Full Document
MINUTES OF THE A VON LAKE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING January 6, 2026 A regular meeting of the Avon Lake Planning Commission was called to order on January 6, 2026, at 7:00 P.M. in Council Chambers with Chairperson Ma presiding. ROLL CALL Present for roll call were Mr. Leitch, Ms. Lissner, Dr. Ma, Mr. Orille, Mrs. Raymond, Mr. Reynolds, Mayor Spaetzel, Director of Law Ebert, City Engineer Howard, Community Development Director Esbom, and Planning & Zoning Manager LaRosa. OATH OF OFFICE The Oath of Office was administered to newly seated members Ms. Lissner and Mr. Reynolds. Members were welcomed and congratulations were extended. ORGANIZATIONAL BUSINESS Mayor Spaetzel moved and Mrs. Raymond seconded to elect Dr. Ma as Chairperson. Motion carried, 7-0. Mr. Leitch moved, Ms. Lissner seconded to elect Mrs. Raymond as Pro-Tern Chairperson. Motion carried, 7-0. GENERAL CORRESPONDENCE & ANNOUNCEMENTS There were no announcements. COUNCIL REPORT Mr. Reynolds reported no Council update. SWEARING IN PUBLIC COMMENTERS Director of Law Ebert swore in applicants and members of the audience who plan to speak to items on the agenda. TABLED CASE Case No. CPC-25-15, Shire Glen Green Management LLC, Major Subdivision Preliminary Plat Approval for Matthew's Hollow Subdivision, located northeast of the Lear Road and Krebs Road intersection. Applicable Code Sections: 1214.05: Major Subdivision and 1238: Subdivision Design Standards apply. Edward Pavicic, 1779 Granite Court, Westlake introduced Kevin Hoffman of Polaris Engineering & Surveying, 34600 Chester Road, Willoughby Hills Ohio who reported that several outstanding 1 January 6, 2026 items from the prior meeting had been addressed, including coordination with Avon Lake Regional Water and revisions relating to stormwater facility approach and documentation. Community Development Director Esbom concurred and provided an update on developments since the December meeting. He reported that the Fire Department had resolved the prior hydrant question, noting that the hydrant requirement was tied to an earlier three-lot concept and was no longer an issue under the current plan. He also explained that Avon Lake Regional Water had expressed concerns regarding water and sanitary lines located beneath the private drive along the northwest portion of the site; in response, the applicant revised the plans to relocate those lines, and Avon Lake Regional Water subsequently confirmed the change addressed their concern. Director Eshom noted that stormwater management remained the most significant outstanding topic. He stated that the applicant recently submitted proposed language for a stormwater maintenance agreement, and staff had reviewed it through the Development Review Committee. The Development Review Committee includes multiple departments (i.e. Fire, Police, Engineering, Building, Public Works, and Avon Lake Regional Water). While staff had previously preferred that stormwater facilities be located within a block owned by the homeowners' association, he indicated the revised approach could potentially meet the City's needs, provided the Law Department confirms the language is sufficiently strong. He added that staff also discussed incorporating deed restriction language so future property owners are clearly on notice of the ongoing maintenance and contribution obligations. Finally, Director Esbom addressed the wetlands discussion. He explained that staff had requested a wetlands delineation or mapping as part of the City's information-gathering for Planning Commission review. The applicant provided an updated letter from the environmental consultant dated the day of the meeting and reflecting the current project name; however, the applicant continued to decline providing a formal wetlands delineation map. City Engineer Howard reiterated concerns regarding the absence of wetlands shown on the plans and the City's ability to verify avoidance/protection without mapped locations. Discussion occurred among the applicant, staff, and Commission regarding whether a delineation map is required by ordinance versus requested as part of the staff and Commission due diligence under subdivision review criteria and design standards. Public Comment No new evidence was provided during public comment. Commission Discussion Commission members engaged in an extended and detailed discussion regarding several interrelated technical and procedural issues raised by the application. A significant portion of the discussion focused on the stormwater management approach, particularly the long-term enforceability of maintenance responsibilities. Commissioners asked how the proposed stormwater maintenance agreement would function over time, who would be legally responsible for maintenance if ownership changed, and whether the agreement alone would be sufficient. Staff explained that, in addition to the maintenance agreement, deed restriction language was being discussed so that future purchasers would be on clear notice of their obligations, and that these 2 January 6, 2026 'v provisions would be further reviewed and refined with the Law Department prior to final plat approval. The discussion then turned to wetlands information, where commissioners sought clarification on the difference between the environmental consultant's letter stating that no wetlands would be impacted and staffs request for a wetlands delineation or mapped location. Several commissioners expressed concern that, without wetlands shown on the plans, the Commission lacked the ability to independently verify avoidance and protection measures. Questions were raised about how the City or Commission could ensure compliance during construction if the location of wetlands were not documented, and how potential impacts would be identified or enforced if issues arose after approval. Commission members also discussed standard development review practices, noting that while a wetlands delineation may not be explicitly listed as a required submittal in the code, requests for additional information are commonly made as part of staff review and due diligence. Commissioners expressed concern about potential implications for the City if wetlands were later determined to be impacted, including regulatory enforcement, remediation requirements, or liability concerns, and emphasized the importance of having adequate documentation in the record to support the Commission's findings. The Commission also discussed the sequencing of subdivision approvals, including the distinction between preliminary plat approval, improvement plans, and final plat approval. Commissioners asked what level of detail is typically required at each stage and whether wetlands mapping or related information could be addressed later in the process. While acknowledging that additional refinement often occurs during improvement plan and final plat review, several commissioners indicated that they needed sufficient information at the preliminary plat stage to determine whether the proposal meets the review criteria for major subdivisions and to make informed findings regarding site suitability and compliance with applicable standards. At the conclusion of the discussion, the applicant requested that the matter be tabled to allow additional time for his attorney to confer with City legal counsel regarding the wetlands delineation request and related legal considerations, prior to further action by the Planning Commission. Mrs. Raymond moved, and Ms. Lissner seconded to table Case NO. CPC-25-15 Matthews Hollow Subdivision, Major Subdivision Preliminary Plat to a future meeting. Motion carried (7-0). APPROVAL OF MINUTES Mrs. Raymond moved, and Mr. Leitch seconded to approve the December 2, 2025, meeting minutes as presented. Motion carried (4-0) with three abstenations. Ms. Lissner, Mr. Reynolds and Mayor Spaetzel abstained from voting as they did not attend the December meeting. OTHER BUSINESS Commission discussed concerns raised in consecutive meetings regarding allegations of bias or conflict raised late in proceedings. Commission discussed adding a standard procedural prompt at the start of presentations and public testimony to disclose any perceived conflicts or concerns early in the process. Planning and Zoning Manager La Rosa was asked to assist with adding standardized language for future agendas and meeting procedures. 3 January 6, 2026 GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no general public comments offered. ADJOURNMENT Mrs. Raymond moved, and Mr. Leitch seconded to adjourn the meeting at 8:04 pm. Motion carried (7-0). Chairperson Ma 4 Reco\ ding Secretary Kelly La Rosa January 6, 2026