Preview:

REPORTED IN THE COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS OF MARYLAND No. 1646 September Term, 1998 ________________________________ EASTERN OUTDOOR ADVERTISING COMPANY

v.

MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF BALTIMORE, et al. ________________________________ Salmon, Eyler, *Harrell, JJ. ________________________________ Opinion by Harrell, J. ________________________________ Filed: September 29, 1999 *Harrell, J., now a member of the Court of Appeals, participated in the conference and decision of this case while a member of this Court; he participated in the

adoption of this opinion as a member of this Court by special designation. This appeal from a judgment of the Circuit Court for Baltimore City concerns the denial by the City of Baltimore's Board of Municipal and Zoning Appeals (the Board) of a conditional use application for a general advertising sign (billboard) within a designated conditional urban use renewal permit, district. Eastern The applicant Advertising for the

Outdoor

Company

(Eastern), sought judicial review of the Board's decision in the circuit court. The Mayor and City Council noted its intention to The circuit court affirmed the

participate in the proceedings.1

Board's denial and Eastern noted this appeal. ISSUES Appellant frames three questions for our consideration, which we have rephrased slightly: I. Did the circuit court apply an incorrect standard of review in reaching its affirmance of the decision of the Board? II. Did the Board err as a matter of law in concluding that the proposed general advertising sign is not permitted, as a conditional use, within the Mt. Vernon Urban Renewal Area? III.
1

Was

the

evidence

before

the

Board

The Mayor and City Council of Baltimore are vested by statute with the general powers of zoning and planning within the City of Baltimore. See Md. Code (1957; 1998 Repl. Vol.), Art. 66B,

Download Eastern Ad v. Baltimore.pdf

Maryland Law