You are viewing an archived code
(a) Appeals to the Board may be made by any person, Board, association, corporation or official allegedly aggrieved by the grant or refusal of a building or use and occupancy permit or by any other administrative decision based or claimed to be based, in whole or in part, upon this chapter, including the zoning map.
(b) Any appeal relative to a variance or any administrative appeal may be filed with the Board only after refusal of issuance or revocation of a building or use-and-occupancy permit by the Department or after the issuance of a permit in cases where it is alleged that such permit has been issued erroneously.
(c) Appeals must be made on forms provided for that purpose, and all information required on such forms must be furnished by the appellant. Forms must be filed with the clerk to the Board, and the appellant must pay the clerk for expenses incidental to the appeal. No form will be accepted by the clerk unless it contains all pertinent information and is accompanied by the required fee to defray expenses.
(d) Appeals and applications filed in proper form shall be numbered serially, docketed and placed upon the calendar of the Board. The calendar of appeals to be heard must be posted conspicuously in the office of the Board during the period before such hearing date.
(e) Except as otherwise specifically provided by statute, any administrative appeals to the Board from any action, inaction, decision or order of a Department of the county government must be considered de novo.
The Department must comply with the prehearing submission requirements of chapter 2A.
(Legislative History: Ord. No. 8-61, § 5; Ord. No. 12-1, § 1; Ord. No. 13-98, § 3; Ord. No. 14-47, § 1.)
Editor’s note-The above Section is quoted in part in National Institutes of Health Federal Credit Union v. Hawk, 47 Md.App. 189, 422 A.2d 55 (1980). Section 59-A-4.3 [formerly § 111-32(c)] is cited and quoted in part in Sterling Homes Corp. v. Anne Arundel County, 116 Md.App. 206, 695 A.2d 1238 (1997), discussing Pemberton v. Montgomery County, 275 Md. 363, 340 A.2d 240 (1975); and is interpreted and quoted in Pemberton v. Montgomery County, 275 Md. 363, 340 A.2d 240 (1975). Section 59-A-4.3 [formerly § 111-32] is cited in Prince George’s County v. Sunrise Development Limited Partnership, 330 Md. 297, 623 A.2d 1296 (1993), discussing Pemberton. Section 59-A-4.3 [formerly § 04-24] is cited in Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission v. Silkor Development Corporation, 246 Md. 516, 229 A.2d 135 (1967). Sections 59-A-4.3(a) and 59-A-4.3(e) are quoted in National Institutes of Health Federal Credit Union v. Hawk, 47 Md.App. 189, 422 A.2d 55 (1980).