’WPC ͇ÓvśĒ/ȑ[#)ųœ6w+ˆA·„śÖ/`:g凒v“x% ¬zŚ£¢'j•·'e®¢ `—ū?ķø§£tlŠ€[UVMlFüUŚĄ½ņ`čL=˜&‘×’ą)%melŽöō¼4ēŗŌŁŗĶ$ˆāŌ“‘…—Lƒ¼źhčr.هČ­ĀĻQÄ l;N2/aBž™ņsķ+ƒ60&š±”fŅr=p¤©dG„iĢ“9 FgŃi§Šć(“xó‚ Į]•–ĖŸe‰šĀ>-y'öļsōĮ1DUC2¶Lt©ĄS”łÄ0ä¤söMŅ­BŖŒ†ś8Qø«é§¢Mˆ¼ę…ąw) Ō>’$EBˆøŠH„MĒWPz—‰½1oPghī5ī|±3Mɛā,Ÿž6P?„Ó¬™Éė…”©ÓŌ¾|J{9©Jf§ķ”–Łėū„ĶdP4÷żż*/CېJ–įW© _Gü§Ÿn²EG£Š!ƒTœoZ×Y@Ÿąé1žÖLU‡błŻ®ņ}f#šÉŅƑ1ńD œVSø1’ī%’ÆēSsՓ?×ōŹNvv!ŻĢ3ųNɱzŲ]”Æ–Ør§ķˆ&¤čDßko“ł.<~aN¾ĶW²b %\^ b 0ˆnUNöwD4H\ zkŅå· m¹ #ÉŠ x™ ĘĘ×ʝĘc )N2 0D4ŌxELĀNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNb 0ė B 0¤  D5Ä D-ł 0K&& ASqĘÄ 0¤Š 0D. A«r»=Œ<1Ļ (`£Ŗ$””Ń€.ŃŃ8€½­»»d»»d8ŃŃ ż ŃÓ  Ó(ķ€"  Z6Times New Roman Regular=ƒ.b014c13|x ˜C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wpt ’U‹’ĄĄĄ˜\\IB01S08\KNOXCLERK4ČČ,,,,ČČ0 MacBRYAN P.J. Epps a]llComplMarchioni t]hereplatLaffertyMcCallenWhittemoreComm'nGov'tFallinComm'rsHemontolorreweighHedgepathNeilsonLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5 ’Ż ƒRÕ$ŻÓ  Óą  ąņņŚ  Ś1Ś  ŚóóŌ€ōęŻņ»»ŌŻ  ŻŌ_ŌCreation€of€a€minor€subdivision€occurs€when€a€single€parcel€or€tract€of€land€is€subdivided€into€no€more€thanŠ ° Štwo€tracts.€€The€original€tract€may€or€may€not€be€part€of€an€already€existing€and€recorded€subdivision€plat.€€In€the€presentŠ tÄ Šcase,€Mayššs€original€tract€of€land€and€Plaintiffššs€property€were€subject€to€an€existing€subdivision€plat.(#Ć$ņņŚ  Ś0Ś  Śóó ŹŻ ƒRÕ$ŻÓ  Óą  ąņņŚ  Ś2Ś  ŚóóŌ€ōęŻņ»»ŌŻ  ŻŌ_Ō€This€statutory€section€was€quoted€verbatim€at€the€beginning€of€the€Opinion. øŻ ƒRÕ$ŻÓ  Óą  ąņņŚ  Ś3Ś  ŚóóŌ€ōęŻņ»»ŌŻ  ŻŌ_Ō€€It€is€important€to€note€that€the€Assistant€Secretaryššs€approval€of€minor€subdivisions€did€not€arise€from€aŠ ° Šblatant€disregard€for€the€language€of€the€statute,€but€because€the€Regional€Planning€Commission€attempted€to€delegateŠ tÄ Šthis€authority€to€the€Assistant€Secretary.€€- ł-(|G2Õ$¤¤Ż ƒ£Ŗ!ŻŃ€.ŃŃ8€X5»»dd8ŃŃ ż ŃÓ  ÓŻ  Żą  ąņņŚ  Ś0Ś  ŚóóŌ€ōęŻņ»»Ō d(|3æv$££Ż ƒ£Ŗ!ŻŃ€.ŃŃ8€X5»»dd8ŃŃ ż ŃÓ  ÓŻ  ŻVVVV)’’!dxdx)!ČČČČdxdx( ±ž$’’ņ ņFigure€Ś  Ś1Ś  Śó ó^_X`YEž’<<C’’ƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3æv$¢¢Ż ƒ£Ŗ!ŻŃ€.ŃŃ8€X5»»dd8ŃŃ ż ŃÓ  ÓŻ  Ż($$””ņ ņŚ  Ś1Ś  Śó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8’’’’’’’’’’C’’ HKKKKŻ ƒ£Ŗ!ŻŃ€.ŃŃ8€X5»»ddČ8ŃŃ ż ŃÓ  ÓŻ  ŻŌ_ŌŃ  ŃŌ€¼X5»»»ŌŃ8€ XXdģ»»d8ŃŃ  Ńą@ü ü ģąŌ‡īWX5ŌIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆŠ ° Šą@WW$ģąAT€KNOXVILLEŌ#†¼X5»īīW #ԈŠ Ö& ŠÓ  ÓJune€9,€2004€SessionŠ üL ŠŌ‡X X»¼X5ŌĢņ ņŌ#†¼X5»XX ń#ŌBOBBY€MacBRYAN€GREEN€v.€JOHNSON€CITYŠ śJ ŠREGIONAL€PLANNING€COMMISSIONŌ‡X X»¼X5Ōó óŠ  ^ ŠĢą@@½½ģąņ ņŌ#†¼X5»XX Œ#ŌŌ€X X»¼X5ŌAppeal€from€the€Chancery€Court€for€Washington€CountyŠ  ^ Šą@@ųųģąNo.€34902€€€€€€G.€Richard€Johnson,€ChancellorŠ ś J ŠĢĢą@@ģģ*ģąßA€V) °°` d€÷E<½` Aߊ ¾  ŠĢą@@TTģąNo.€E2003„02509„Ō_ŌCOAŌ_Ō„R3„CV€„€FILED€SEPTEMBER€28,€Ō_Ō2004Ō_ŌŠ ¹  ŠĢßA€V) °°` dE<` Aßó óŠ ‘į  ŠÓ  ÓĢĢBobby€MacBryan€Green€(š šPlaintiffšš)€and€Michael€May€(š šMayšš)€own€adjoining€land€within€the€cityŠ xČ Šlimits€of€Johnson€City.€€Mayššs€tract€of€land€was€subdivided€into€two€lots€as€a€minor€subdivisionŠ d“ Šwithout€formal€approval€from€the€Johnson€City€Regional€Planning€Commission€(the€š šCommissionšš).€Š P  ŠPlaintiff€challenged€the€approval€of€the€minor€subdivision€before€the€Commission.€€Relying€on€legalŠ <Œ Šadvice€from€the€city€attorney,€the€Commission€voted€unanimously€not€to€take€any€action€onŠ (x ŠPlaintiffššs€request€that€the€approval€of€the€minor€subdivision€be€rescinded.€€Plaintiff€appealed€to€theŠ d ŠTrial€Court€which€upheld€the€decision€of€the€Commission€after€concluding€the€Commissionššs€refusalŠ P Što€take€any€action€on€Plaintiffššs€request€was€not€illegal,€arbitrary€or€capricious.€€We€affirm.€€Š ģ< ŠĢĢņ ņą@µ µ ģąTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Judgment€of€theˆŠ ° Šą@„ „ ģąChancery€ą@@« « ģąCourt€Affirmed;€Case€RemandedˆŠ œģ Šņņó óĢĢD.€Michael€Ō_ŌSwineyŌ_Ō,€J.,€óódelivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€ņņHerschel€P.€Franks,€P.J.,€óóandŠ `!°  ŠņņSharon€G.€Lee,€J.,€óójoined.Š L"œ! ŠĢĢBobby€MacBryan€Green,€ņņpro€seóó€Appellant.Š %` $ ŠĢĢJames€H.€Epps,€IV,€Johnson€City,€Tennessee,€for€the€Appellee€Johnson€City€Regional€PlanningŠ Ō'$#' ŠCommission.€€Š Ą($( ŠŠ  ¬)ü$)ż ŠŌ_Ōą@66'ģąņ ņOPINIONˆŠ ° ŠĢą@ŪŪ%ģąņņBackgroundó óóóˆŠ ˆŲ ŠĢą  ąą ` ąPlaintiff€owns€real€property€located€within€the€city€limits€of€Johnson€City,€Tennessee.€Š `° ŠMay€owned€approximately€2.12€acres€of€land€located€next€to€Plaintiffššs€property.€€On€April€5,€2002,Š L œ ŠMayššs€property€was€subdivided€into€two€lots€and€the€new€plats€were€approved€by€€James€D.€MoodyŠ 8 ˆ Š(š šMoodyšš),€the€Assistant€Secretary€of€the€Johnson€City€Regional€Planning€Commission,€and€dulyŠ $ t Šfiled.€€The€plats€contained€a€certification€which€provided:€€Š  ` ŠĢą@z z ģąCERTIFICATE€OF€APPROVAL€FOR€RECORDINGˆŠ č 8  ŠĢą8  ąą8` Š Š ąI€HEREBY€CERTIFY€THAT€THE€SUBDIVISION€PLAT€SHOWNŠ Ą  ŠHEREON€HAS€BEEN€FOUND€TO€COMPLY€WITH€THEŠ ¬ü  ŠSUBDIVISION€REGULATIONS€FOR€JOHNSON€CITYŠ ˜č  ŠTENNESSEE,€WITH€THE€EXCEPTION€OF€SUCH€VARIANCES,Š „Ō  ŠIF€ANY,€AS€ARE€NOTED€IN€THE€MINUTES€OF€THEŠ pĄ ŠPLANNING€COMMISSION€AND€THAT€IT€HAS€BEENŠ \¬ ŠAPPROVED€FOR€RECORDING€IN€THE€OFFICE€OF€THEŠ H˜ ŠREGISTER.€€Š4„` x` x ŠĢThe€Certificate€was€signed€by€Moody€on€April€5,€2002.€€The€plats€were€approved€pursuant€to€Tenn.Š  \ ŠCode€Ann.€šš€13„3„402(a)(1)€which€allows€the€Secretary€of€a€Regional€Planning€Commission€toŠ ųH Šapprove€the€subdividing€of€a€lot€into€no€more€than€two€lots€without€the€Regional€PlanningŠ ä4 ŠCommissionššs€approval.€€Specifically,€this€statute€provides:Š Š  ŠĢą8  ąą8` Š Š ąņ ņRegional€planning€commission€platting€authority€š!š€StandardizedŠ Øų Šlots€š!š€Recording€Play€by€county€register.€š!š€ó ó€€(a)(1)€From€and€afterŠ ”ä Šthe€time€when€the€regional€planning€commission€of€any€region,€asŠ „Ō Šdefined€and€created€by€the€department€of€economic€and€communityŠ pĄ Šdevelopment,€has€adopted€a€regional€plan€which€includes€at€least€aŠ \ ¬ Šmajor€road€plan€or€has€progressed€in€its€planning€to€the€state€of€theŠ H!˜ Šmaking€and€adoption€of€a€major€road€plan,€and€has€filed€a€certifiedŠ 4"„  Šcopy€of€such€major€road€plan€in€the€office€or€offices€of€the€countyŠ  #p! Šregister€or€registers€of€the€county€or€counties€lying€in€whole€or€in€partŠ  $\" Šin€such€region,€then€no€plat€of€a€subdivision€of€land€within€suchŠ ų$H # Šregion,€other€than€land€located€within€the€boundaries€of€anyŠ ä%4!$ Šmunicipal€corporation,€shall€be€filed€for€record€or€recorded€until€it€hasŠ Š& "% Šbeen€approved€by€such€regional€planning€commission,€and€suchŠ ¼' #& Šapproval€endorsed€in€writing€on€the€plat€by€the€secretary€of€theŠ Ø(ų#' Šcommission;€ņņ€provided,€that€if€the€plat€of€subdivision€divides€the€tractŠ ”)ä$( Šinto€no€more€than€two€(2)€lots,€the€approval€may€be€endorsed€inŠ €*Š%) Šwriting€on€the€plat€by€the€secretary€of€the€commission€without€theŠ l+¼&* Šapproval€of€the€regional€planning€commission,€upon€certification€byŠ ° Šthe€planning€staff€of€the€regional€planning€commission€that€theŠ œģ Šsubdivision€complies€with€such€regulations€governing€a€subdivisionŠ ˆŲ Šof€land€as€have€been€adopted€by€the€regional€planning€commissionŠ tÄ Špursuant€to€šš€13-3-403óó;€provided€further,€that€no€request€for€varianceŠ `° Šfrom€such€regulations€has€been€requested.€€(emphasis€added).€ŠL œ` x` x ŠĢą  ąą ` ąOn€September€10,€2002,€Plaintiff€attended€the€Commissionššs€regularly€scheduledŠ $ t Šmeeting€and€challenged€the€subdividing€of€Mayššs€property.€€At€that€meeting,€Plaintiff€claimed€theŠ  ` Šnew€plats€did€not€comply€with€many€of€the€Subdivision€Regulations€established€by€the€Commission.€Š ü L  ŠFor€example,€Plaintiff€argued€that€šš€4„5.1€of€the€Subdivision€Regulations€requires€that€š š[a]ll€ņņutilityóóŠ č 8  Šservices€shall€be€placed€underground€in€all€newņņ€subdivisions.ó󚚀(emphasis€in€original).€€PlaintiffŠ Ō$  Šclaimed€Mayššs€new€subdivisions€did€not€comply€with€this€and€many€other€requirements€for€newŠ Ą  Šsubdivisions.€Š ¬ü  ŠĢą  ąą ` ąIn€defense€of€the€new€plats,€Development€Coordinator€Steve€Neilson€argued€that€theŠ „Ō  Šdivision€of€Mayššs€lot€into€two€lots€did€not€create€a€š šnewšš€subdivision€for€purposes€of€the€SubdivisionŠ pĄ ŠRegulations.€€Instead,€Mayššs€two€new€lots€were€in€an€already€existing€subdivision,€and€May€wasŠ \¬ Šrequired€to€comply€only€with€whatever€restrictions€were€imposed€on€the€other€lots€within€that€sameŠ H˜ Šsubdivision.€€Neilson€argued,€among€other€things,€it€would€make€no€sense€to€require€a€developer€ofŠ 4„ Ša€new€home€š što€go€to€the€expense€of€providing€underground€utilities€where€š8š€[the€new€home€isŠ  p Šlocated€in]€an€existing€subdivision€where€everything€else€is€above€ground€š8š.šš€€Neilson€maintainedŠ  \ Šthat€Mayššs€new€plats€were€in€compliance€with€the€Subdivision€Regulations€and€met€the€requirementsŠ ųH Šof€the€existing€subdivision€within€which€the€two€lots€were€located.€€Š ä4 ŠĢą  ąą ` ąPlaintiff€also€argued€before€the€Commission€that€he€and€May€had€entered€into€a€š šjointŠ ¼  Šdriveway€agreementšš€which€š šin€essence€says€the€pavement€belongs€to€both€of€us€and€that€neither€oneŠ Øų Šof€us€can€do€anything€to€damage€the€pavement,€obstruct€the€pavement.šš€€Plaintiff€also€pointed€out€Š ”ä Šthat€when€Mayššs€lot€was€subdivided,€May€was€required€by€the€Subdivision€Regulations€to€dedicateŠ €Š Ša€drainage€and€utility€easement€to€the€City.€€Plaintiff€then€claimed:Š l¼ ŠĢą8  ąą8` Š Š ąAccording€to€the€Subdivision€plat,€heššs€pledged€to€you€that€7.5€[foot]Š D!” Šdrainage€easement€š8š.€[M]y€claim€on€the€pavement€of€the€drivewayŠ 0"€  Šblocks€that,€and€so€heššs€not€able€to€deliver€that€and€I€assert€superiorŠ #l! Šinterest€in€that€portion€in€spite€of€what€š8š€the€subdivision€plat€shows.Š$X"` x` x ŠĢą  ąą ` ąAfter€hearing€Plaintiffššs€various€arguments€as€to€why€the€new€plats€were€improperŠ ą%0!$ Šand€Neilsonššs€response€as€to€why€the€new€plats€were€in€full€compliance€with€applicable€regulations,Š Ģ&"% Šthe€Commission€deferred€taking€any€action€until€it€could€obtain€a€legal€opinion€from€the€city€attorneyŠ ø'#& Šon€three€specific€issues.€€The€three€questions€posed€to€the€city€attorney€by€the€Commission,€alongŠ ¤(ō#' Šwith€the€city€attorneyššs€respective€answers,€are€as€follows:€Š )ą$( Šā āŠ |*Ģ%) Šą8  ąą8` Š Š ą1.€€Does€the€Planning€Commission€have€authority€to€rescind€aŠ ° Šā āsubdivision€approval€done€by€the€Planning€Department€staff€under€theŠ œģ Šprovisions€of€Article€3.3€of€the€Subdivision€Regulations?ŠˆŲ` x` x ŠĢą8  ąą8` Š Š ą[Answer:]€The€Planning€Commission€does€not€have€the€authority€toŠ `° Šrescind€a€subdivision€approval€under€State€law.€€I€have€researched€theŠ L œ Špowers€of€the€Planning€Commission€as€granted€by€the€State.€€ThereŠ 8 ˆ Šis€no€provision€for€the€Planning€Commission€to€review€and€rescindŠ $ t Ša€subdivision€plat,€once€that€subdivision€plat€has€been€approved.€Š `` x` x ŠĢą8  ąą8` Š Š ą2.ą ø ąWhat€is€the€legal€status€of€a€new€home€which€the€propertyŠ č 8  Šowner€has€received€a€building€permit€for€and€is€near€completion,€ifŠ Ō$  Šthe€subdivision€is€rescinded?ŠĄ ` x` x ŠĢą8  ąą8` Š Š ą[Answer:]€Because€the€Planning€Commission€lacks€the€authority€[to]Š ˜č  Šrescind€an€approved€subdivision€plat,€the€answer€to€the€question€#2Š „Ō  Šis€pretermitted.€€ŠpĄ` x` x ŠĢą8  ąą8` Š Š ą3.ą ø ąDoes€[Plaintiffššs]€transportation€easement€interfere€with€theŠ H˜ ŠPlanning€Commissionššs€authority€to€require€the€property€owner€toŠ 4„ Šdedicate€a€7.5€foot€drainage€and€utility€easement€along€his€propertyŠ  p Šlines€and€dedicate€additional€right„of„way?Š \` x` x ŠĢą8  ąą8` Š Š ą[Answer:]€No€private€agreement€between€private€parties€can€interfereŠ ä4 Šwith€the€Planning€Commissionššs€authority,€which€stems€from€theŠ Š  Špolice€powers€granted€by€the€State€of€Tennessee.€€Š¼ ` x` x ŠĢą  ąą ` ąThe€Commissionššs€next€meeting€was€held€on€October€8,€2002.€€By€this€time,€theŠ ”ä ŠCommission€had€the€city€attorneyššs€responses€to€the€three€questions.€€In€light€of€the€city€attorneyššsŠ €Š Šlegal€opinion,€the€Commission€voted€unanimously€to€take€no€action€on€Plaintiffššs€request€that€theŠ l¼ ŠCommission€rescind€the€approval€given€to€May€to€subdivide€his€property.€€Š X Ø ŠĢą  ąą ` ąPlaintiff€was€not€represented€by€an€attorney€throughout€the€proceedings€before€theŠ 0"€  ŠCommission.€€Still€proceeding€ņņpro€seóó,€Plaintiff€filed€a€Petition€for€Writ€of€Certiorari€with€the€TrialŠ #l! ŠCourt€claiming€that€the€Commission€had€acted€š širresponsibly,€capriciously,€arbitrarily,€and€illegallyššŠ $X" Šwhen€it€voted€to€take€no€action€on€his€request€to€rescind€the€approval€given€to€May€to€subdivide€hisŠ ō$D # Šproperty.€€The€Trial€Court€granted€Plaintiffššs€petition€and€a€trial€was€held€on€September€2,€2003.Š ą%0!$ ŠĢą  ąą ` ąThe€first€witness€was€Michael€Marchioni€(š šMarchionišš),€the€Secretary€of€the€PlanningŠ ø'#& ŠCommission.€Marchioni€testified€that€he€has€been€the€Commissionššs€Secretary€for€two€years.€Š ¤(ō#' ŠMarchioni€stated€that€in€addition€to€his€position€as€Secretary,€the€Commission€also€has€an€AssistantŠ )ą$( Šā āSecretary€and€that€position€is€held€by€James€Moody€(š šMoodyšš).€€Marchioni€testified€that€š šminorŠ |*Ģ%) Šsubdivisionsšš€are€handled€by€staff€members€and€signed€by€Moody.׃ׯ ƒ#ĆŻņņŚ  Ś1Ś  ŚóóŻ  Ż×  ׀€Marchioni€identified€theŠ ° Šā āapplicable€Commission€by„law€addressing€minor€subdivisions.€€This€by„law€states,€ņņinter€aliaóó,€thatŠ œģ Šš š[t]he€Assistant€Secretary€shall€assist€the€Secretary€in€carrying€out€the€prescribed€duties.€€TheŠ ˆŲ ŠAssistant€Secretary€shall€be€authorized€to€sign€Minor€Subdivision€plats€and€Condominium€plats€onŠ tÄ Šbehalf€of€the€Planning€Commission.€€The€Planning€Director€for€the€City€of€Johnson€City€orŠ `° Šdesignated€representative€shall€serve€as€Assistant€Secretary.šš€€Marchioni€acknowledged€that€thereŠ L œ Šare€approximately€150€minor€subdivision€plats€approved€by€the€Assistant€Secretary€on€an€annualŠ 8 ˆ Šbasis.€Š $ t ŠĢą  ąą ` ąMoody€testified€that€he€is€the€Planning€Director€for€Johnson€City.€€In€addition,€theŠ ü L  ŠCommissionššs€by„laws€provide€that€the€Planning€Director€also€shall€serve€as€the€Assistant€SecretaryŠ č 8  Šof€the€Planning€Commission.€€Moody€identified€the€plats€he€approved€which€subdivided€the€MayŠ Ō$  Šproperty.€€Moody€relied€on€Section€3„3€of€the€Subdivision€Regulations€when€approving€the€plats.€Š Ą  ŠSection€3„3.1€provides:Š ¬ü  ŠĢą8  ąą8` Š Š ąAdministrative€ApprovalŠ„Ō ` x` x Šą8  ąą8` Š Š ąA€ņņminor€subdivisionóó€may€be€administratively€approved€by€theŠ pĄ ŠņņPlanning€Commissionóó€staff,€provided€that€no€variance€from€theŠ \¬ Šņņsubdivisionóó€regulations€has€been€requested.€€Any€ņņminor€subdivisionóóŠ H˜ Šor€replat€which€involves€a€variance€from€the€ņņsubdivisionóó€regulationsŠ 4„ Šshall€be€approved€by€the€ņņPlanning€Commissionóó.€(emphasis€inŠ  p Šoriginal).Š \` x` x ŠĢMoody€testified€that€by€affixing€his€signature€to€the€plats,€he€was€certifying€that€Mayššs€new€platsŠ ä4 Šš šcomplied€with€all€the€regulations€of€the€Regional€Planning€Commission.ššŠ Š  ŠĢą  ąą ` ąAfter€all€the€proof€was€presented,€the€Trial€Court€made€the€following€findings:Š Øų ŠĢą8  ąą8` Š Š ąI€find€that€in€this€case€all€legal€requirements€were€met;€however,€theŠ €Š Šaction€of€the€assistant€secretary€in€signing€off€on€subject€plats€doesŠ l¼ Šnot€conform€with€the€applicable€statutes,€where€it€says,€š šThe€secretaryŠ X Ø Šshall€sign.šš€€However,€this€technical€difference€does€not€and€wouldŠ D!” Šnot€affect€the€result;€therefore,€the€Court€finds€substantial€complianceŠ 0"€  Šwith€this€Statute.Š#l!` x` x ŠĢą8  ąą8` Š Š ąą ø ąThe€Court€finds€that€the€records€as€a€whole€reflects€noŠ ō$D # Šillegality,€no€arbitrariness,€no€capriciousness€and€no€fraud€on€the€partŠ ą%0!$ Šā āof€the€Regional€Planning€Commission€in€regard€to€this€matter.€Š Ģ&"% ŠAccordingly€the€cause€is€dismissed€and€the€court€costs€taxed€to€Mr.Š ° ŠGreen.€Šœģ` x` x Šā āĢą  ąą ` ąJudgment€was€entered,€and€Plaintiff€appeals€raising€several€issues.€€First,€PlaintiffŠ tÄ Šclaims€the€Trial€Court€erred€in€denying€him€relief€after€specifically€finding€that€the€plat€at€issue€didŠ `° Šnot€conform€to€the€applicable€statute.€€Second,€Plaintiff€claims€the€Regional€Planning€CommissionŠ L œ Šdoes€have€authority€to€rescind€the€approval€of€the€May€minor€subdivision€plats.€€Finally,€PlaintiffŠ 8 ˆ Šclaims€the€Trial€Court€erred€when€it€concluded€the€subdivision€plats€and€the€approval€process€metŠ $ t Šall€essential€legal€requirements.€€Š  ` ŠĢą@))%ģąņ ņņņDiscussionó óóóˆŠ č 8  ŠĢą  ąą ` ąIn€ņņLafferty€v.€City€of€Winchesteróó,€46€S.W.3d€752€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€2000),€this€CourtŠ Ą  Šdiscussed€the€relevant€standard€of€review€in€cases€such€as€this,€stating:€Š ¬ü  ŠĢą8  ąą8` Š Š ąą ø ąWhether€characterized€as€administrative€or€quasi-judicial,Š „Ō  ŠņņWilson€County€Youth€Emergency€Shelter,€Inc.€v.€Wilson€Countyóó,€13Š pĄ ŠS.W.3d€338,€342€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1999),€decisions€by€local€zoningŠ \¬ Šboards€and€officials€involve€the€exercise€of€the€local€government'sŠ H˜ Špolice€power€to€protect€the€health,€safety,€and€welfare€of€theirŠ 4„ Šcitizens.€€ņņDraper€v.€Haynesóó,€567€S.W.2d€at€465;€ņņHoover,€Inc.€v.Š  p ŠMetropolitan€Bd.€of€Zoningóó,€955€S.W.2d€52,€54€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.Š  \ Š1997).€€In€recognition€of€the€policy€that€favors€permitting€theŠ ųH Šcommunity€decision-makers€closest€to€the€events€to€make€theŠ ä4 Šdecision,€the€courts€refrain€from€substituting€their€judgments€for€theŠ Š  Šbroad€discretionary€power€of€the€local€governmental€body.€€ņņMcCallenŠ ¼  Šv.€City€of€Memphisóó,€786€S.W.2d€633,€641-42€(Tenn.€1990);Š Øų ŠņņWhittemore€v.€Brentwood€Planning€Comm'nóó,€835€S.W.2d€11,€15Š ”ä Š(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1992).Š€Š` x` x ŠĢą8  ąą8` Š Š ąą ø ąThe€common-law€writ€of€certiorari€provides€the€proceduralŠ X Ø Švehicle€for€reviewing€the€decisions€by€local€zoning€boards.€€This€writŠ D!” Šaffords€quite€limited€judicial€review.€€ņņ421€Corp.€v.€MetropolitanŠ 0"€  ŠGov't€of€Nashvilleóó,€[36€S.W.3d€469,€474€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€2000)].€€ItŠ #l! Šempowers€the€courts€to€determine€whether€the€local€zoning€boardŠ $X" Šexceeded€its€jurisdiction;€followed€an€unlawful€procedure;€actedŠ ō$D # Šillegally,€arbitrarily,€or€fraudulently;€or€acted€without€materialŠ ą%0!$ Ševidence€to€support€its€decision.€€ņņFallin€v.€Knox€County€Bd.€ofŠ Ģ&"% ŠComm'rsóó,€656€S.W.2d€338,€342-43€(Tenn.€1983);€ņņHoover,€Inc.€v.Š ø'#& ŠMetropolitan€Bd.€of€Zoningóó,€955€S.W.2d€at€54;€ņņHemontolor€v.€WilsonŠ ¤(ō#' ŠCounty€Bd.€of€Zoning€Appealsóó,€883€S.W.2d€613,€616€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.Š )ą$( Š1994).Š|*Ģ%)` x` x ŠŠ h+ø&* Šą8  ąą8` Š Š ąą ø ąWhen€the€evidentiary€foundation€for€a€local€zoning€boardŠ ° Šdecision€is€challenged€using€the€common-law€writ,€the€sufficiency€ofŠ œģ Šthe€evidence€is€a€question€of€law.€€Hence,€the€courts€must€review€theŠ ˆŲ Šrecord€de€novo€without€presuming€that€the€board's€finding€is€correct.Š tÄ ŠņņWilson€County€Youth€Emergency€Shelter,€Inc.€v.€Wilson€Countyóó,€13Š `° ŠS.W.3d€at€342.€€This€review€does€not€permit€the€courts€to€reweigh€theŠ L œ Ševidence,€ņņHoover,€Inc.€v.€Board€of€Zoning€Appealsóó,€924€S.W.2d€atŠ 8 ˆ Š904,€or€to€scrutinize€the€intrinsic€correctness€of€the€decision.€€ņņ421Š $ t ŠCorp.€v.€Metropolitan€Gov't€of€Nashvilleóó,€[36€S.W.3d€469,€474].€€ItŠ  ` Šenvisions€that€the€court€will€review€the€record€independently€toŠ ü L  Šdetermine€whether€it€contains€"such€relevant€evidence€that€aŠ č 8  Šreasonable€mind€might€accept€as€adequate€to€support€a€rationalŠ Ō$  Šconclusion."€€ņņHedgepath€v.€Nortonóó,€839€S.W.2d€416,€421€(Tenn.€Ct.Š Ą  ŠApp.€1992).€€A€decision€by€a€local€zoning€board€will€be€consideredŠ ¬ü  Šarbitrary€only€when€there€is€no€evidence€in€the€record€to€support€it.€Š ˜č  ŠņņSexton€v.€Anderson€Countyóó,€587€S.W.2d€663,€667€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.Š „Ō  Š1979).ŠpĄ` x` x Š€ĢņņLaffertyóó,€46€S.W.3d€at€758„59.Š H˜ ŠĢą  ąą ` ąIn€reviewing€Plaintiffššs€various€arguments€before€the€Commission,€as€well€as€his€briefŠ  p Šon€appeal,€it€is€apparent€to€this€Court€that€Plaintiff€has€taken€bits€and€pieces€of€statutes€andŠ  \ Šregulations€and,€by€disregarding€the€remaining€language,€has€altogether€transformed€them€intoŠ ųH Šsomething€they€are€not.€€For€example,€Plaintiff€argues€that€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€šš€13„3„402(a)(1),€theŠ ä4 Šstatute€authorizing€approval€of€minor€subdivisions€under€certain€circumstances€without€RegionalŠ Š  ŠPlanning€Commission€approval,€specifically€excludes€all€land€located€within€a€municipalŠ ¼  Šcorporation.׃ׯ ƒ#ĆŻņņŚ  Ś2Ś  ŚóóŻ  Ż×  ׀€Based€on€this€interpretation,€Plaintiff€then€argues€that€because€Mayššs€original€tract€wasŠ Øų Šwithin€the€city€limits€when€that€tract€was€subdivided€as€a€minor€subdivision,€it€was€š šillegal.šš€€WeŠ ”ä Šare€reluctant€to€read€the€clause€relied€upon€by€Plaintiff€in€such€a€restrictive€manner€and,€in€effect,Š €Š Šinvalidate€hundreds€of€minor€subdivision€approvals€within€Johnson€City.€Š l¼ ŠĢą  ąą ` ąThe€issue€before€the€Trial€Court€was€not€whether€minor€subdivisions€can€be€approvedŠ D!” Šwithin€the€municipal€limits€of€Johnson€City.€€Rather,€the€Trial€Court€was€reviewing€the€decision€ofŠ 0"€  Šthe€Commission€not€to€take€any€action€on€Plaintiffššs€request€and,€more€precisely,€whether€thatŠ #l! Šdecision€was€illegal,€arbitrary€or€capricious.€€We€believe€the€Commission€certainly€gave€PlaintiffŠ $X" Šappropriate€consideration€and€listened€to€his€numerous€concerns€and€complaints.€€After€doing€so,€theŠ ō$D # ŠCommission€requested€a€legal€opinion€from€the€city€attorney€to€assist€them€in€resolving€the€mattersŠ ą%0!$ Špresented€by€Plaintiff.€€In€reliance€on€the€advice€of€the€city€attorney,€the€Commission€concluded€thatŠ Ģ&"% Šit€did€not€have€the€authority€to€rescind€the€approval€of€the€minor€subdivision€by€the€AssistantŠ ø'#& ŠSecretary.€€In€our€opinion,€this€is€more€than€adequate€evidence€to€support€the€Trial€CourtššsŠ ¤(ō#' Šconclusion€that€the€decision€of€the€Commission€on€this€point€was€neither€arbitrary€nor€capricious.€Š )ą$( Їą  ąą ` ąPlaintiff€also€claims€that€the€decision€of€the€Planning€Commission€was€illegal.€Š ° ŠPlaintiff€equates€š šwrongšš€with€š šillegal.šš€€The€role€of€the€Trial€Court€was€not€to€review€the€intrinsicŠ œģ Šcorrectness€of€the€Commissionššs€reliance€on€the€opinion€of€the€city€attorney€that€it€did€not€have€theŠ ˆŲ Šauthority€to€rescind€the€minor€subdivision€approval.€€In€other€words,€whether€the€Commission€wasŠ tÄ Šwrong€because€it€actually€had€such€power€was€not€the€issue€before€the€Trial€Court.€€ņņCf.óó€ņņHenry€v.Š `° ŠBoard€of€Claimsóó,€638€S.W.2d€825,€827€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1982)(š šThe€Chancellor's€action€here€wasŠ L œ Šclearly€to€review€the€intrinsic€correctness€of€the€Board's€decision€š8š€and,€when€he€did€this,€theŠ 8 ˆ ŠChancellor€exceeded€his€power€and€jurisdiction€under€the€common€law€writ€of€certiorari.š8š€AnŠ $ t Šerroneous€decision€of€the€Board,€absent€more,€is€not€an€illegal,€arbitrary€or€fraudulent€decision.šš).€Š  ` ŠWe€agree€with€the€Trial€Court€that€the€Commission€did€not€act€illegally.€€Regardless€of€the€numerousŠ ü L  Šimproprieties€alleged€by€Plaintiff,€it€is€nonetheless€clear€that€the€two€new€tracts€created€when€MayššsŠ č 8  Šproperty€was€subdivided€are€subject€to€the€same€restrictions€that€are€imposed€on€Plaintiffššs€propertyŠ Ō$  Šand€the€other€tracts€within€that€subdivision.€€There€simply€is€nothing€š šillegalšš€about€these€new€tractsŠ Ą  Ševen€if€the€Planning€Commission€was€š šwrong.ššŠ ¬ü  ŠĢą  ąą ` ąThe€statute€authorizing€creation€of€minor€subdivisions€without€approval€of€a€regionalŠ „Ō  Šplanning€commission€requires€the€approval€of€a€planning€commissionššs€Secretary,€not€an€AssistantŠ pĄ ŠSecretary€as€was€done€in€the€present€case.€€Since€we€find€nothing€inherently€illegal€about€the€twoŠ \¬ Šnew€tracts€of€land,€we€must€determine€whether€this€procedural€defect€is€sufficient€to€conclude€theŠ H˜ Šnew€tracts€are€š šillegalšš€as€claimed€by€Plaintiff€and,€if€so,€whether€he€is€entitled€to€the€relief€he€seeks.€Š 4„ ŠWe€respectfully€conclude€that€this€procedural€impropriety€is€insufficient€to€warrant€rescission€of€theŠ  p Šapproval€of€Mayššs€minor€subdivision.€€There€is€nothing€in€the€record€to€suggest€that€the€minorŠ  \ Šsubdivision€would€not€have€been€or€should€not€have€been€approved€had€it€been€submitted€toŠ ųH ŠMarchioni€instead€of€Moody€for€approval.€€A€further€concern€is€the€fact€that€after€obtaining€approvalŠ ä4 Šof€the€minor€subdivision,€May€proceeded€to€build€a€house€on€one€of€the€new€tracts.€€Even€if€we€wereŠ Š  Što€conclude€that€the€minor€subdivision€approval€was€improper,€we€are€far€from€convinced€thatŠ ¼  Šrescission€of€the€minor€subdivision€and€requiring€removal€of€the€house€would€be€an€appropriateŠ Øų Šremedy,€as€Plaintiff€suggests.€€As€stated€previously,€such€a€holding€could€indeed€invalidate€hundredsŠ ”ä Šof€other€minor€subdivisions€with€the€same,€albeit€minor,€procedural€defect.׃ׯ ƒ#ĆŻņņŚ  Ś3Ś  ŚóóŻ  Ż×  ׊ €Š ŠĢą  ąą ` ąThe€final€issue€is€Plaintiffššs€claim€that€the€Planning€Commissionššs€refusal€to€act€onŠ X Ø Šhis€request€was€illegal€because€May€dedicated€a€portion€of€his€property€to€the€city€as€a€drainage€andŠ D!” Šutility€easement€when€May€did€not€have€that€power€in€light€of€Plaintiffššs€already€existing€easementŠ 0"€  Šon€the€same€property.€€As€with€the€previous€issues,€the€Planning€Commission€relied€on€the€adviceŠ #l! Šof€its€attorney,€and€the€intrinsic€fairness€or€correctness€of€that€decision€is€beyond€the€scope€of€reviewŠ $X" Šof€either€the€Trial€Court€or€this€Court.€€If€May€interfered€with€Plaintiffššs€property€right€in€theŠ ō$D # Šeasement€when€the€property€was€subdivided€and€a€drainage€easement€was€granted€to€the€city,€thenŠ ą%0!$ Šsuch€an€issue€can€be€addressed€by€a€court€if€Plaintiff€chooses€to€pursue€such€an€action€against€May.€Š Ģ&"% ŠThis€does€not€mean,€however,€that€the€action€of€the€Commission€was€arbitrary,€capricious,€or€illegal.€Š ø'#& ŠIn€light€of€the€š šquite€limited€judicial€reviewšš€standard€applicable€here,€and€after€reviewing€theŠ ° Šprimary€issues€set€forth€by€Plaintiff€as€well€as€various€and€sundry€other€points€raised€throughout€hisŠ œģ Šbrief,€we€conclude€the€judgment€of€the€Trial€Court€must€be€affirmed€in€all€respects.€€Š ˆŲ ŠĢą@  %ģąņ ņņņConclusionó óóóˆŠ `° ŠĢą  ąą ` ąThe€Judgment€of€the€Trial€Court€is€affirmed,€and€this€cause€is€remanded€to€the€TrialŠ 8 ˆ ŠCourt€for€collection€of€the€costs€below.€€Costs€on€appeal€are€assessed€against€the€Appellant,€BobbyŠ $ t ŠMacBryan€Green.€€Š  ` ŠĢĢĢĢĢą  ąą ` ąą ø ąą  ąą h ąą Ą ąą  ą____________________________________Š ˜č  Šą  ąą ` ąą ø ąą  ąą h ąą Ą ąą  ąD.€MICHAEL€SWINEY,€JUDGE