Skylar Sutton - Hudson City Council

D11 Zoning (JoAnn's):

As the only council member around for more than 2 years, I am the only one qualified to give you the complete story:

* JoAnn went bankrupt twice, all real estate was sold to IRG (a national developer) during the first one. IRG leased the building back to JoAnn until the second one. IRG still owns the property today.

* The JoAnn building does not conform to current zoning code (too large), so IRG has 2 years from the closure of JoAnn's to backfill it. If they don't do that, they will need to split, modify, or replace the building to meet current code.

* IRG scheduled at least two meetings with City Staff (2023 / 2024), outlining their vision for the property. That vision was heavily focused on "mixed use" with a "live work play" mentality, consisting of townhomes and retail shopping. How do I know this? City staff invited me to two of those presentations. I saw IRG's slideshow and drawings with my own eyes. I heard their representative say it.

* Hudson's Charter and laws require Council to use a "Comprehensive Plan" as a guide for land use and growth plans. We update the plan roughly every 10 years.

* The Comprehensive Plan Steering Committee was a group of your neighbors, who spent 18+ months researching, surveying, and having thoughtful discussions with your neighbors about the next 10 years. Their final work product is the "2024 Comprehensive Plan", which was UNANIMOUSLY adopted by Council in Oct. 2024. [Editorial: To those of you dismissing the nonpartisan hard work these folks did, I find it really disrespectful]

* I can't speak for the Comp Plan Comm., but I was their Council Liaison and attended the meetings, so I am qualified to give you my recollection of the discussion. They had some deep discussions about south Hudson (knowing that JoAnn and LittleTikes might not be around forever). The intersection of 91/Norton (old "Darrowville") was suggested for a residential/commercial mixed use to function as a gateway as you entered Hudson. Heavy industrial, and the accompanying truck traffic, was suggested for the Seasons Road / Rt. 8 area. Light industrial and office was suggested for Terex / Barlow / Georgetown triangle (inc. the JoAnns property).

* They were explicit that the area was to remain dedicated to high income tax uses. Hudson is primarily funded through income taxes, NOT your property taxes (those go to the schools). This is reflected in the "Future Land Use Map" contained within the Comp. Plan, and several Comp. Plan members have spoken at Council meetings stating the same.

* After JoAnn closed, Council formed a subcommittee of Bird, Sutton, Foster, and several city staff members to discuss the future of the site. The subcommittee met a few times by itself, at least once with the IRG - the developer (wrong IMHO), and made a visit to the Valor Acres project in Brecksville which I was unable to attend.

* A rough draft of a new zoning district (D11) came out of those meetings. Like anything made by committee it is a blend of ideas, some good, some bad. Council discussed it a few times, and then sent it to Planning Commission (PC) for review and comment.

* PC are the land use experts. They know our land use laws inside and out, and are in the best position to point out errors, conflicts, and concerns. Hudson's laws require them to review land use changes we want to make. Interestingly, several of the current PC members were also on the Comp Plan Comm. and are in a unique position to provide expert guidance.

* PC discovered several items of concern, but ran out of time to fully investigate all of them. There is a time limit on how long PC can keep an item, and they must fit the discussion in around other required duties. PC sent D11 back to council with proposed changes, but also explicitly requested more time to go deeper on some of the topics.

* Sutton and Brezovec requested that council honor that request and send D11 back to PC, but Council declined.

* Council paused the vote on D11 until May, and no further discussions have occurred to date.


What is currently proposed for D11?

Use by right:
* Commercial: banks, medical clinics, offices, business parks, small hotels, rec facilities, media studios, restaurants, retail up to 10k square feet, showrooms
* Industrial: light, distribution, research labs
* Civic: government buildings, hospitals, public safety

Conditional Uses:
* Residential: townhomes and multifamily (within a Planned Development)
* Commercial: studios, bars, nurseries, day care centers, grocery stores up to 40k square feet, large hotels, retail up to 20k square feet, repair facilities (except auto), vets, wireless facilities


Weren't you on the subcommittee / Where do you stand on D11?

* Sure was. Like anything made by a committee it has some good and some bad. I don't support everything in it, but the legislative process is iterative. We're supposed to iterate and refine until we get it right, however long that takes.

* There is no deadline on this. I'm not sure why some of my peers feel the need to "get it done". I'm disappointed that some of my peers have spent time finger wagging at residents for getting involved late in the process. I'm just happy people are talking about it at all. If we need to take time to further refine D11, so be it, we should take that time and get it right.

* At the end of the day, some kind of zoning refinement needs to happen... we just need to make sure D11 is what Hudson wants it to be.

* My personal opinion? Get rid of any reference to residential. Limit the uses to light industrial, medical, and office (this is what currently surrounds JoAnn on three sides). Provide somewhere for office workers to eat lunch by restricting retail to a limited number of sit down dining options facing 91 (ex: would two new free standing restaurants facing the street be out of the question?)


What's Next?

* Council can vote on D11 again in May. It remains to be seen what (if any) changes Council will make before that vote.

* If you want {something} or don't want {somethingElse} in that area, you can send your thoughts to Council or read them into the record at a meeting.

Today's Hudson Hub headline story is incorrect (shocking, right?). They are correct that Contigo Health is closing, but the Hudson office only had about 10 employees - not the 175 employees they are reporting.

[Edit: Official city page is now saying the confirmed headcount is "4"].

The City notified the Beacon last week when it ran the same story. The same parent company owns both the Beacon and the Hub, so they had over a week to correct it before it ran in the Hub but chose not to for some reason.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯