analysis.

District 11 Code Amendment

  • The proposed zoning amendment would create a new District 11 allowing mixed-use development (retail, hotel, residential up to 20 units per acre) in the Darrow Road corridor, including the former Jo-Ann Fabrics site.
  • Commissioners expressed strong opposition, citing conflicts with the Comprehensive Plan, which recommends light industrial/income-generating uses, not residential. They noted the plan’s emphasis on traffic, support for downtown, and lack of residential designation. Concerns included density (15 vs. 20 units/acre), planned development exceptions, institutional uses inadvertently allowing senior care, and lack of transparency.
  • Commissioners agreed to prepare a memo to City Council summarizing their opposition and rationale. Motion passed 5-0. The public hearing will be held May 5, with Council action scheduled May 19.

Density Discussion (LDC 2026)

  • Continued discussion on revising residential densities across the city, including removing duplexes from several districts, reducing single-family attached units in District 4 from five to four, and addressing open space conservation subdivisions. The topic was tabled to the next meeting for further staff analysis.

Subpoena Power (PC Admin Rules)

  • Second reading of the amendment to grant Planning Commission subpoena power for public hearings. Approved 5-0.

Key Outcomes

  • WRA Wang Innovation Center: Tabled to April 13, 2026 (5-0) for stormwater, sidewalks/street trees, and tree preservation details.
  • Day Care Center: Tabled to April 13, 2026 (4-1) for traffic, wetlands, and tree preservation studies.
  • District 11: Commission voted 5-0 to send a memo to City Council opposing the amendment.
  • Subpoena Power: Approved (5-0) on second reading.
  • Density Discussion: Tabled to next meeting.
  • Joint Boards Meeting: Tentatively scheduled for April 27, 2026.
  • Staff noted: December recommendation to council on LDC purpose statements was forwarded; Village Dental findings of fact sent to BZBA.

Meeting Transcript

The time is now 7:30 on Monday, March 9th, 2026, and I would like to call this regularly scheduled and duly noticed meeting of the Hudson Planning Commission to order according to the open meeting act of the Ohio Revised Code. Mr. Sugar, would you please call the roll? Yes, Ms. Obert. Here. Mr. Enerado. Here. Ms. McCoy. Here. Miss Romano. That's out. Ms. Norman. Here we have a quorum with four of seven members present. I did not get any notice that Mr. Romano would be missing. Um, and so we will look forward to his arrival later. For the city tonight, we have Greg Hannon, Nick Sugar, and Marshall Pitchford. At this point in the agenda, I'm going to ask all of the people who intend to address the planning commission tonight to be sworn in. If you're expecting to deliver testimony or comment to the planning commission, please stand and raise your right hand, including staff. Do you swear or affirm the testimony you will give tonight will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? If so, please say I do. Thank you. You may be seated. Also, in case you missed my announcement about signing in, if you are delivering testimony or comment to the planning commission, please sign in legibly on the sheet, which is at the back of the room, and um we will get your name spelled correctly. Hopefully, I'd like the record to reflect that Mr. Romano has arrived at 7 31, and we still have a quorum of five of seven present. Thank you for arriving, Mr. Romano. Well, I I informed Ms. McCoy that in the event she needed a break, we would actually have to formally stop if you weren't here. So great. All right, our next item of business is item number four, approval of minutes. These are the minutes from the previous planning commission meeting of February 9, 2026. Were there any corrections or additions that the planning commission members wanted to bring to the attention of staff? I had only um two locations. Um page three first. So I'd like to suggest that we uh make it read the following. Um this is an insertion near the end of that first line of paragraph number three, um, high density residential, which prompted PC's October 2025 request for a 90-day moratorium on new applications and at the end of that sentence while it discussed those revisions among others, and then on page five. Um I think for clarity we should insert the reference. This is in the second full paragraph. The paragraph begins further discussion in the last line. There's a subsection B7, but if we would put 1204.02, it would be more clear for the public to read it. And then finally, um the third paragraph after that begins Ms. Katie Banke. And I think to preserve the dignity of her identity, we should spell her name the German way instead of the Anglicized way. B E H N K E.

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI
TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com