City of Hudson, Ohio

Meeting Minutes - Final

Architectural & Historic Board of Review

John Caputo, Chair

Allyn Marzulla, Vice Chair

John Workley, Secretary

Amy Manko

Françoise Massardier-Kenney

William Ray

Jamie Sredinski

Nicholas Sugar, City Planner

Amanda Krickovich, Associate Planner

Wednesday, May 28, 2025

7:30 PM

Town Hall

27 East Main Street

Call To Order

Chair Caputo called to order the regularly scheduled meeting of the Architectural & Historic Board of Review of

the City of Hudson at 7:30 p.m., in accordance with the Sunshine Laws of the State of Ohio, O.R.C. Section

121.22.

II.

Roll Call

5 -

2 -

Present:

Absent:

Mr. Caputo, Ms. Kenney, Ms. Marzulla, Mr. Ray and Mr. Workley

Ms. Sredinski and Ms. Manko

III.

IV.

Public Comment

Chair Caputo opened the meeting to public comments for anyone wanting to address the Board. There were no

comments.

Consent Applications

A motion was made by Ms. Kenney, seconded by Ms. Marzulla, to approve the Consent

Agenda. The motion carried by the following vote:

Aye:

5 - Mr. Caputo, Ms. Kenney, Ms. Marzulla, Mr. Ray and Mr. Workley

AHBR 25-260

2380 Tyre Dr

Accessory Structure (Pavilion)

Attachments:

2380 Tyre Dr - AHBR Packet

This AHBR application was approved on the Consent Agenda.

AHBR 25-585

85 Division Street (Historic District)

Accessory Structure (Siding Alteration)

Attachments:

85 Division Street Packet for AHBR

This AHBR application was approved on the Consent Agenda.

Old Business

AHBR 25-474

78 Aurora Street (Historic District)

[Addition (Kitchen, Laundry Room, Elevator)

Attachments:

78 Aurora Street Packet For AHBR 5.14.25

78 Aurora Street - AHBR Packet 5.28.2025

Perspectus Report - 78 Aurora Street

Preservation Brief #14 - Additions

OHI Form

Ms. Coffman introduced the application by displaying and reviewing the project, noting a site visit was

conducted with the consultant, and reviewed the comments.

Ms. Rebecca Pantuso, Pantuso Architects, discussed the AHBR and historic consultants comments, including the

one-foot bump out and the hip type roof (Victorian Tower).

The Board, staff, and applicant, discussed: The transom windows, that the pyramid type roof was chosen in order

to reduce the size of the roof, that the proportions for the house and pyramid roof are good, and the Secretary of

Interior Standards.

A motion was made by Ms. Kenney, seconded by Mr. Workley, that this AHBR Application be

approved. The motion carried by the following vote:

Aye:

5 - Mr. Caputo, Ms. Kenney, Ms. Marzulla, Mr. Ray and Mr. Workley

AHBR 25-417

7 College St. (Historic District)

Accessory Structure - Fence (6 foot privacy)

Submitted by Heather Borowy, Northeast Ohio Fence

a) Verify the proposed fence would be located behind the main mass of the

house.

b) Submit a scaled site plan accurately depicting the proposed fence along

with the existing property lines and structures.

c) Question if the proposed fence would abut existing fences.

Attachments:

7 College Street Packet for AHBR

7 College Street - AHBR Packet 5.28.25

The applicant was not present for the meeting.

VI.

New Business

AHBR 25-493

80 N Oviatt St (Historic District)

Accessory Structure - Fence (6 ft privacy)

Submitted by Heather Borowy, Northeast Ohio Fence

a) Section III-1(f)(3) states “fence heights and materials shall be compatible

with their site location and development”. Staff notes the proposed fence

would tie into and extend a neighboring fence. Submit additional photos

of the area of the proposed fence and the existing neighboring fence to

verify an appropriate design and transition.

b) Submit a scaled site plan accurately depicting the proposed fence along

with the existing property lines and structures.

Attachments:

80 N Oviatt St - AHBR Packet

The applicant was not present for the meeting.

AHBR 25-524

72 Aurora Street (Historic District)

Addition (Guest Bathroom & Terrace)

Attachments:

72 Aurora Street - AHBR Packet

Preservation Brief #14 Additions

Ms. Coffman introduced the application by displaying the house and reviewing the staff comments.

Mr. Eric Kuczek, applicant, noted the wood post in question is intended to match the previously installed wood

post and pickets, and that more recent photos will be submitted.

The Board, applicant, and staff, discussed: That the existing railing was submitted and approved, that the new is

differentiated from the existing, that a set of approved plans with aluminum exists, that the proposed railing will

be visible from the street and this type of railing is not typically historical, the applicant's desire for the new rail

to be consistent with the existing railing, the Board's desire not to introduce another material, that the door

specifications have not been submitted, the possibility of moving the railing back so it is not seen from the public

view, that this proposed railing is not appropriate for the public view.

The Board and applicant discussed the appropriate materials for the public view in the Historic District and that

the new door to the outside will hopefully be a reused door.

The Board requested a submittal on the railing material and at least a photo of the door to be used.

This matter was continued

AHBR 25-549

118 Elm Street (Historic District)

Fence (4 ft Split Rail)

Attachments:

118 Elm St - AHBR Packet

Ms. Coffman introduced the application by displaying and describing the project, reviewing the staff comments

and questions.

Mr. Robert Bronson, applicant, described how the proposed fence will connect to the neighboring fences - one a

chain link fence, the other a stockade fence, displayed where the fence will be located, showed the minimal view

of the fence from the street view, described why this type of fence was chosen and showed examples of the

proposed fence from the surrounding neighborhood, the Board noted that the examples of neighboring fences

were done prior to the standard change to eliminate chain link fences, staff questioned how the fence will be

finished, noted the fence will not be functional without the mesh, discussed the applicant's willingness to make

the fence black, the applicants willingness to move the fence to the back of the house on the side, the Board's

previous decision's regarding the use of mesh, discussed the Board's concern of introducing metal mesh in the

Historic District, and the applicant's willingness to use a four-foot wooden style fence with the final approval

given by staff.

A motion was made by Ms. Kenney, seconded by Mr. Workley, that this AHBR Application be

approved with the following conditions: A height restriction of no more than five-feet high, that

a wooden picket or shadow box style fence be installed, that is moved to the back of the house

on the west side. The motion carried by the following vote:

Aye:

5 - Mr. Caputo, Ms. Kenney, Ms. Marzulla, Mr. Ray and Mr. Workley

AHBR 25-393

139 Hudson Street

Accessory Structure (Detached Garage)

Attachments:

139 Hudson Street AHBR Packet

Ms. Coffman introduced the application by displaying the elevations and photos of the project.

Mr. Joe Matava, Peninsula Architects, described the site as 9.5 feet from the property line and out of the public

view.

The Board, applicant, and staff, discussed: The location of the garage on the property, that the board and batten

siding has been removed on the revised elevations, that gable returns have been added, that staff's suggestion of

removing the hip roof will make the addition seem too large, that the windows were moved closer together to

resolve the fenestration issue, and the proposed foundation was described.

The Board also discussed whether the existing garage has any historic significance.

Ms Kenney made a finding, seconded by Mr. Ray, that the AHBR finds that the building or

structure does not have historic or architectural significance and the applicant for such permit

is not willing to voluntary consent to the retention of such building or structure. The finding

was approved by the following vote:

Aye:

5 - Mr. Caputo, Ms. Kenney, Ms. Marzulla, Mr. Ray and Mr. Workley

A motion was made by Mr. Ray, seconded by Ms. Marzulla, that the application be approved as

shown in the revised drawings with the foundation to match the existing foundation materials.

The motion carried by the following vote:

Aye:

5 - Mr. Caputo, Ms. Kenney, Ms. Marzulla, Mr. Ray and Mr. Workley

VII.

Other Business

Minutes of Previous Architectural & Historic Board of Review Meeting: April

AHBR 4.09.2025

9, 2025.

Attachments:

April 9, 2025 - AHBR Meeting Minutes Draft

A motion was made by Ms. Marzulla, seconded by Ms. Kenney, that the April 9, 2025, Minutes

be approved. The motion carried by the following vote:

Aye:

5 - Mr. Caputo, Ms. Kenney, Ms. Marzulla, Mr. Ray and Mr. Workley

Minutes of Previous Architectural & Historic Board of Review Meeting: May

14, 2025

AHBR 5.14.2025

Attachments:

May 14, 2025 - AHBR Meeting Minutes Draft

A motion was made by Ms. Kenney, seconded by Ms. Marzulla, that the May 14, 2025, Minutes

be approved as amended. The motion carried by the following vote:

Aye:

5 - Mr. Caputo, Ms. Kenney, Ms. Marzulla, Mr. Ray and Mr. Workley

VIII.

IX.

Staff Update

There were no staff updates.

Adjournment

A motion was made by Ms. Marzulla, seconded by Mr. Workley, that the meeting be adjourned

at 8:39 p.m... The motion carried by the following vote:

Aye:

5 - Mr. Caputo, Ms. Kenney, Ms. Marzulla, Mr. Ray and Mr. Workley

___________________________________________

John Caputo, Chair

___________________________________________

John Workley, Secretary

___________________________________________

Joe Campbell, Executive Assistant

Upon approval by the Architectural & Historic Board of Review, this official written summary of the meeting

minutes shall become a permanent record, and the official minutes shall also consist of a permanent audio and

video recording, excluding executive sessions, in accordance with Codified Ordinances, Section 252 .04, Minutes

of Architectural and Historic Board of Review, Board of Zoning and Building Appeals, and Planning

Commission.