Lake Twp. Court date set for zoning dispute

A mediation hearing date in the legal dispute between the owner of Woodville Road Nursery and Lake Township has been set for April 14 and Wood County Common Pleas Court Judge Matthew Reger has scheduled a trial for May 27.
The dispute centers on two parcels purchased in 2017 by James Mlynek, the nursery owner, and the township’s zoning resolution. Mlynek purchased the parcels along Woodville Road to temporarily store leaves before composting them at his nursery business.
The parties are at odds over required buffer yards and mounds, the use of the parcels as a transfer station, and whether the township has applied its zoning resolution equitably.
Judge Reger last month gave a mixed ruling on the township’s and Mlynek’s motions for summary judgments, finding each party had motions that were well taken and those that were not.
“The court finds that a number of genuine issues of material fact remain due to the conflicting evidence provided in support of the motions,” he wrote.
Mlynek has argued he’s met all the zoning requirements for the parcels, including erecting a mound along the parcels’ boundary line with Bailey Road, but that the township has given conflicting opinions on the requirements.
“As instructed, defendant (Mlynek) installed a mound on the Bailey Road boundary with a 25-foot buffer yard and was informed he was in compliance after a visit from the zoning inspector,” Judge Reger wrote. “However, soon after, defendant was informed by violation letter that the mound was in violation of …the zoning resolution for failing to measure 25 feet in width.”
Mlynek was also later told the resolution requires him to comply with buffer yard requirements along two other property boundaries and that the yard waste transfer station wasn’t an approved use of property zoned B-2 general commercial even though the township trustees in May 2018 approved his request to rezone the parcels from R-2 to B-2. The approval by the trustees required Mlynek to establish the buffer yard along the Bailey Road boundary with an earthen mound at least 4 feet high and planted with trees. Also, there could be no access road from Bailey to the parcels.
Mlynek’s motion with the court argued the township couldn’t impose further conditions on his parcels than what was stipulated in the rezoning agreement.
But the court disagreed.
“While the court agrees that defendant was subjected to wholly inconsistent and likely frustrating representations throughout this matter, the court finds that the doctrine of equitable estoppel cannot apply to estop further enforcement of the resolution,” the judge wrote.
However the judged ruled the zoning resolution “contains no specification as to the width of a buffer yard earthen mound” and granted Mlynek’s motion on that issue. But he declined to render a summary judgment on whether Mlynek was meeting the mound height requirement because the parties submitted conflicting evidence.
The parties also dispute whether a yard waste transfer station on the parcels violates the zoning resolution but Judge Reger wrote “…such a dispute constitutes an issue of fact. Accordingly, the issue of whether the yard waste transfer station use of the Mlynek parcels violates the resolution is not appropriate for resolution by summary judgment.”
The judge backed the township in Mlynek’s claim the township wasn’t enforcing the resolution uniformly. As evidence, Mlynek had submitted an affidavit from a former trustee who said there were repeated similar complaints about a Mathews Road property that were largely ignored by the township.
The township is represented by the Wood County prosecutor’s office in the case.