Planning commission reviews preliminary site plan for 2108 Wadsworth Road mulch operation

The City of Norton Planning Commission on an unidentified meeting date discussed a preliminary site plan (SPR 12 20 25) for property at 2108 Wadsworth Road, an application presented by GBC Design on behalf of Akron's Finest Mulch.

Commissioners and the city’s consulting engineer treated the item as preliminary review, raising engineering, environmental and access issues that must be addressed before a final plan is submitted.

City engineering consultant Brian Neumeier of GPD said the firm “doesn't have an issue with the concept,” but listed items the applicant must resolve before a final plan, including stormwater approval, wetland impact categories and a jurisdictional determination by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The applicant, John Walsh of GBC Design, described the site as roughly 22–23 acres plus two additional parcels of about 3 acres and said access would be from Wadsworth Road. Mario Halasa of Akron’s Finest Mulch said the near-term plan is to strip topsoil, haul it off-site and prepare a future building pad, and that longer-term development will depend on utilities and market conditions.

Why it matters: commissioners and staff framed the review as an early check to identify significant technical or permitting obstacles. With the site in the flood plain and crossed by overhead transmission lines, the city and applicant agreed to pursue additional studies before a final plan is submitted.

Key details and concerns

- Engineering and environmental: Neumeier told the commission the firm needs stormwater approvals, a wetland categorization and a Corps of Engineers jurisdictional (JD) determination. He also warned that changing ground elevations by stripping or adding fill could alter floodway/floodplain conditions and require a floodplain permit.

- Site layout and utilities: Walsh said the parcel is intersected by a set of high‑tension power lines and that sewer and water could be brought in via existing utility easements; he said the team is working with a wetland consultant and will secure a JD and other permits before returning with a final plan.

- Operations and access: Applicant Mario Halasa said initial operations would focus on topsoil removal and off‑site sale; he said he would prefer higher‑end future development if utilities come to the road. Commission members asked for a paved apron at the access on the adjacent lot to reduce truck mud tracked onto the public road and discussed coordinating with the electric utility (FirstEnergy) on work near transmission lines.

- Neighbor and regulatory questions: resident Lisa Devonport, whose property sits across the street, asked about dust control, noise, truck traffic volume and the project’s duration. Commissioners and the applicant said those issues would be addressed during design and permitting; stormwater and setback issues will be clarified in the final plan and related permit reviews.

Outcome and next steps

The commission treated SPR 12 20 25 as a preliminary site plan review only; no formal approval, vote or binding action was taken. Staff and the applicant agreed the applicant will pursue required technical studies (stormwater, wetland JD, floodplain permitting and truck/access geometry) and return with a finalized site plan for a subsequent hearing. The city engineer will continue to review materials and provide comments prior to any final action.

Ending

Commissioners noted multiple outstanding technical items but identified no major policy objections to continuing the process. The applicant was instructed to coordinate with the city engineer and to provide updated plans and permit documentation when available.