Dobry v. Board of County Commissioners

Per Curiam. The appellants (or their predecessors in title) as owners of Lot 4, Parcel A in the subdivision of Livingston Park in Prince George’s County at the intersection of White Oak Drive and Livingston Road (the subject property) filed a petition for rezoning the subject property from R-55 (single family residential) to C-2 (heavy commercial) with the Maryland-Na ⁷¹⁹ tional Capital Park and Planning Commission (Planning Commission) on July 30, 1963. Both the Technical Staff and the Planning Commission recommended that 30,496 square feet of the total of 33,000 square feet in the subject property be rezoned to the C-2 zone but that 2504 square feet be not zoned but held for the further widening of two abutting streets— White Oak Drive and Livingston Road. The appellants agreed to this reservation of 2504 square feet for the widening of the two roads.

Testimony was taken before the appellee, the Board of County Commissioners for Prince George’s County, sitting as a District Council (District Council) on October 21, 1964. A real estate broker and appraiser testified as an expert on behalf of the owners that in his opinion the subject property should be zoned C-2 and that the best and proper use of the subject property was “for heavy commercial of some type.” He pointed out that directly across the street from the subject property, on the corner, the District Council had recently rezoned that property from R-55 to C-O (commercial-offices) and that property was presently occupied by an accountant’s office. In the rear of that property was a non-conforming property occupied by a real estate office. There was C-2 zoning immediately adjoining the subject property on the south and numerous other parcels to the south adjacent to and fronting on Livingston Road zoned C-2.

On behalf of the neighboring property owners who opposed the rezoning application, an expert real estate appraiser testified that although in his opinion the subject property should be rezoned for a C-0 or C-l (light commercial) zone, the subject property should not be rezoned for a C-2 (general or “heavy” commercial) zone. It was his opinion that the “heavy” commercial uses permitted in the C-2 zone, such as parking lots, used car sales lots, road cleaning, motels, tailor shops, tinsmith shops and uses of that nature would adversely affect the values of the properties in the Livingston Park subdivisions adjoining the subject property. Commander John E. King, who owned property in Livingston Park, pointed out in his testimony that the subject property forms part of the entrance to the Livingston Park subdivision, that there would be an additional traffic hazard, especially to children passing the subject property on their ⁷²⁰ way to school and that although he too thought the subject property should be rezoned to permit a commercial use, it should not be rezoned to C-2 as this heavy commercial use “would pull down our residential values in this area.” He characterized the residential area in Livingston Park as a “lovely subdivision.” Other owners and residents in the neighborhood of the subject property gave similar testimony in regard to the depreciation of the value of their properties and the hazard which would likely result from reclassification of