1/26/2021 Council Workshop Recap
Discussion Items
Park Board discussion with City Council
Park board presented on the new Parks Master Plan as well as two projects they would like Council to consider approving funding for tennis and pickleball courts (estimated around 1 million dollars), and a dog park (estimated around $80,000). Staff also presented an idea to create a facility at Ellsworth Meadows Golf Club for golf simulators that would allow students on the golf team and guests at the course to practice, therefore better utilizing Ellsworth in the off-months. Park board also briefly discussed the citywide Sidewalk & Trail Master Plan and the Park Capital Budget.
My take: This was a fun and really thorough presentation. It was clear a lot of hard work went into this. Tennis and pickleball facilities ranked in the top four of residents’ unmet needs on the recent Park Board survey, and research shows that these facilities are popular in other communities. The proposal is to create a racquet sports facility at Barlow Farm Park that has 5 tennis courts, 12 pickleball courts, a shed, pavilion, and restrooms. The dog park is recommended to go in the Colony Park fields area, and would have separate sections for small and large dogs. I want to learn more about each, but I really love both proposals and am supportive of Park Board and their recommendations. Regarding the golf simulator facility at Ellsworth Meadows - no doubt this would be incredibly popular and is a cool idea. Staff was asked to present a business plan to Council. In addition to the business plan, I also want to hear Park Board’s recommendation on this project. If parks money is going to be used, I want to be sure we have the full support of the board and that this expenditure would not impede any of the projects that they wanted to do as a result of the citizen survey.
The City of Hudson Pedestrian Safety Discussion
Staff discussed pedestrian safety and their constant work to make Hudson a safer place. Areas of focus included: SR 303 corridor from Boston Mills to SR 91; the intersection of Clinton St., Aurora St., and N. Main St.; Aurora at. College and Oviatt intersection; SR 91 at the Stoney Hill intersection; SR 91 and Veterans Way; SR 303 and Roslyn; Stow Rd. At Hudson Aurora Rd; and Herrick Park Dr. They also showed a crash map that involved pedestrian-related crashes.
My take: Staff presented a chart that outlines the specific steps they are taking to address (either study or remedy) each of the aforementioned locations. If you have a question or would like an update on on of the locations mentioned, you can either view the chart here or email me directly at nkowalski@hudson.oh.us. The crash map really solidified in my mind that we need to take additional measures to prevent pedestrian-related crashes. Quite a few of these involved bicyclists. I would like to see more bike lanes and signage related to bike safety throughout the city.
Short-Term Rentals
Staff brought this topic back for Council to provide any additional input on in a public session so that they might address it before we vote on it next Tuesday.
My take: Overall, feedback was minimal. We have spent a lot of time on this and staff has worked very hard to address Council’s feedback. Most of the comments centered around the public input process and the desire to get this legislation moving. Personally, I feel very comfortable with this. We can always revisit it later if we find something needs to be adjusted.
Recreation Center Initiative / LifeCenter Plus
I presented a memo, which can be viewed here and is also attached to the agenda. The memo outlined the process I recommended Council take to explore this topic.
My take: All I will say about the overall feedback from Council is that it was certainly mixed. It is not a long segment, about 28-ish minutes. Here is where you can watch it.
Since I introduced this initiative, I would just like to take some time to clarify a few important points.
The first point I would like to clarify is while I proposed three possible solutions, I AM NOT advocating for any of them. While I tend to think a solution like Option 1 is the most fiscally responsible and the most creative, should Council want to pursue a different direction, I am more than open to it. I am not saying any of the solutions I proposed are perfect or right for Hudson, but they might be. We do not know, we need to do a deeper dive. That is why I brought them before Council.
There was feedback that my presentation simultaneously went too far AND lacked the appropriate information. If a Council member wants a topic to be evaluated by staff, he or she needs to get approval from the entire Council to allow staff to spend time and resources to gather numbers, data, analysis, etc. for Council to consider. Why did I not have all the financials laid out, and made only mere suggestions? Because I respected that procedure. So, yes, my ideas did not have hard financials attached to them. That was my intention all along. So, I am puzzled why I was accused of negotiating an acquisition. Oh, if only acquisitions were this easy or took this little time! Any insinuation that I “negotiated a deal” is false, although I will choose to take their confidence in me and my negotiating abilities as a compliment.
The process I presented was influenced by feedback from my fellow Council members following my initial pitch last week. It was clear to me they want to conduct a survey to learn more. It seems to me that there is not consensus in Hudson over what constitutes a “rec center.” Is it a facility with meeting rooms? Or a swim and splash pad type of facility? A senior center? I do think that before we move forward, we need to define what a rec center is to Hudson so we can assess that against the amenities Hudson already offers.
Regarding a rec center survey, it was recently suggested that the Phase 2 survey we are slated to do would also contain questions about a rec center. Yes, you read that right. No, it does not make sense. These are two very different, complicated issues that could taint the results if included on the same survey. So, I did my homework. This fallacy is born out of an initiative from the October 13, 2020 City Council workshop (under Discussion Items) when this Phase 2 survey was first proposed. If you watch, you will see a rec center is NEVER mentioned. Additionally, in the RFP document used to find a consultant to conduct the survey, this is not framed as a joint Phase 2/rec center survey. I’m not sure why this untruth was propagated to begin with, the only thing I can think of was to diminish and reframe this idea.
Regardless, I did not feel like we made progress on this issue like I had hoped. If a survey is what Council wants, then I am happy to do it.
The important thing here: whether you disagree with me or you love the idea, this is the most productive discussion we have had on this topic in recent years. Had I not put proposals forward that created such a splash, we probably would not be here. That is a win for Hudson residents who have been asking for Council to address this for decades.
Items to be Added to Future Agendas
My request: Since we talked so much about the Phase 2 survey in regards to the rec center, I started asking questions. The more questions I asked, the less answers I got. It seems a sub-committee of three Council members were tasked with assisting staff in formulating an RFP and selecting a consultant to do the Phase 2 survey. At the October 13th workshop I referenced earlier, a complete dismissal of our Comprehensive Plan was cited as a reason to conduct this survey. Our Comprehensive Plan steers so much in the city. Our Planning Commission and Board of Zoning and Building Appeals both use the Comprehensive Plan to guide them in many of their decisions. To abandon it now would not only cause many decisions to be called into question, but also completely spits in the face of everything that has moved our community forward in recent decades, especially downtown development. Do you enjoy First & Main? Well, we can thank our Comprehensive Plan for that. To say that the previous plan for the Phase 2 area which was not overwhelmingly favorable to Hudson residents is a reason to reject decades of research, work, and precedent is shallow-minded. We can absolutely come up with a plan for Phase 2 the majority agrees will be good for Hudson that utilizes the Comprehensive Plan.
I want Council to think through this and evaluate whether or not we want to dismiss the Comprehensive Plan simply because it does not have the answers we (well, some of us) want.
I will not support a survey for the downtown area that is not rooted in the Comprehensive Plan.
Don’t forget to RSVP for the At-Large Council Open Forum! This will take place on February 8, 2021 from 7-8 pm. Learn more here.
Lastly, to those of you who have reached out to me with words of encouragement and support following this week’s Council workshop, thank you! But rest assured, I have not let a bully get to me since the 6th grade and I don’t intend on starting now. If you feel upset, just remember this at the ballot box someday.
That’s it for now! Tune in next week.
Have questions? Want to share with me your thoughts on any of the agenda items or issues listed above? As always, I would love to have a conversation! Email me directly at nkowalski@hudson.oh.us.
