News / Articles

Report on Geauga Mining Operations Reviewed and

Commission Tables NOACA Letter

Planning Commission – December 9, 2025 

Meeting Details: The Geauga Planning Commission met in Regular Session on December 9, 2025 at 7:30 am at the Geauga County Office Building, 12611 Ravenwood Drive, Chardon, OH 44024.  This meeting was in person with no virtual attendance option.  The agenda is normally available online prior to the meeting. A copy was available at the meeting.  Observer Note: The website presents the minutes and meeting dates, and the agenda is included in that section.

Public Comment Policy:  No formal policy, but in practice, public comment could be permitted at the Chair’s prerogative. However, this does not happen. No public comment is solicited or offered except in cases where an applicant or zoning inspector is present to answer questions regarding an item on the agenda. 

Board Attendance:

Staff Attendance: Linda Crombie, Planning Director, Pamela Irizarry, Administrative Assistant, and Allyson Kobus, Planner II, were present. 

Others Attending: This Observer and three other members of the public were in attendance. One member of the public was Chris Alusheff, the zoning inspector for Chester Township. A second was Jeff Martin of Industrial Commercial Properties of Geauga Lake.

Minutes - Once approved by the board, the minutes are available online here.  Scroll down until the section on Minutes and Agendas.

Pledge of Allegiance - The meeting opened with the Pledge of Allegiance.

Roll Call - Roll was called. A quorum was present.

Approval of Minutes - November 13, 2025 Regular Meeting Minutes

• Requested revisions had been received by the staff and incorporated into the November 13, 2025 minutes, including a correction to ensure the proper identification of a member who made and/or seconded a motion.

• Action: The Commission approved the November 13, 2025 minutes as amended by motion (Brakey) and second (Bergansky), followed by a unanimous voice vote.

Approval of Agenda/Addendum

• Action: The agenda as presented in the packet was approved by motion (Fabig) and second (McCaskey), followed by a unanimous voice vote.

Financial Report and Approval of Expenses

• Executive Director Linda Crombie reported no changes from the financials included in the packet. As a highlight, she noted the purchase of a new workstation, explaining that payment had been split across accounts. The expenditure (reported as approximately $540 for equipment) was described as budgeted and previously approved.

• Action: The Commission approved the financial report and expenses as presented by motion and second, followed by a unanimous voice vote.

Other Business

There was no “other” business to discuss.

Major Subdivisions to be Reviewed

A. Samuel Whiting Allotment – Replat of Sublot 15 (Chester Township) – Final Plat

• Ms. Crombie presented a request from the applicant/owner, Lois Wensel, involving Sublot 15 in an older subdivision (Samuel Whiting Allotment/Survey) and an adjacent one-acre lot located behind the residence. Staff explained that a storage building and most or all of the septic system were located on the rear lot. The owner’s stated objective was to consolidate lots and clarify property configuration (including for estate planning and potential future sale).

• Ms. Crombie explained that because the proposal changed the boundary within a platted subdivision, the Ohio Revised Code process (711.24) is strict and typically requires approval signatures from all owners in the subdivision. The applicant obtained all signatures except one. Staff stated that the remaining owner appeared not to oppose the proposal so much as not understand it, and that multiple attempts had been made to obtain the signature.

• Chester Township comment: Mr. Chris Alusheff, the Chester township zoning inspector, in attendance, indicated the proposal would improve zoning conformance and noted that other owners in the subdivision have similar “rear lot” configurations. He further indicated the replat would help address nonconformity and “clean up” configurations that may recur in the subdivision.

• Commission discussion: Mr. Gorris asked for clarification regarding the location of the non-signing owner’s property and its proximity to the applicant’s lots. Ms. Crombie identified the non-signing owner’s holdings as similarly configured (including parcels that could face the same signature issue in the future). Ms. Crombie said the Ohio Revised Code language had “a little bit of gray area” tied to whether the change “injuriously affects” other lots, and that “if the Planning Commission determines that there’s no injurious effect, the Prosecutor… felt that that last signature may not necessarily require it if the commission agreed.”

• Members discussed that commission findings about whether the change “injuriously affects” other lots could be relevant and identified the unsigning owner’s parcel as not proximate to the requestor’s and in the same potential situation as the requestor in the future.

• Action: The final plat was approved by motion (McCaskey) and second (Claypool), followed by a unanimous voice vote.

B. Big Dipper Road Dedication Plat (Bainbridge Township) – Preliminary Plan Revised

Ms. Crombie presented a revised preliminary plan associated with the Big Dipper Road dedication, noting that the preliminary and final plans had been approved in 2021 and that the road and utilities had been constructed. The item was returned to the Planning Commission primarily due to stormwater documentation and responsibility as the project advanced toward road dedication.

Background provided by Ms. Crombie:

• The road has associated stormwater facilities (three ponds/basins) installed and currently functioning.

• The surrounding area has been subject to significant development activity (including major commercial development), resulting in property line and ownership changes that required plan revisions.

• The County Engineer required that stormwater-related drainage maintenance district/easement language be addressed differently because this is a road dedication only (with no sublots to assess stormwater maintenance fees in the typical manner).

Soil & Water contingency: Geauga Soil and Water Conservation District requested a condition requiring the developer to submit a declaration of covenants and restrictions establishing inspection and maintenance responsibility for the stormwater easements/ponds, to be reviewed and approved by Soil & Water. They indicated conditional approval upon their acceptance of the declaration.

Commission discussion: Mr. Neola questioned the timing of a future transaction transferring responsibility to another developer and expressed concern about ensuring the entity responsible for stormwater is legally bound and not dissolved before maintenance responsibility is formalized. Ms. Crombie indicated the covenant requirement was intended to protect against that risk. A representative from Industrial Commercial Properties of Geauga Lake (Jeff Martin) was present for questions.

Action: The Commission approved the revised preliminary plan conditionally (including the Soil & Water covenant requirement) by motion (Brakey) and second, followed by a unanimous voice vote. Ms. Crombie stated the final plat would return for action in a subsequent month, with the covenant to be recorded before road dedication proceeds.

Township Zoning Amendments to be Reviewed

A. Hambden Township – Text Amendment ZC-2025-03 (Initiated November 3, 2025 by the Zoning Commission)

• Ms. Crombie presented a text amendment intended to increase the maximum permitted area for accessory buildings in residential districts. She summarized the existing language and the proposed revision and noted that Hambden Township is more rural, where property owners often require larger accessory structures.

• Ms. Crombie’s planning concern focused on whether the amendment should establish a clear maximum to avoid being overly permissive. As context, staff provided comparative building footprints from around the county (including very large structures) to illustrate why a cap could be important.

• Action/Recommendation: Staff recommended approval with modification (to consider establishing a maximum square footage). The Commission approved the recommendation by motion (Fabig) and second (Claypool), followed by a unanimous voice vote.

B. Claridon Township – Map Amendment Z25-3 (Initiated November 24, 2025 by the Zoning Commission)

• Ms. Crombie described the map amendment as part of the administrative work following the dissolution of the Village of Aquilla. She explained that the 982 parcels formerly within Aquilla must be assigned a township zoning classification and that Claridon’s base residential district (R-1) has a three-acre minimum.

• Commission discussion: Mr. Bergansky asked whether the change effectively applies the three-acre minimum to many smaller existing lots. Ms. Crombie explained this is a “mass rezoning” step to establish a baseline classification, while the township is also working on language to manage existing small lots and cross-lot structures without necessarily forcing consolidation.

• Action: The Commission approved the map amendment as presented by a unanimous voice vote.

Director’s Report – Ms. Crombie

Ms. Crombie reported on several operational and planning items:

• Lot splits (November): The year-to-date and monthly lot-split activity was reviewed. For November, staff reported one lot split in Chester Township and three in Thompson Township (noting the pattern of activity trending toward the eastern side of the county).

• Thompson Township zoning work: There was progress completing additional chapters of Thompson Township zoning work, with a goal of finishing remaining chapters and providing a final product in January/February 2026 for township trustee review.

• GIS mapping for zoning maps: Ms. Crombie described an internal coordination change under which Planning Commission staff would continue producing and updating township zoning maps (including final map prints for signatures), rather than relying on the Auditor’s GIS office. Staff characterized the change as efficient and consistent with work already being performed.

• Archives scanning support: The county archives offered to begin scanning frequently requested files (especially subdivision and lot files, including large plats) as time allows. Ms. Crombie indicated this could reduce future retrieval time and costs.

• Workstation installation: The Director referenced the new workstation purchase and noted plans to add maps to walls and potentially show updates to Commission members.

• Commercial construction: Staff indicated no major new items to highlight beyond reports in the shared folder.

• Legislative tracking: Staff summarized several state legislative bills relevant to planning, zoning, and county operations, including proposals affecting township action timelines for variances/conditional uses/zoning changes, inspection options, potential zoning requirements for larger townships currently without zoning, and bills related to county “blue ribbon” efficiency commissions and political subdivision consolidation incentives:

  • House Bill 520 — “blue ribbon commission” on county services

    • Would require each county to create a blue-ribbon commission to review potential duplication of services and “streamline county efficiency.”

    • While zoning wasn’t named, the Director noted that doesn’t mean it couldn’t appear in later versions.

    • The proposed commission membership was described as very large: three county commissioners, the auditor, the mayor of each municipality, a township trustee from each township, and the superintendent (as stated in the transcript).

  • House Bill 574 — merging political subdivisions

    • Would allow political subdivisions to merge (reducing the number of governmental entities).

    • Includes a proposed $25 million grant pool to support communities that merge.

    • The Director said there was no Ohio Legislative Service Commission analysis yet, but she would share it once available.

  • House Bill 575 — CAUV (Current Agricultural Use Value) visibility

    • Would require CAUV tax statements to be listed on the tax bill, and referenced land devoted exclusively to agricultural use.

  • Senate bills

    • There were no updates on the Senate bills at that time.

• Work volume (November): Staff reported processing 33 splits/transfers/consolidations/ easements and four zoning reviews during the month.

No action was required on the Director’s Report.

Correspondence

No correspondence was reported.

Old Business

A. NOACA (Northeast Ohio Areawide Coordinating Agency) Letter

The Commission discussed a draft letter related to NOACA (Northeast Ohio Areawide Coordinating Agency) and the Commission’s concerns about the scope of NOACA’s work and potential fiscal impacts for Geauga County.

Materials discussed:

• A prior draft letter (discussed briefly at the November Planning Commission Meeting).

• A shortened version prepared by staff to tighten length and focus.

• A third “option” proposed by Mr. Claypool to remain in NOACA but limit participation to traditional MPO (Metropolitan Planning Organization) transportation functions, avoiding non-transportation planning initiatives.

Substance of discussion:

• Ms. Brakey recommended that the Planning Commission consider obtaining an objective, data-based evaluation (including financial impacts, legal considerations, and funding stream examples) to reduce uncertainty and focus the decision on verifiable information.

• Mr. Claypool (who has previously worked on the issue as County Commissioner) stated that federal rules for MPO formation/changes are clear, and offered to provide supporting materials including: federal regulation references, state legislative service analyses, and an ODOT-supported cost model/spreadsheet describing financial implications.

• Ms. Brakey emphasized that, if the letter is meant to persuade decision-makers, it should be less rhetorical and more grounded in facts, figures, and demonstrated impacts, including clarity on what Geauga County contributes and what it receives.

• Members also discussed governance and optics, including the practicality of a County Commissioner serving on the Planning Commission and the appearance of “sending a letter to oneself.” The group noted that Planning Commission action is separate from the Board of County Commissioners, and individual members may abstain or decline to sign if desired.

• The discussion included differing views on whether the principal argument should center on NOACA’s broader policy agenda or on the fiscal/representation outcomes tied to MPO structures and discretionary funding.

Action: A motion was made and approved to table the NOACA letter item to allow additional information to be gathered and incorporated into a revised draft (including financial and legal documentation and supporting exhibits). The motion passed by unanimous voice vote.

New Business

A. 2026 Meeting Dates Schedule/Calendar

Staff presented the proposed 2026 meeting schedule/calendar and noted minor formatting improvements and alignment with the County Commissioners’ meeting schedule. The calendar also included deadlines for plan submissions (e.g., replats/final plats and zoning amendments).

As presented: 

• January 13, 2026

• February 10, 2026

• March 10, 2026

• April 14, 2026

• May 12, 2026

• June 9, 2026

• July 14, 2026

• August 11, 2026

• September 10, 2026

• October 15, 2026

• November 10, 2026

• December 8, 2026

Action: The Commission approved the 2026 meeting dates schedule/calendar by motion (Bergansky) and second (Miller), followed by a unanimous voice vote.

B. Model Zoning Amendments

Ms. Crombie presented updates to the county’s model zoning materials to reflect changes in Ohio law regarding public notice options (print and digital notices, official public notice websites where applicable, and related statutory references). She also noted updates related to referendum petition thresholds on zoning amendments and incorporation of previously reviewed model updates (including definitions and “similar uses”). Ms. Crombie reported coordinating with the Prosecutor’s Office.

Mr. Gorris recommended distributing the updated model materials to townships so they can incorporate changes.

Action: The Commission approved incorporation of the revisions into the model zoning materials by motion (McCaskey) and second (Neola), followed by a unanimous voice vote. Ms. Crombie indicated the updated model would be posted to the website and townships notified.

C. Mining Operations

Ms. Kobus presented a draft informational report on mining operations in Geauga County, developed with Planning Commission GIS support and intern assistance. The report compiles data from ODNR (Ohio Department of Natural Resources) and county sources, includes geologic and glaciation context, maps showing mine locations, and profiles of individual mining operations (including production and economic information where available).

There are six mining operations referenced in the report, distributed across multiple townships (including Auburn, Munson/Claridon, Newbury/Burton, Parkman, and Thompson). Discussion included the specialized nature of certain sand products (e.g., arena or golf-course sand) and historical context for large quarry operations.

Action: With Commission consent and no objections, staff indicated the report would be posted to the website and shared with townships as an informational resource.  The report was subsequently posted here.

Additional end-of-year remarks

At the close of New Business, the Chairperson, Mr. Gorris, acknowledged that several members’ terms were expiring at year-end and thanked outgoing members for their service. Mr. McCaskey, termed six years, will be stepping down. Mr. Neola has reapplied. Ms. Cocca-Fulton was not present for the discussion, having left early.

Adjournment

The meeting adjourned at 8:56 am following a motion and unanimous vote.

Next meeting: January 13, 2026.

More Information about the Geauga Planning Commission is available online. 

Observer: David Lewis

Editor: Rooney Moy

Reviewer: Sarah McGlone

Submitted: 12/29/2025

The League of Women Voters of Geauga is a 501(c)(3) nonpartisan political organization that encourages informed and active participation in government, works to increase understanding of major public policy issues, and influences public policy through education and advocacy. They do not support or oppose individual candidates or parties. Learn more about the LWVG at www.lwvgeauga.org.