City of Hudson, Ohio  
CD Meeting Agenda - Final  
Architectural & Historic Board of Review  
John Caputo, Chair  
Allyn Marzulla, Vice Chair  
John Workley, Secretary  
Andrew Brown  
Amy Manko  
Françoise Massardier-Kenney  
Jamie Sredinski  
Nicholas Sugar, City Planner  
Lauren Coffman, Associate Planner  
Wednesday, May 27, 2026  
7:30 PM  
Town Hall  
27 East Main Street  
Call To Order  
Roll Call  
I.  
II.  
III.  
IV.  
V.  
Public Comment  
Consent Applications  
Old Business  
200 Laurel Lake Dr  
New House (Villas)  
Submitted by John Ducatman, RDL Architects  
a) Staff notes this application was continued from the April 8, 2026, AHBR  
meeting. The project received site plan approval from Planning  
Commission and Board of Zoning and Building Appeals.  
b) The applicant has submitted revised elevations for the Boards review.  
c) Staff comments are attached.  
Attachments:  
126 N. Main Street (Historic District)  
Alteration (Window Replacement)  
Submitted by Heather Davies  
a) Staff notes this application was continued from the May 13, 2026 AHBR  
meeting.  
b) A site visit took place on May 19, 2026.  
c) Additional documentation of the existing windows is attached for the  
Board’s consideration.  
Attachments:  
150 Aurora Street (Historic District)  
Addition (Office Space & Dormers)  
Submitted by Eric Kuczek, Sojourn Architects  
a) Staff notes this application was continued from the May 13, 2026 AHBR  
meeting.  
b) The National Park Service Preservation Brief #14 for additions states “a  
new addition should be smaller than the historic building - it should be  
subordinate in both size and design to the historic building. A new addition  
should be simple and unobtrusive in design, and should be distinguished  
from the historic building.” Staff notes the applicant has submitted revised  
elevations for the Boards consideration that depict a reduced rear dormer  
centered on the rear roofline and proposed shutters on the left-side  
elevation.  
c) The National Park Service Preservation Brief #14 for additions states “a  
new addition should not be highly visible from the public right of way; a  
rear or secondary elevation is usually the best location for a new  
addition”. Question the proposed front dormers; however, staff  
acknowledges the dormers would not result in a footprint expansion and  
are common throughout the historic district is designed appropriately.  
Attachments:  
New Business  
VI.  
48 College Street (Historic District)  
Accessory Structure (Outdoor Fireplace)  
Submitted by Tanya McInerney Landscape Design  
a) Question how the proposed sandstone material and parged finish relate to  
the existing house and if a brick fireplace would be more appropriate.  
Attachments:  
5801 Ogilby Dr  
Addition (Covered Deck)  
Submitted by WeatherSeal Home Services, Inc.  
a) Section IV-4(c) of the Architectural Design Standards state that all roofs in  
all the wings must be of the same shape as the main body, but they may  
have a different pitch or orientation. Roofs shall not intersect a wall so as  
to cause a valley. Question proposed shed roof, as the main house has a  
gable roof.  
b) Staff notes the submitted elevations depict a proposed standing seam metal  
roof; however, staff notes the applicant has verified that shingles to match  
the existing roof are proposed.  
Attachments:  
7563 Sugarbush Tr  
Addition (Bedroom, Dormers & Gable)  
Submitted by Chris Luker  
a) Staff notes the existing house would be classified as a two-story wing type.  
b) Section IV-4(g)(3) of the Architectural Design Standards states that  
additions should be designed to be compatible with the main structure by  
incorporating materials and a foundation to match. Staff notes a standing  
seam metal roof is proposed to mix with the shingle. Revise elevations to  
depict one consistent roof material.  
c) Verify proposed shake siding material will end on an inside corner.  
d) Section III-1(g)(8) of the Architectural Design Standards state that Large  
expanses of blank wall are to be avoided. Fenestration placement should  
be at a maximum of approximately every 12 feet. Question removal of  
south elevation 2nd story window.  
e) Section IV-4(a) identifies the two story wing type as a main body and  
subordinate wings. Question the second floor addition extending to the  
west wing, which would further deemphasize the small main mass  
containing the front door.  
Attachments:  
5 Thirty Acres Ln  
Addition (3 Car-Garage, Bedrooms, Bathroom, Kitchen, & Laundry)  
Submitted by Matt Plecnik, Cleveland Draw  
a) Staff notes this application received informal AHBR review at the April 8,  
2026, AHBR meeting.  
b) The applicant has submitted revised elevations for the Boards  
consideration that depict a reduced overall footprint and consistently  
applied foundation material around the rear wing addition.  
c) Verify proposed foundation material to match existing house.  
d) Submit product spec sheets of all proposed exterior materials.  
Attachments:  
6799 Dana Ave  
Addition (Master Bedroom & Bathroom)  
Submitted by Eric Wright, Sojourn Architects  
a) Section IV-4 of the Architectural Design Standards states that the front  
face of the main body must sit forward at least 18" from the front face of  
the wings”. Staff notes the existing wing sits forward of the main mass;  
however, the second story addition would increase the degree of  
nonconformity and would not meet the intent of the requirement for the  
wings to be subordinate to the main mass.  
b) Section IV-4(f)(2) of the Architectural Design Standards states that details  
in a wing must be consistently applied throughout the sides of that wing.  
Staff notes that shutters are proposed on the front elevation only. However,  
staff notes that 3 sides of the existing house do not have shutters and the  
proposed design would be consistent with the existing house.  
c) Question if existing chimney is being removed.  
Attachments:  
7541 Lakedge Ct  
Addition (Great Room, Dining Room, & Covered Patio)  
Submitted by Tracy Corpus  
a) Section III-1 (g)(2) of the Architectural Design Standards state that all  
chimneys must match the foundation material. Fireplace vents, when  
incorporated, shall be located at the rear elevation. Revise proposed  
chimney material to match existing chimney and foundational material.  
b) Section IV-3(e)(4) states “the building shall have a typical window used  
for most window. Question proposed fixed windows on the rear elevation,  
as well as the proposed transom windows on right and left elevations.  
Attachments:  
130 N. Oviatt St (Historic District)  
Addition (WRA - Wang Innovation Center)  
Submitted by Jason Boltz, Wheeler Boltz Architects, LLC  
a) Staff notes this case received informal AHBR review at the February 11,  
2026, meeting.  
b) Staff notes the site plan was approved by the Planning Commission at the  
May 11, 2026 meeting with a condition of approval to receive AHBR  
approval.  
c) The subject building was constructed in 1990, with an existing wing  
addition completed in 1996. As the building is not yet 50 years old, staff  
notes that it is not subject to review under the Secretary of the Interior  
Standards for Rehabilitation. The proposed project would instead be  
reviewed for compliance with the Architectural Design Standards type  
standards, part 4. However, overall compatibility to the surrounding  
buildings and campus is considered.  
d) Staff notes the AHBR requested additional study of the curtain wall. The  
applicant has submitted additional perspectives from surrounding streets.  
e) Staff notes removal of windows on the south elevation from the previous  
informal design; however, the revision complies with the intent of Section  
III-1(g)(8) stating “Large expanses of blank wall are to be avoided.  
Fenestration placement should be at a maximum of approximately every 12  
feet”.  
f) Section IV-4 (b)(1) of the Architectural Design Standards state “wings may  
not be larger or taller than the main body of the structure, but they may be  
the same height.” Staff notes the ridge of the addition would be taller than  
the existing building.  
Attachments:  
750 W. Streetsboro St  
Commercial Addition (Vestibule entrance and second story addition)  
Submitted by Julie Ziga, Sol Harris Day Architecture  
a) Staff notes the proposed vestibule entrance expansion and second floor  
addition would support the church’s existing children’s ministry program.  
b) Staff notes the proposed additions would utilize compatible materials.  
c) The existing building is identified as a “large mass type” per Section IV-5  
of the Architectural Design Standards. “Large mass types” are described  
as follows: “This type has a complex massing with several large masses  
attached to each other. It does not have a dominant (forward) main body,  
but may have one or more central masses to which other masses are  
attached. Most of the building is two stories tall. It may have more than  
one entrance, and several subordinate wings or projections.”  
d) Section IV-5(h)(4) states “Wings may also be extended or made two-story.  
In this case, the original wing and its extension shall be considered one  
wing and shall be reviewed as such under these Standards.”  
e) Section Iv-5 states “Wings may occur on any of the masses and be the  
same size or smaller in height than the central masses.” Staff notes the  
proposed second story addition would be smaller in height than the central  
masses; however, would be taller than the adjacent masses.  
f) Question if the proposed aluminum storefront vestibule entrance is  
compatible with the existing building.  
g) Question if the proposed stone panels would be inset to match existing.  
Attachments:  
Other Business  
VII.  
43 Wellgate Dr (Informal)  
Addition (Attached Garage)  
Submitted by Bridget Tipton  
a) Question proposed forward garage wing expansion. Section IV-4 (h)(1) of  
the Architectural Design Standards states that wings must be attached at  
the rear or side of the building and may not extend forward of the main  
body. However, staff notes that the existing garage is forward of the main  
mass.  
b) Staff notes a previous approval was granted by the Architectural and  
Historic Board of Review at the June 28, 2023 meeting for a similar  
proposal to expand the existing forward garage mass. The previously  
approved plans consisted of a reduced scope and smaller addition than  
what is currently proposed. The previously approved plans are attached  
for the Boards review.  
Attachments:  
278 W. Streetsboro Street (Informal)  
Addition (Kitchen, Bedrooms, Bathrooms, Office, Mud Room & Porch)  
Submitted by Robert Shearer  
a) Staff notes this proposal is subject to all applicable Land Development  
Code requirements. Applicant to verify proposed addition is not an ADU.  
b) Section IV-(3)(a) of the Architectural Design Standards state that the  
single story wing type has a main body and subordinate wings. The main  
body is a single story and centrally located in the structure and the front  
door is located within the main body. There are one or two wings which  
are smaller in size. Question overall size of the proposed addition. Staff  
notes the proposed addition is slightly subordinate in nature to the main  
mass.  
c) Section IV-3(b)(2) of the Architectural Design Standards state “The front  
face of the main body must sit forward at least 18" from the front face of  
the wings.” Additionally, Section IV-3(h)(1) states “The wing must be  
attached at the rear or side of the building and may not extend forward of  
the main body” Staff notes the proposed addition would extend in front of  
the main body approximately 6 ft. Revise the projection to meet this  
requirement  
Attachments:  
Architectural and Historic Board of Review Findings of Fact for case #25-1478  
for the property located at 88 N Main Street, Hudson, OH 44236  
Attachments:  
Staff Update  
VIII.  
IX.  
Adjournment  
*
*
*