ÿWPCh …# VU:a %› 0û¡w@œ 4Ü ð 0Lÿ K S Y 0J_ 0T© 0^ý 0h[ 0rà 0|5 0†± 07 1uÇU,< 0dhU,ÌU*øB)"DCK BŽ AM«»øv~³vÓ1 D3 0@7 0Lw AOÃÆ 0DØ D/ BK˜HP LaserJet 4Si/4SiMX PS 600dpiPSCRIPTÀÌÀääÀÀÌ0 , øð AZ‹"Arial RegularX(Óý,$¡¡Ñ  ÑÒH°ÒÒ°ÒÑTR[  AØ'ÿ Legal[  AØ'ÿ Legal AØ'ÿ Legal AØ'ÿ LegalTÑÔ€XûXXXÔÑ7€>‚XXdðXXdð7Ñ âDãäDåÊæÊçèEéêÊëÓ€‹â 3|xö> ÿÿ$Large Circleððà0 àÈRH2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)< Œ 9p`(ModernP ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ< Œ 9p`(Monaco< Œ 9p`(Arial% Line 7 d####7Border 1dd d€-$Cþÿ << Gÿÿ ±Ý ƒ!ÝÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÔ€"ÔÑ  ÑÒ  ÒÒ H ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ#€d#ÑÝ  ÝÔ€"ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€"XÔÌÌò òAugustÏ16,Ï1996ÌÌCecilÏCrowson,ÏJr.ÌÔ€"ôÔAppellateÏCourtÏClerkó óPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHØ(d'`Styl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑMonacoÑÑ ÑÒ  BA Op Monaco ÒÒ  BA Op Monaco Ò%%%%'ÿÿdxd("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò>ßb$Large Circleððà0 à€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú2Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€ÔÓ&€!!X„d&ÓÑ#€!!Xd#ÑÔ€"ÔÑ  ÑÒ  ÒÒ H ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ#€Xd#ÑÑ#€Xd#ÑÝ  ÝÓÓò òÙ€€ÙÙ€€ÙÓ  ÓßL€&'$;+'h|` à. `€€Lß›IN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÌWESTERN€œSECTION€AT€NASHVILLEÔ% € Ô€›ÌÓ  ÓÌà@ à„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„Ìó óÌÓÓCONE€OIL€CO.,ÏINC.,à àà àà à)à àWilliamson€Chancery€No.€Ï23282Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àPlaintiff/Appellantà àà àà à)à àAppealÏNo.€€œ01A01„9604„CH„00154Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìv.à àà àà àà àà àà à)à àÌà àà àà àà àà àà à)ÌWILLIAMSON€COUNTY€REGIONALà à)ÌPLANNING€COMMISSION,à àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àDefendant/Appelleeà àà à)à àÌÌÌÌÌÌÓ  ÓAPPEAL€FROM€THE€CHANCERY€COURT€OFÏWILLIAMSON€COUNTYÌAT€FRANKLIN,€TENNESSEEÌTHE€HONORABLE€HENRY€DENMARK€BELL,ÏCHANCELLORÌÓ  ÓÌÌÌò òÌÌTHOMAS€V.€WHITEÌTUNE,€ENTREKIN›€&€WHITE,€P.C.Ìó óœ21st›€FloorÌ315€œDeaderick›€StreetÌNashville,€Tennessee€37219ÌAttorney€for€AppellantÌÌò òJAMES€D.€œPETERSEN›ÌœPETERSEN›,€BUERGER,€œMOSELEY›€&€CARSONÌó ó306€Court€SquareÌFranklin,€Tennessee€37064ÌAttorney€for€AppelleeÌÌÌÌÌò òAFFIRMED.ÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àWILLIAM€H.€INMAN,€SENIOR€JUDGEÌÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌW.€FRANK€œCRAWFORD›,€JUDGEÌÌALAN€E.€œHIGHERS›,€JUDGEó óÌÌò òòòÓ  ÓO€P€I€N€I€O€N€€ÌÓ  ÓÌÓÓóóó óà àThe€Williamson€County€Regional€Planning€Commission€[ððWCRPCðð]€initiallyÏheard€the€application€of€Cone€Oil,€Inc.€[ððConeðð]€on€January€12,€1995€for€aÏconditional€use€permit€to€expand€an€existing€refueling€station€at€the€Goose€CreekÏexit,€Interstate€65.€€The€station€was€previously€owned€and€operated€by€œStuckey›ððs;ÏCone€intended€to€add€a€new€fueling€facility.Ìà àConeððs€application€triggered€administrative€reviews.€€It€contracted€theÏprofessional€services€of€Hawkins€Development€Company€to€evaluate€the€impact€ofÏthe€proposed€new€facility;€the€WCRPC€also€contracted€the€professional€services€ofÏan€expert,€œTocknell›€&€Assoc.,€to€evaluate€the€traffic€impact€of€the€proposed€facility.Ìà àThe€WCRPC€initially€heard€the€application€on€January€12,€1995,€as€we€haveÏstated.€€The€staff€recommended€approval;€various€residents€opposed€theÏapplication,€the€thrust€of€their€objections€being€directed€essentially€to€trafficÏcongestion€and€general€safety€conditions.€€An€engineer€for€Cone€explained€that€theÍsite€would€be€self„limiting,€with€no€more€than€50€trucks€using€it€in€a€24„hour€period.Ìà àThe€WCRPC€declined€to€accept€its€staffððs€recommendation,€citing€as€reasonsÏthe€proximity€of€Interstate€65,€the€lack€of€information€about€the€impact€of€traffic€on€theÏœarea›€and€the€possibility€of€increased€traffic€problems.€€Specifically,€it€raised€nineÏissues€involving€traffic€safety€which€prevented€approval.€€These€issues€were:ÌÓÓ(1)à àThe€thickness€of€the€pavement€on€Old€Peytonsville€Road€as€to€whether€it€wasÏà àadequate€for€heavy€trucks.ÌÌ(2)à àWhether€a€vertical€curb€would€pose€a€problem€for€vehicles€using€the€GooseÏà àCreek€By„pass.ÌÌÓÓ(3)à àWhat€is€the€anticipated€peak€traffic€on€the€By„pass€and€on€site?Ì(4)à àThe€estimated€number€of€trucks€per€day?Ì(5)à àIs€stacking€(trucks€in€line)€likely€to€be€a€problem?Ì(6)à àWhat€are€the€turning€radii€at€ingress€and€egress€of€the€site?Ì(7)à àAre€the€ramps€to€the€site€too€steep?Ì(8)à àIs€there€a€site„distance€problem?Ì(9)à àIs€there€an€adequate€on„site€maneuvering€area€for€anticipated€traffic?€€€ÌÌà àThe€second€public€meeting,€and€the€one€with€which€we€are€concerned,€wasÏheld€on€March€9,€1995.€€In€the€interim,€Cone€contracted€with€RPM€and€Assoc.,€aÏtraffic€consultant,€to€evaluate€the€proposed€location.Ìà àRPMððs€findings€were€that€the€traffic€impact€would€not€create€a€safety€œproblem›Ïand€would€be€manageable.€€The€expert€employed€by€Williamson€County€concurredÏin€this€assessment€of€œRPM›€œand,›€œagain,€›the€staff€of€WCRPC€recommended€approvalÏof€the€œapplication›€and€made€specific€recommendations€respecting€each€of€the€nineÏconditions€laid€down€at€the€January€1995€œmeeting,›€which€Cone€proposed€to€satisfy.Ìà àAll€of€the€experts€for€Cone€and€the€County€recommended€approval,€as€didÏthe€staff,€as€we€have€shown.€€Local€residents€were€again€allowed€to€air€their€views,Ïthe€first€of€whom€was€a€county€commissioner€and€former€truck€driver€who€feared€thatÏtoo€many€trucks€would€be€backed€up€at€the€station.€€Another€resident€expressed€theÏview€that€trucks€would€not€be€able€to€stop€on€account€of€road€surface€conditions;€stillÏanother€(ten,€in€all)€expressed€fears€of€congestion,€stacking,€turning€radii.€€The€thrustÏof€all€objectors€was€directed€to€perceived€traffic€woes.Ìà àFollowing€public€comment,€the€WCRPC€asked€for€a€clarification€of€standardsÏrequired€to€approve€a€conditional€use€permit.€€Specifically,€Joe€œHorne›,€PlanningÏDirector€for€Williamson€County,€was€asked€if€the€site€could€be€safely€operated.€€HeÏdeferred€to€the€opinions€of€the€experts€who€had€studied€the€issue;€thereupon€theÏWCRPC€œinquired›€where€they€stood€if€they€rejected€the€application,€and€theirÏcounsel,€Mr.€Peterson,€advised€them€that€the€application€could€not€be€rejectedÏsimply€because€the€neighboring€residents€opposed€it,€explaining€that€theÏOrdinance€itself€must€provide€the€reason€to€deny€the€application.Ìà àThe€WCRPC€then€voted€to€deny€the€conditional€use€permit€for€the€assertedÏreason€the€site€could€not€be€safely€operated€as€a€refueling€center.€Ìà à€On€certiorari€to€the€Chancery€Court,€the€Chancellor€ruled€that€the€ZoningÏOrdinance€delegates€to€the€WCRPC€discretion€in€reviewing€applications€forÏconditional€use€permits,€and€that€material€evidence€supported€the€denial€of€theÏpermit.Ìà àÌà àCone€œappeals›€and€presents€two€issues€for€review:€(1)€Whether€the€WCRPCÏexceeded€its€authority€as€a€quasi„judicial€body€when€it€denied€approval€of€ConeÍOilððs€conditional€use€permit,€and€(2)€Whether€it€acted€arbitrarily.Ìà àMuch€of€the€briefs€and€arguments€are€given€over€to€distinguishing€theÏfunction€€and€authority€of€a€Regional€Planning€Commission€as€contrasted€to€aÏBoard€of€Zoning€Appeals.€€The€essential€thrust€of€the€appelleeððs€argument€is€that€itÏis€a€quasi„judicial€body€and€is€vested€with€wide€discretion,€unlike€Boards€of€ZoningÏAppeals.€€We€see€no€need€to€explicate€this€point;€the€real€issue€is€œ„€„›€measuredÏagainst€the€appropriate€standard€of€review€œ„€„›€whether€the€WCRPC€acted€arbitrarilyÏor€in€excess€of€its€authority,€and€whether€there€is€material€evidence€to€support€itsÏdenial€of€Coneððs€application.Ìà àThe€zoning€ordinance,€as€pertinent€here,€provides:ÌÒ  ÒÒ H ÒÒ  ÒÒ ½ ÒÓÓÓ  Óð ðSECTION€9310.€€GENERAL€STANDARDS€FOR€CONDITIONALÏUSESÌÌNo€application€for€a€conditional€use€permit€shall€be€approved€unlessÏthe€Planning€Commission€shall€specifically€find€the€proposedÏconditional€use€appropriate€in€the€location€for€which€it€is€proposed.€ÏThis€finding€shall€be€based€on€the€following€criteria:ÌÌA.à àThe€proposed€use€shall€be€in€harmony€with€the€generalÏpurpose,€à àgoals,€objectives,€and€standards€of€the€WilliamsonÏCounty€à àà àComprehensive€Plan,€this€Ordinance,€and€anyÏother€plan,€à àà àprogram,€or€ordinance€adopted,€or€under€Ïconsideration€pursuant€à àto€official€notice€by€the€County.ÌÌB.à àThe€proposed€location€of€the€proposed€use€shall€beÏconsistent€à àwith€policies,€map,€or€provisions€of€the€ComprehensiveÏPlan,€this€à àOrdinance,€or€other€plans€or€programs€of€the€County.ÌÒ  ÒÒ H ÒÒ  ÒÒ ½ ÒÒ  ÒÒ ½ ÒÒ ` ÒÒ ½ ÒÒ ` ÒÒ H ÒÌÒ  ÒÒ H ÒÓÓÒ  ÒÒ H ÒÓÓC.à àThe€proposed€use€at€the€proposed€location€shall€not€result€in€aÏà àsubstantial€or€undue€adverse€effect€on€adjacent€property,€theÏà àcharacter€of€the€neighborhood,€traffic€conditions,€parking,€publicÏà àimprovements,€public€sites€or€rights„of„way,€or€other€mattersÏà àaffecting€the€public€health,€safety,€and€general€welfare,€.€.€.ððÌÒ  ÒÒ H ÒÓÓÓÓÓ  ÓÌÓÓà àClearly€mandated€by€the€ordinance€is€the€requirement€that€the€PlanningÏCommission€find,€as€a€condition€precedent€to€approval€of€a€conditional€use€permit,Íthat€the€proposed€use€will€not€unduly,€adversely€affect€traffic€conditions€or€the€publicÏsafety.Ìà àœÌà àThe›€Planning€Commission€denied€the€permit€for€the€reason€the€ð ðsite€couldÏnot€be€safely€operated€as€a€semi€(truck)€refueling€center.ðð€€If€there€is€materialÏevidence€to€support€the€decision€of€the€Planning€Commission,€it€was€the€duty€of€theÏChancellor€to€uphold€it,€and€our€concomitant€duty€to€uphold€the€Chancellor.€Ïð ðMaterial€evidenceðð€in€this€context€has€been€defined€to€be€ð ðsuch€relevant€evidenceÏas€a€reasonable€mind€œmight›€accept€as€adequate€to€support€a€rational€conclusionÏand€such€as€œto›€furnish€a€reasonably€sound€basis€for€the€action€underÏconsideration.ðð€œ€òòSexton€v.€Anderson€County,€óó587€S.W.2d€663,€666€(Tenn.€App.Ï1979).€€Allied€with€this€principle€is€the€caveat€that€beliefs,›€opinions,€and€fears€œofÏneighborhood€residents€are›€not€material€evidence.€€òòœMullins€v.€City€of€Knoxville,€óó665ÏS.W.2d€393€(Tenn.€App.€1983);òò€Sexton€óóat€666.Ìà àAs€we€have€shown,€the€Planning€Commission€conducted€two€publicÏhearings.€€Because€of€the€opposition€presented€by€residents€upon€the€first€hearing€„Ï„€or€perhaps€for€other€reasons€not€clearly€articulated€in€the€record€„€„€the€initial€actionÏof€the€Commission€in€disapproving€the€site€plan€without€a€traffic€study€and€otherÏdata€involved€some€indicia€that€if€Cone€satisfied€the€nine€criteria,€its€applicationÏwould€be€approved.€€This€is€a€troublesome€point,€since€Cone€accepted€the€invitationÏessentially€tendered€and€apparently€expended€much€time,€labor€and€money€inÏcomplying,€or€attempting€to€comply,€with€the€conditions.€€But€a€careful€review€of€theÏminutes€does€not€reveal€anything€more€than€an€indication€that€approval€might€beÏforthcoming€if€the€criteria€were€satisfied.€€Traffic€and€safety€data€concerned€theÍCommission,€which€resolved€these€issues€at€the€second€hearing.Ìà àThe€experts€employed€by€the€Commission€and€by€Cone€testified€that€theÏproposed€location€posed€no€traffic€problems€and€would€create€no€safety€factors.€ÏCone€argues€that€the€material€evidence€„€„€all€of€it€„€„€is€therefore€posited€in€its€favor,Ïbecause€the€opinions€of€local€citizenry€cannot€intrude€upon€the€fact„finding€process.€ÏIt€is€true€that€most€of€the€ten€residents€who€spoke€in€opposition€to€the€granting€of€theÏpermit€merely€expressed€their€opinions,€but€we€know€of€no€reason€why€the€views€of€Ïconcerned€residents€whose€experiences€are€relevant,€i.e.,€the€former€truck€driver,Ïcannot€be€considered€concomitantly€with€those€of€experts.€€Finally,€and€probablyÏmost€importantly,€a€court€cannot€substitute€its€judgment€for€that€of€an€administrativeÏbody.€€òòPace€v.€Garbage€Disp›.€District,€óó390€S.W.2d€œ461,€463›€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1965).€€Ìà àThe€appellee€argues€that€it€weighed€all€of€the€evidence€and€applied€theÏOrdinance€as€required€by€law.€€We€cannot€find€that€there€is€no€material€evidence€toÏsupport€the€Commissionððs€œfindingÔ% € Ô€or›€that€it€acted€illegally€or€in€excess€of€itsÏjurisdiction.Ìà àThe€judgment€is€affirmed€at€the€costs€of€the€appellant.ÌÌÓÓà àà àà àà àà àà à_______________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àWilliam€H.€Inman,€Senior€JudgeÌÌCONCUR:Ìœ›ÌÌÌ_____________________________ÌW.€Frank€œCrawford›,€JudgeÌÌÌÌ_____________________________ÌAlan€E.€œHighers›,€œJudge›ÌÌÌÌÌÌà àà àà àà àà à