Board of County Commissioners v. Lightman

Barnes, J., delivered the opinion of the Court. This appeal was filed by the Board of County Commissioners of Prince George’s County (the Board) from an order of the Circuit Court for Prince George’s County (Bowie, J.) reversing an order of the Board, sitting as the District Council, denying a special exception to William R. Lightman and Marie C. Lightman, his wife, (the applicants or appellees) for an automobile filling station at 7123 George Palmer Highway in the Town of Seat Pleasant. The subject property is located on the George Palmer Highway. This highway is a major artery which connects with East Capital Street in the District of Columbia.

The lot is Parcel B of the Gregory Farms Subdivision, contains 15,000 square feet and is currently zoned C-2 (general commercial), as are the adjoining properties. As one faces the subject property, the land on the left side is a McDonald’s Drive-In and on the right side of the property is a Texaco service station. Within 2500 feet of the subject property there are seven other gasoline filling stations. Within the three miles between the District of Columbia line and the subject property there are at least ten gasoline filling stations.

Other commercial uses in the area include a dry cleaning establishment, a pizza restaurant, a dairy store, a discount mart, a retail drygoods store, a coin operated laundry, a beauty shop, drugstores, and supermarkets. There was testimony that the Park and Planning Commission was contemplating a park directly behind the subject property. Across the ⁸⁸ street from the Texaco station there are individual homes. There is a buffer of several hundred feet of trees in the rear of the subject property.

The applicants’ case before the Board consisted of a written statement of the applicants themselves, and the testimony of a representative of the Crown Oil Company (Crown), the contract purchaser of the subject property. The .witness testified that the proposed filling station would be used for the sale of gasoline and motor oil only, with other services such as vacuum cleaning and inflating tires provided at a separate island away from the pump island. Crown would itself operate and control the 24 hour-a-day operation and would not relinquish control of the operation to any lessee nor would it permit stray automobiles to be parked on the lot nor permit any repair work. He testified that the subject property was chosen by Crown because of a need based upon traffic studies and estimated population growth.

He called the Board’s attention to the other commercial uses in the area, already mentioned, and stated that, in his opinion, the widening of the George Palmer Highway, already in progress, would eliminate any congestion likely to be caused by the additional driveway into the filling station. One of the town councilmen for the Town of Seat Pleasant testified in opposition to the granting of the special exception, stating that, in his opinion, there was no need for any additional filling stations. He further testified that many of the people of the town were opposed to the granting of the special exception ; that the town was trying to prevent a “gasoline alley” along this portion of the highway; that the area was “cluttered” with gasoline stations; and that most of the increase in population which would be generated in the area would not occur in the Town of Seat Pleasant. The Board, on June 30, 1967, filed the following order and decision: “Upon motion of Commissioner Brooke, seconded by Commissioner Aluisi, and unanimously passed, it was Ordered that the application of WILLIAM R. LIGHTMAN AND MARIE C. LIGHTMAN, Owners, for a SPECIAL EXCEPTION to use the premises now ⁸⁹ known as 7123 George Palmer Highway, being Parcel B of the Gregory Farms Subdivision, property now zoned C-2, for the purpose of an AUTOMOBILE FILLING STATION, be DISAPPROVED in accordance with District Council’s Findings of Fact and Conclusions.

FINDINGS OF FACT “1. The District Council finds that there are seven (7) gasoline stations within 2,500 feet of the proposed station. “2. That there are two (2) vehicle-oriented uses on either side of the proposed station; namely, a Texaco station and a McDonald’s Drive-In. “3. The District Council finds no testimony as to the health and safety of the residents or workers in the area. “4.

The District Council finds no testimony as to detriment to the use and/or development of the general neighborhood.” CONCLUSIONS “1. The District Council concludes that the applicant failed to meet the burden of proof required under 28.2 of the Zoning Ordinance. “2. The District Council concludes that another vehicle-oriented use might cause excessive traffic congestion along George Palmer Highway at the location of the subject property and is not consonant with the orderly growth of the neighborhood. “3. That it is not consistent with land planning principles to allow another gasoline station in an area that