Triplin Associates, Inc. v. Mayor And City Council Of Baltimore

898 A.2d 449 (2006)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

P purchased the property at issue, in 1983. The property had been a nightclub featuring adult entertainment, including male and female exotic dancing. The adult entertainment had been presented up to five nights a week since 1979. The applicable zoning ordinance did not prohibit the use of the property as an adult entertainment facility. P reduced the number of nights of nude or exotic dancing from five to two nights per week, featuring music and comedy on the other nights. D approved his use of the premise as an 'after hours establishment' in 1992. With this approval, the adult entertainment was presented after hours, exclusively. On December 15, 1994, an ordinance regulated adult entertainment businesses, 'where persons appear in a state of total or partial nudity.' 'Any adult entertainment business existing on September 10, 1993, is considered a nonconforming use, subject to all Class III regulations.' P continued to use the facility as a club that provided adult entertainment after hours. That use was unchallenged until April 14, 2000, when a Baltimore City zoning inspector issued a 'Code Violation Notice and Order' to the Club. P appealed to the Board in that D could not restrict the usage to two nights per week. D ruled that the entertainment could continue but only for the two nights per week. P petitioned the Circuit Court, and it affirmed D's decision and, in addition, ruled that P needed to 'apply for and obtain all necessary and relevant licenses required by the City for the operation of an adult entertainment business.' P appealed, and the court again affirmed for D. The Court of Special Appeals addressed the issue of 'intensification' of the nonconforming use, rather than an expansion of that use.