London City Council on Tuesday adopted the Planning Commission's recommendation to advance the Madison Reserve planned unit development, a proposed neighborhood off U.S. Route 42/State Route 142 that the developer says would include roughly 245 to 271 houses priced to reach first-time buyers.

The vote to adopt the Planning Commission recommendations (Resolution 1-80-25) passed on a 6-1 roll call. Councilman Eads voted no; the motion received affirmative votes from Councilwoman Jacqueline Jackman, Councilman Stall, Councilwoman Shannon Trainer, Councilman Andrew Hitt, Councilman Hayes and Councilman Brent McDaniels.

The decision follows a nearly three-hour public hearing in which about 32 people signed up to speak. Supporters said the project would create attainable homeownership for young families, teachers and factory workers; opponents raised concerns about density, traffic on East High Street and whether the development would meet the city's open-space rules.

"This will add to the tax base to support city services and the school system," said Bernadette Willard, a nearby resident. State Sen. Michelle Reynolds, chair of the Ohio Senate's housing committee, described state programs and grants designed to encourage local jurisdictions to adopt pro-housing policies and to help rural and suburban communities build workforce housing. "Homes are where jobs go to at night," Reynolds said during an overview of recent state budget actions that include funds for residential economic development.

Developer Paul Gross said his team substantially revised the plan after neighborhood meetings, removing proposed road connections and adding green buffers. "We went door to door," Gross told the council, and engineers reworked the layout to address neighbors' concerns, he said. He and the builder, Michael Marinangeli of Arbor Homes, said they will use deed restrictions limiting sales concentration (no more than three homes sold to a single buyer or entity) and other controls they say will reduce the risk of wholesale conversions to rentals.

Planning and code questions were central to opposition. Matt Daley, a resident and speaker, cited the City of London zoning code (Chapter 12.62) requiring 20% of a PUD tract to be reserved for usable open space and urged council to require that any open space not be counted only as utility easement or retention pond. In response, planners and the developer said the preliminary plan shows about 27% open space overall, above the 20% code minimum, and that much of the space is contiguous and walkable.

Traffic and lot size drew repeated attention. Residents pointed to potential increases of hundreds of daily vehicle trips and asked that the city require a public traffic study before final approvals. Several speakers also said lots proposed at or below roughly 5,625 square feet are too small and questioned how the city will enforce affordability limits tied to smaller lot sizes. Builder Michael Marinangeli said market forces and mortgage underwriting set price points; he and local realtors said a $225,000'$250,000 new-home price would be an entry option that is not widely available in the city today.

The Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend the project after a revised filing that the developer said reduced the final lot count and added design changes required by staff and the fire and public-safety chiefs (including 31-foot local street widths). City building department staff (Christie West) told council the online application labeling issue that had caused confusion earlier had been corrected and that the project had been reviewed as a PUD.

Council members said they balanced neighborhood concerns with the broader fiscal and housing needs the city faces. Councilwoman Shannon Trainer, who sponsored the resolution adopting the Planning Commission recommendation, said the city lacks many lower-priced new homes and that the project would help retain workers and young families. Opponents including several longtime residents urged the council to require more protections, clearer definitions of "affordable" units and binding enforcement mechanisms before final plat approval.

What passed: the council adopted the Planning Commission's recommendation to move the Madison Reserve PUD forward. That action does not itself finalize the subdivision plat or building permits; the developer must still complete any final engineering, submit a final plat and meet any conditions the council or staff require before construction begins.

Council also heard several commitments from the developer and builder during the hearing: a deed restriction limiting bulk purchases, placement of larger lots and green buffers next to existing residences, and a homeowners association covenant that would restrict certain activities such as commercial fireworks. The developer and builder said they would continue to work with neighbors on fence lines, buffer plantings and pedestrian connections.

Council members and staff said they expect additional technical submittals, including a traffic study and final stormwater and utility plans, before final approvals are signed and recorded. Several residents asked that those studies be made available to the public when complete.

The public hearing drew a cross-section of local voices: school leaders who said measured growth can help district staffing, local business owners who argued more rooftops mean more customers, and social-service workers who said more housing options would help families and students in need.

The council resolution approving the Planning Commission recommendation is available in the meeting packet as Resolution 1-80-25. The developer said he will file subsequent engineering and plat documents with the city; dates for those filings were not specified at the meeting.

A vote tally and summary of other formal actions taken by council during the meeting appear in a separate "Votes at a glance" summary of the same council meeting.