## Facts

- Helen Rosenberg owned a 31-acre tract in West Lanham Hills, Prince George’s County, Maryland, and sought preliminary approval to subdivide two parcels for residential development.
- County subdivision regulations conditioned approval on “adequate public facilities,” including availability of school capacity within a reasonable distance.
- Commission staff prepared an adequate-public-facilities checklist stating West Lanham Hills Elementary School was over capacity and that the subdivision would generate additional students; the checklist included a student-generation estimate later conceded to be inaccurate.
- Relying on earlier enrollment/capacity figures and the checklist, the Prince George’s County Planning Board denied preliminary subdivision approval because the development would further overload the elementary school.
- Rosenberg sued in circuit court seeking mandamus and a mandatory injunction requiring approval.
- At trial, uncontroverted evidence showed that by 1972 the elementary school’s actual enrollment had declined to below capacity and that nearby schools within about one mile had sufficient combined capacity to absorb projected students.
- The circuit court found the denial arbitrary and ordered the Commission to approve the preliminary plan; the Commission appealed.

## Issues

1. Whether the Commission’s denial of preliminary subdivision approval under adequate-public-facilities school-capacity standards was arbitrary or unsupported by substantial evidence when based on outdated or inaccurate enrollment and projection data.
2. Whether mandamus and a mandatory injunction were proper remedies to compel approval after the court found the denial unlawful and no lawful basis remained to deny the application.

## Decision

- The Maryland Court of Appeals affirmed the circuit court’s judgment for Rosenberg.
- The court held the Commission’s denial, justified as preventing school overcrowding, was arbitrary and not supported by substantial evidence in light of updated and uncontroverted capacity and enrollment information.
- The court upheld mandamus and mandatory injunctive relief because, once the applicant satisfied all lawful requirements and the Commission’s sole stated ground for denial lacked factual support, the Commission had a clear duty to approve.

## Legal Principles

- Administrative decisions applying subdivision and adequate-public-facilities standards must be supported by substantial evidence; reliance on obsolete or erroneous data can render a denial arbitrary and unlawful.
- A planning agency’s discretion must be exercised within the limits of the governing regulations and based on reliable facts; it cannot operate as a blanket bar to development when objective standards are met.
- Mandamus (and, where needed, a mandatory injunction) may compel agency action when the plaintiff shows a clear legal right to approval and the agency has no remaining lawful discretion to deny.

## Conclusion

The court sustained judicial relief compelling subdivision approval where the planning agency denied an application under school-capacity standards using outdated and inaccurate information, making the denial arbitrary and leaving the agency with a clear duty to approve.


Maryland-Nat'l Cap. Park & Plan. Comm'n v. Rosenberg, 269 Md. 520, 307 A.2d 704 (Md. 1973)