decided cases on issues not previously raised.”); Coffey v. Derby Steel Co., 291 Md. 241, 256, 434 A.2d 564 (1981); Panamerican Consulting Co. v. Broun, 238 Md. 438, 447, 209 A.2d 575 (1965); Cavalier Mobile Homes, Inc. v. Liberty Homes, Inc., 53 Md.App. 379, 394, 454 A.2d 367, cert one, 271 Md. 655, 663, 319 A.2d 536 (1974), the trial court found that rezoning had dispossessed the owners of “two-thirds of their original investment” and the diminution in value destroyed the greater part of the property’s value; thus, the rezoning was an unconstitutional confiscation. The Court of Appeals, however, held: The record is devoid of evidence which would demonstrate that the owners were denied all reasonable use.... [W]e hear only tha .2d 522, cert. denied, 305 Md. 621, 505 A.2d 1342 (1986) (<HOLDING>); Anne Arundel County v. Maryland Nat’l Bank,
holding that airport noise regulations and county zoning ordinances which restricted certain development and adversely affected the value of property did not constitute a taking because the owner was not deprived of all beneficial use of the property considering the fact that there were a number of permitted uses consistent with the noise zone regulations and county zoning ordinances holding that because the development plan had the force and effect of law the proposed development must be consistent with both the general plan and the zoning emphasis in original holding that a statute that prohibited producers and refiners from directly operating retail service stations did not constitute a taking because they were not deprived of all beneficial uses of their property holding a dedication of a rightofway in connection with a subdivision did not vest rights in the property owner for the purpose of estopping the county from changing the zoning classification absent a showing that the planning commission or county knew that the sewer permit would not be granted or that the countys subdivision regulations guaranteed the zoning of the property would not change holding that the amendment was a use regulation which was in effect a condition on the use of property in the affected zone