Grau v. Board of Zoning Appeals of Baltimore County

• Citation: 122 A.2d 824,210 Md. 19
• Decision Date: 03 May 1956
• Docket Number: No. 131,131
• Parties: Dr. Edward Gordon GRAU, Dwight Dodge, James Mulligan, William H. Bartman, et al. v. BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS OF BALTIMORE COUNTY.
• Court: Court of Appeals of Maryland

Page 19

210 Md. 19

122 A.2d 824

Dr. Edward Gordon GRAU, Dwight Dodge, James Mulligan William H. Bartman, et al. v. BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS OF BALTIMORE COUNTY.

No. 131.

Court of Appeals of Maryland.

May 3, 1956.

Herbert F. Kuenne, Baltimore (Hinkley & Singley, Baltimore, on the brief), for appellants.

Charles E. Quandt and Robert C. Prem, Baltimore (John J. Caslin, Towson, and Niles, Barton, Yost & Dankmeyer, Baltimore, on the brief), for appellee.

Before BRUNE, C. J., and DELAPLAINE, COLLINS, HENDERSON and HAMMOND, JJ.

DELAPLAINE, Judge.

This is an appeal from an order of the Circuit Court for Baltimore County affirming an order of the Board of Zoning Appeals of Baltimore County reclassifying two lots of ground situated at the northwest corner of Loch Raven Boulevard and Mussula Road, in the Ninth Election District of Baltimore County, from a 'B' (Semi-detached) Residence Zone to an 'E' Commercial Zone.

These lots, which have been owned by Charles L. Regenhardt and Celeste E. Regenhardt, his wife, since 1942, were originally classified by the County Commissioners of Baltimore County on January 2, 1945, in an 'A' (Cottage) Residence Zone. It was at that time that the County Commissioners, by authority vested in them by the Legislature of Maryland, adopted Zoning Regulations which divided the County into seven zones, namely, 'A' (Cottage) Residence, 'B' (Semi-detached) Residence, 'C' (Apartment) Residence, 'D' (Group) Residence, 'E' Commercial, 'F' Light Industrial, and 'G' Heavy Industrial. Oursler v. Board of Zoning Appeals of Baltimore County, 204 Md. 397, 400, 104 A.2d 568; Temmink v. Board of Zoning Appeals of Baltimore County, 205 Md. 489, 109 A.2d 85; Kroen v. Board of Zoning Appeals of Baltimore County, Md., 121 A.2d 181.

In 1945 the Legislature authorized the County Commissioners to vest in the Zoning Commissioner the power to amend, supplement, or change from time to time the boundaries of the zoning districts, divisions or zones. Laws 1945, ch. 502, Baltimore County Code, 1948 Ed., sec. 366. In accordance with that authority, the County Commissioners vested in the Zoning Commissioner the power to reclassify tracts of land.

In 1951 the Regenhardts applied to the Zoning Commissioner to reclassify their two lots from an 'A' (Cottage) Residence Zone to an 'E' Commercial Zone. They asserted that there had been changes in the character of the neighborhood which had been brought about by the construction of many semi-detached houses, group houses, and apartments, as well as by a shopping center on Loch Raven Boulevard directly across from their lots. At that time the Zoning Commissioner refused to change the classification of the lots to an 'E' Commercial Zone, but reclassified them as a 'B' (Semi-detached) Residence Zone. No appeal was taken from that action of the Zoning Commissioner.

In June, 1953, the Regenhardts filed their second application with the Zoning Commissioner, this time for reclassification from a 'B' (Semi-detached) Residence Zone to an 'E' Commercial Zone. On July 17, 1953, the Zoning Commissioner, believing that reclassification to an 'E' Commercial Zone would be 'spot zoning' and detrimental to the gerneral welfare of the community, passed an order denying the petition.

The Regenhardts appealed from that order to the Board of Zoning Appeals. On December 31, 1953, the Board, reversing the action of the Zoning Commissioner, passed an order granting the reclassification of the lots from a 'B' (Semi-detached) Residence Zone to an 'E' Commercial Zone. In support of its action, the Board stated in its opinion: 'Since 1945 there has been a phenomenal growth in cottage, semi-detached, and group homes, as well as commercial zones in this area. The Board is of the opinion that the granting of this reclassification would not be detrimental to the health, safety, and general welfare of the community.'

On January 28, 1954, Dr. Edward Gordon Grau and other owners of property in the Ninth Election District filed a petition in the Circuit Court for a writ of certiorari directed to the Board of Zoning Appeals for the purpose of annulling the Board's order. They alleged that the order was illegal, arbitrary, and unreasonable and constituted a gross abuse of administrative discretion.

The protestants alleged that the evidence showed: (1) that reclassification from a 'B' (Semi-detached) Residence Zone to an 'E' Commercial Zone would be 'spot zoning' and detrimental and in direct opposition to the zoning plan; (2) that it would create a traffic hazard, increase traffic on heavily burdened...