ARTICLE 5. COUNTY ROADS — AUTHORITY AND FUNDING.

Sec. 49-51. Reserved..

   Editor’s note—Former Sec. 49-51, Definitions, derived from Mont. Co. Code 1965, § 24-30, and 2007 L.M.C., ch. 8, § 1, was repealed by 2022 L.M.C., ch. 31 , § 1.

   Section 49-51 [formerly § 24-30] is cited in Eggert v. Montgomery County Council, 263 Md. 243, 282 A.2d 474 (1971).

   See County Attorney Opinion dated 7/29/98 explaining that the Washington Metropolitan Area Transportation Authority, Housing Opportunities Commission, and the fire corporations must comply with County permit requirements and mandatory referral.

Sec. 49-52. An assessment of costs for road construction to be authorized by County Executive; Council to assess benefits.

   (a)   The County must not assess the cost of constructing any road as a benefit to adjacent property unless the Executive has issued an order authorizing the assessment. After the Executive has authorized the assessment, the County Council may assess the cost of construction by resolution as a benefit to all property adjacent to the road’s right-of-way and specially benefited by its construction as provided in this Section.

   (b)   The law in effect when construction is authorized must allow the assessment of all or part of its cost.

   (c)   A property must not be assessed more than the amount by which the property is specially benefited by the construction.

   (d)   Property owned by the United States, the State, or any agency of either must not be assessed.

   (e)   The Council may waive any assessment in an urban renewal project, community redevelopment project, or neighborhood improvement project. (Mont. Co. Code 1965, § 24-31; 1971 L.M.C., ch. 3, § 14; 1976 L.M.C., ch. 16, § 4; 1982 L.M.C., ch. 31, § 2; 2007 L.M.C., ch. 8, § 1; 2013 L.M.C., ch. 27 , § 1

   Editor's note—This section was interpreted in Montgomery County v. Edward W. Schultze, 302 Md. 481, 489 A.2d 16 (1985) and in Montgomery County v. Edward W. Schultze, 57 Md. App. 781, 471 A.2d 1129 (1984). Section 49-52 [formerly § 24-31] is quoted in Murphy v. Montgomery County, 267 Md. 224, 297 A.2d 249 (1972). In Eggert v. Montgomery County, 263 Md. 243, 282 A.2d 474 (1971), it was held that the authorization of road construction is an executive rather than a legislative function and the County Executive has exclusive jurisdiction. In Silver Spring Memorial Post No. 2562, VFW v. Montgomery County, 207 Md. 442, 115 A.2d 249 (1955), it was held that the County was authorized to enact this section. The front foot method of assessment was held to be valid.

Sec. 49-53. Public hearing; notice.

   (a)    Before an assessment for road construction is authorized, the County Executive or the Executive’s designee must hold a public hearing. Any person who would be subject to an assessment or otherwise affected by the location or construction of the road is entitled to be heard at the hearing. Notice of the hearing must be sent by certified or registered mail, at least 2 weeks before the scheduled date of the hearing, to the owners of each property that would be subject to an assessment, as listed in the records of the Department of Finance.

   (b)    Each notice issued under subsection (a) must contain:

      (1)   the time and place of the hearing;

      (2)   the location of the construction which is the subject of the hearing;

      (3)   the extent and kind of construction intended;

      (4)   the type of materials to be used;

      (5)   the estimated cost of construction; and

      (6)   the location of the real property that will be benefited by the construction.

   (c)    A summary of the notice provided for in subsection (a) must be published twice in a newspaper of general circulation in the County before the scheduled date of the hearing. The summary must tell where a full copy of the notice may be obtained.

   (d)   Before beginning construction of any road, the Director of Transportation or the Director’s designee must hold a public hearing to receive comments on the proposed design of the road.

   (e)   The Director need not hold a hearing under subsection (d) before a sidewalk or sidepath is constructed if:

      (1)   the sidewalk or path can be constructed entirely in one or more existing public rights-of-way without a detailed engineering design;

      (2)   (A)   a civic association, homeowner’s association, or other organization, which includes a substantial number of owners of property located on the proposed route of the sidewalk or path, has filed a notice of its support for the sidewalk or path with the Executive or a designee; or

         (B)   if no such organization has filed a notice of support, a petition signed by a majority of owners of property located on the proposed route of the sidewalk or path has been filed with the Executive or a designee; and

      (3)   the Executive finds, after the Executive’s designee has given notice to and met with residents of the area, that no significant controversy has arisen that would require a public hearing to be held. (1971 L.M.C., ch. 3, § 15; 2007 L.M.C., ch. 8, § 1; 2010 L.M.C., ch. 3, § 1; 2013 L.M.C., ch. 27 , § 1; 2022 L.M.C., ch. 31, § 1.)

   Editor’s note—This section is interpreted in Montgomery County v. Schultze, 57 Md.App. 781, 471 A.2d 1129 (1984).

Sec. 49-54. Authorization of an assessment of costs for construction; recommendation of assessments to Council.

   (a)    If, after the hearing required by Section 49-53(a) is held, the County Executive finds that the public interest requires the assessment under consideration to be carried out, the Executive must authorize the assessment as required in this Chapter.

   (b)    As soon as practicable after the Executive authorizes an assessment of costs for road construction under this Section, the Executive must forward to the County Council a written report recommending any proposed assessments based on the estimated cost of building the road. The report must describe the work to be done and state, with particularity, what portion of the cost of the construction, if any, should be paid by the adjacent properties and what portion, if any, of the cost should be paid by the County under this Chapter.

   (c)   The recommendations must be based on the actual costs of publishing notices, conducting hearings, advertising for bids, and engineering, and the anticipated costs of financing to be incurred before the Council adopts the assessment resolution. Each cost assessment must be computed on the basis of linear frontage of adjacent properties, except as otherwise provided in this Chapter. The report must also estimate the dollar amount of the cost share to be paid by adjacent properties. (1971 L.M.C., ch. 3, § 16; 2007 L.M.C., ch. 8, § 1; 2010 L.M.C., ch. 3, § 1; 2013 L.M.C., ch. 27, § 1.)

   Editor’s note—This section is interpreted in Montgomery County v. Schultze, 57 Md.App. 781, 471 A.2d 1129 (1984).

Sec. 49-55. Assessment of costs by County Council; appeals.

   (a)   Within 270 days after the County accepts any road authorized and subject to assessments under Section 49-54, the County Executive must forward final recommendations for assessments to the Council. The Executive must include any adjustment to previous estimates resulting from the actual costs of the project, including financing.

   (b)   Within 90 days after receiving these recommendations, the Council must approve or modify the recommended assessments and, by resolution, assess the costs of the road project against the adjacent properties, subject to the limits of Section 49-52. Each assessment must be computed on the basis of the linear frontage of each property, except as otherwise provided in Section 49-56. Each assessment becomes final when the Council adopts the resolution.

   (c)   Any person aggrieved by an assessment may appeal, within 30 days after the notice is mailed, to the Circuit Court for the County. Any party may appeal a decision of the Circuit Court to the Court of Special Appeals. (1971 L.M.C., ch. 3, § 17; 1976 L.M.C., ch. 16, § 5; 1978 L.M.C., ch. 34, § 1; 1982 L.M.C., ch. 31, § 1; 2007 L.M.C., ch. 8, § 1.)

   Editor’s note—This section is quoted in part in Montgomery County v. Schultze, 302 Md. 481, 489 A.2d 16 (1985) and cited in Montgomery County v. Schultze, 57 Md.App. 781, 471 A.2d 1129 (1984).

Sec. 49-56. Assessment of corner lots.

   If the property to be assessed is located at the intersection of 2 or more streets (hereinafter, a corner lot), the linear frontage of each corner lot assessed in connection with the construction of each adjacent street must be reduced to one-half of the total frontage of that lot on the street to be built, but any reduction must not exceed 50 feet on any one street. The portion of the cost of the construction which would otherwise have been assessed to a corner lot must be added to the overall cost assessed to the remaining assessable frontage of the whole project, unless the Executive authorizes the County to pay all or part. (Mont. Co. Code 1965, § 24-37; 1971 L.M.C., ch. 3, § 20; 2007 L.M.C., ch. 8, § 1.)