City of Hudson, Ohio  
CD Meeting Agenda - 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, March 12, 2025  
7:30 PM  
Town Hall  
27 East Main Street  
Call To Order  
Roll Call  
I.  
II.  
III.  
Public Comment  
Consent Applications  
IV.  
A.  
00 Bridgewater Blvd  
Ground Sign (Residential Entrance Sign)  
Submitted by Joe Berdine (Signarama)  
a) Staff recommends approval as submitted.  
Attachments:  
B.  
46 Ravenna St. (The Poppy Shop & Hudson Plant Co.)  
Sign (Wall Sign)  
Submitted by Lauren Donatelli  
a) Staff recommends approval as submitted.  
Attachments:  
Old Business  
V.  
A.  
16 Owen Brown Street (Historic District)  
Addition & Alterations (Bedroom, Dining room & Porches)  
Submitted by Mark Madar  
a) Staff notes this application was reviewed at the 2/12 and 2/26 meetings.  
The Board requested assistance of the Consultant (report attached).  
b) The applicant has made the following changes to reflect the comments  
from the Consultant Report:  
· Retaining the front door location on the historic mass.  
· Retaining the window locations on the left elevation of the historic  
mass. Staff notes the windows will be replaced with the Pella Lifestyle  
series, which is an approved window within the historic district.  
Question if the existing trim will remain as this is historic material.  
· Incorporating a wraparound porch that does not extend past the west  
and north walls of the house. Additionally, the applicant depicts the roof  
at a lower height to reflect the Board’s suggestion at the February 26th  
AHBR meeting.  
· Incorporating a steeper roof pitch on the right elevation as well as  
aligning the second and first floor windows.  
· Depicts the use of hardi-board siding on the existing mass and the  
proposed additions.  
· Incorporating a gable roof on the proposed dormers on the left  
elevation as well as removing the small clerestory window.  
· Adjusting the proposed addition to depict an inset on the left elevation  
in order to comply with the National Park Service Preservation Briefs.  
Attachments:  
Legislative History  
2/12/25  
2/26/25  
Architectural & Historic Board continued  
of Review  
Architectural & Historic Board continued  
of Review  
B.  
145 Aurora Street (Historic District)  
Demolition & Accessory Structure (Detached Garage)  
Submitted by Kody Kocias, Peninsula Architects  
a) Staff notes this case was reviewed at the February 26th AHBR meeting.  
The Board requested a site visit, which was conducted on March 4th.  
b) Staff notes the applicant is requesting to demolish the existing accessory  
structure on the property. Based on the pictorial evidence the applicant  
provided and site visit observations, the Board could consider the  
following when making a decision:  
· The structure is technically contributing to the historic district based  
on the age of construction, but not historically significant. The exact  
age is undetermined, as it doesn’t seem to be a 1920’s building (per  
Summit County records).  
· The existing structure appears to have significant deterioration based  
on the pictures provided by the applicant and the site visit  
observations. Staff notes Appendix 1(6) states “Deteriorated historic  
features shall be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of  
deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new  
feature shall match the old in design, color, texture, and other visual  
qualities and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing  
features shall be substantiated by documentary, physical, or pictorial  
evidence.”  
c) Section I-2 of the Architectural Design Standards state “New buildings  
and alterations shall respect the existing context and framework. The  
design of any building shall be judged in reference to its site and the  
character of its surroundings, not as an independent object. The site plan  
for all new buildings shall be prepared with a clear understanding of the  
framework that exists or is being created in a particular area, through  
development standards, zoning and other regulations.” Staff notes the  
existing garage was lower in height and setback farther from the side  
property line. Question if the new garage should depict a lower height to  
better accommodate existing and surrounding site conditions or could be  
set back to maintain a similar footprint.  
d) The Board requested the applicant relocate the door and window on the  
left elevation towards the center to better accommodate fenestration  
regulations. The applicant revised the drawings to depict this request.  
Attachments:  
Legislative History  
2/26/25 Architectural & Historic Board continued  
of Review  
C.  
252 North Main Street (Historic District)  
Addition & Alteration to Accessory Structure (Barn)  
Submitted by Stuart Hamilton  
a) Staff notes this case was reviewed at the February 26th AHBR meeting.  
The Board requested a site visit that was conducted on March 4th.  
b) Appendix 1(6) of the Secretary of Interior Standards state “Deteriorated  
historic features shall be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity  
of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new  
feature shall match the old in design, color, texture, and other visual  
qualities and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features  
shall be substantiated by documentary, physical, or pictorial evidence.”  
The applicant is proposing to utilize existing materials and repurpose  
windows and doors.  
c) Appendix 1(9) of the Secretary of Interior Standards states “New  
additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not  
destroy historic materials that characterize the property. The new work  
shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the  
massing, size, scale, and architectural features to protect the historic  
integrity of the property and its environment.” Staff notes the applicant is  
proposing to remove historic siding to accommodate the new roof  
structures; however, the removed siding will replace the horizontal boards  
at the existing foundation.  
Attachments:  
Legislative History  
2/26/25 Architectural & Historic Board continued  
of Review  
New Business  
VI.  
A.  
225 W. Prospect Street  
Demolition (Single-family dwelling)  
Submitted by Curt Van Blarcum  
a) The applicant is proposing the demolition of the existing house on the  
property. Staff notes this is an active code enforcement case with the city  
regarding property in disrepair.  
b) Staff notes no architectural significance due to the material changes and  
deterioration over time.  
c) As the property is outside of the Historic District and not an individual  
historic landmark, the AHBR may only make the following  
recommendation upon review: The Architectural and Historic Board of  
Review finds the structure at 225 W. Prospect Street (does) or (does not)  
have historic or architectural significance. Further, the Board finds that  
the applicant for a permit to demolish this building will not voluntarily  
consent to the retention of this building.  
Attachments:  
B.  
180 W. Streetsboro Street (Bell’s Barber Shop)  
Sign (Wall Sign)  
Submitted by Kaldon Al Falih  
a) Staff notes the sign plan for 180 W. Streetsboro St. states a polyurethan  
resin panel with a black painted raised boarder. The applicant is  
proposing a polyethylene panel with no black boarder. Revise the  
elevations to depict a raised black boarder.  
b) Section V-2(b) of the Architectural Design Standards state “The sign and  
associated lighting fixtures should complement the architecture of the  
building on which it is placed and should be placed in an appropriate  
location on the building facade.” Question the location of the sign and if it  
should be centered on the wall to align with surrounding signs.  
c) Section V-5(c)(3) of the Architectural Design Standards state “Signs  
should have a matte finish, not have a glossy or reflective finish.” Confirm  
the sign will have a matte finish.  
Attachments:  
C.  
82 First Street (Talbot’s)  
Alteration (Awnings)  
Submitted by William Morse, Ohio Awning  
a) Staff notes the applicant is replacing the existing awnings with new  
awnings that will be the same size but different style.  
b) Section IV-9(d)(5) of the Architectural Design Standards state “Signs and  
awnings, if used, shall fit entirely within the width of the storefront and  
below its lintel. Awnings shall maintain a minimum 7-foot clearance above  
the sidewalk. Awnings shall be retractable and made of canvas or other  
fabric on a metal frame. Awnings shall not be backlit. Awning colors shall  
be compatible with the sign and building colors.” Provide a specification  
sheet of the awning material to confirm material.  
Attachments:  
D.  
2732 Middleton Road  
Accessory Structure & Alterations (Detached Garage)  
Submitted by Nate Bailey, Hara Architects  
a) Staff notes the applicant is proposing a detached garage, along with  
alterations and a small addition to the existing house.  
b) Section IV-4(e)(4) of the Architectural Design Standards state “The  
building shall have a typical window used for most windows.” Staff notes  
the proposed window design on the rear and garage side of the existing  
house. Question if double hung windows would be more appropriate.  
c) Section III-1(d)(2) of the Architectural Design Standards state “Enclosed  
accessory buildings shall incorporate some elements similar to the main  
body, for example similar corner boards, window types, or materials.”  
Question the materials and how they relate to the existing house.  
d) Section III-1(g)(11) of the Architectural Design Standards states  
“Replacement wall and roof materials should be blended across a facade  
(rather than small patch areas) to ensure compatibility with existing  
materials.” Question how the wall and foundation materials will blend in  
with the existing at the right-side elevation and the door infill on the rear  
elevation.  
Attachments:  
E.  
7706 Oxgate Court  
Alteration (Siding)  
Submitted by Kaitlyn Davis, Campo Roof  
a) Section IV-1(d)(2) of the Architectural Design Standards state the  
materials used in the main body must be applied consistently on that mass on  
all sides of the structure. Staff notes the applicant is proposing board and  
batten siding that does not wrap around the entire mass. Revise plans to depict  
a more consistent material on all sides of the mass.  
Attachments:  
F.  
2425 Hudson Aurora Road  
Addition (2nd Story Bed & Bath)  
Submitted by Jim Dombroski  
a) Section III-1(g)(11) of the Architectural Design Standards state  
replacement wall and roof materials should be blended across a facade  
(rather than small patch areas) to ensure compatibility with existing  
materials. Question how the siding material will blend with the existing on  
the west elevation.  
b) Suggest the windows on the west elevation shift up to be centered on the  
wall.  
Attachments:  
G.  
6575 Dunbarton Drive  
Addition (In-law suite)  
Submitted by Brian Kuck  
a) Section III-1(g)(3) of the Architectural Design Standards state “Exposed  
foundations and tie courses shall be of a consistent material on all  
elevations.” Confirm exposed foundation will be consistently applied on all  
elevations.  
Attachments:  
H.  
549 West Streetsboro Street  
New Construction (Single-family dwelling)  
Submitted by Robyn Jones, Prestige Builder Group  
a) Section IV-4(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.” Staff notes the two garage wings sit approximately 40 feet  
forward of the main body. This design is in direct conflict with the  
Architectural Design Standards. Revise plans to depict a more appropriate  
design.  
b) Section 1205.05(d)(5)(c)(3) of the Land Development Code states “All uses  
on lots fronting arterial roads: 100 feet, of which the front fifty feet shall  
comprise a bufferyard that shall be landscaped pursuant to Section  
1207.04(k).” Staff notes Streetsboro Road (State Route 303) is an arterial  
road. The applicant is depicting a 130-foot setback. The adjoining  
property to the west has a front setback of 99 feet and the east property is  
vacant. Suggest revising site plan to depict a 100-foot setback in order to  
better align with the west property. Additionally, revise site plan to depict  
landscaping to ensure compliance with bufferyard requirements.  
Attachments:  
I.  
Preserve of Hudson Townhomes  
New Residential Construction (29 Unit Townhomes - District 3)  
Submitted by Hanna Cohan  
a) Staff notes this case was reviewed at the May 8, 2024 AHBR meeting. The  
applicant is proposing a 29-unit townhome project that is proposed to be  
setback 500-feet from Darrow Road and will be accessed via a private  
drive.  
b) The Board discussed ways the applicant could include different variety  
amongst the building units. Different window/door design and  
configurations were discussed as well as the color pallet. Staff notes the  
applicant depicted a different bay window configuration on the “American  
Farmhouse” concept, a different window design on the “Cottage” concept,  
and included a railing feature on the “traditional concept”. Additionally,  
the applicant implemented different color pallets to further create variety  
between the building units and depicts bay windows on the side elevations.  
c) Staff notes the units 24-29 is a six-unit building. Revise the design to  
incorporate more variety between the units. Submit a color rendering for  
the six-unit building.  
d) Staff notes the elevations depict siding extending to the ground.  
Incorporate exposed block masonry foundation with variety between units  
and buildings.  
e) Submit specification sheets of proposed siding material. Suggest a  
hardi-board or similar.  
f) Submit specification sheets for the proposed windows and roofing  
materials.  
g) Section IV-11(d)(2) of the Architectural Design Standards state “The  
materials used on a dwelling unit must be applied consistently on that  
dwelling unit on all sides.” Incorporate shutters at the side and rear  
elevation typical windows.  
h) Label building height.  
i) Submit a roof plan.  
j) Submit plans for the proposed pavilion.  
k) Submit unit typical cross sections to depict the amount of relief and  
detailing proposed as dormers, bump outs, roof overhangs and openings.  
l) Farmhouse  
· Suggest have the front elevation end units adjusted so the massing  
does not match each other  
· Suggest incorporating another wall material such as smooth  
paneling or painted brick  
· Suggest revising the second-floor bay window  
· Revise the side elevations to incorporate one square window and one  
full size window per bedroom to reduce the open space without  
openings.  
· Incorporate varied porch column designs  
· Incorporate additional variety in the bay configuration  
· Suggest some relief in the rear elevations. This could be address with  
a mix of bump out headers, 1-2ft bump out for garage with shed roof,  
small balcony at second floor, and/or bumping out second floor  
window with a small shed roof.  
m) Cottage  
· Suggest a varied dormer design on the front façade  
· Suggest the front elevation end units be adjusted so the massing  
does not match each other.  
· Revise the side elevations so the front façade gables do not clip  
or overlap the side elevation.  
· Question if shake at the gable ends would soften the large wall  
surface at the side elevations.  
· Revise the side elevations to incorporate one square window  
and one full size window per bedroom to reduce the open space  
without openings.  
· Suggest some relief in the back elevations. This could be  
addressed with a mix of bump out headers, 1-2 ft bump out for  
garage with a shed roof, small balcony at the second floor,  
and/or bumping out second floor windows with a small shed roof.  
· Suggest a reduced side elevation bay design with the paneling  
removed and decorative brackets.  
n) Traditional  
· Suggest the front elevation end units be adjusted so the massing  
does not match each other.  
· Revise the side elevations so the front facade gables to not clip  
or overlap the side elevation.  
· Revise the side elevations to incorporate one square window  
and one full size window per bedroom to reduce the open space  
without openings.  
· Suggest some relief in the back elevations. This could be  
addressed with a mix of bump out headers, 1-2 ft bump out for  
garage with a shed roof, small balcony at the second floor,  
and/or bumping out the second-floor window with a small shed  
roof.  
· Suggest a reduced side elevation bay design with the paneling  
removed and decorative brackets.  
o) Staff notes the submittal includes a ground sign review.  
· Section V-5(c)(3) states “Signs should have a matte finish, not have a  
glossy or reflective finish.” Confirm sign will have a matte finish.  
· Section V-5(c)(1) states “ Signs should be fabricated on and of  
materials that are of permanent quality, good durability and are  
complimentary to the building of which they become a part.”  
Question how the proposed sign compliments the building.  
Attachments:  
Other Business  
VII.  
A.  
Minutes of Previous Architectural & Historic Board of Review Meeting:  
February 12, 2025.  
Attachments:  
Legislative History  
2/26/25  
Architectural & Historic Board postponed to a date certain  
of Review  
Minutes of Previous Architectural & Historic Board of Review Meeting:  
February 26, 2025.  
B.  
Attachments:  
Staff Update  
VIII.  
IX.  
Adjournment  
*
*
*