ÿWPCµ& ô”!eð±ê6L¬½7 ,®‚߀ŠPÿ ¿7uQ¿IÏ›÷™qÓ½ŸkuMÛt»þ€D=DJ9Â™Ì ¾th3š~k¤´÷%ÓDE£Ëh`ÑD,N­³k!E¥¯Ž/üâˆð#·Á÷(>5qtR³ÂfùæZøñ¢¯'~Q~ ‚^¹©NtE®xØÓOr©û¨ëöìiê†5÷*žC•åM“ ì¸WX¢/ØpB3žºô¤ø˜Ö“žÉó3.‰?«®®ÌzwT®1@ȃÀ‘»·'|'ÛŽ‰Ý‘)FJcL3‰Ã€ŸPÄEOwB+à"7÷¨Í׬“.ÜzE¤Û{>Û zwò5à~ñ9Š= G71<álb÷hrù­ßKßfXõ5¡†[²’,Î¥uvêcƒ†‰. ‹­žçµ”6n|ù}°{<-‚ï:v—§5¦Ä5“ôúg¢ê­ÈÝÁY^#kÿ±¬QÔâr—ÃîóALòƒPeóÀbÌ€ÿFoFÛ²‘7ÏùóºšËb#Á\^  %) 0ˆ/ UN· w 4 z Ò— i x mz ‘ Æ™ Æ_ Æ% Æë à±N‘ 0D““E×NÙï'»×ÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑb¨!¨!¨!¨!¨!¨!¨!¨!¨!¨!¨!¨!¨!¨!¨!¨!¨!¨!¨!¨!¨!¨!¨!¨!¨!¨!¨!¨!¨!¨!¨!¨!¨!¨!¨!¨! 0ë°!°!°!°! B›"›" 0¤¸" D5\# D-‘# 0K¾#¾# AS $Æ\$ 0¤"% 0DÆ% A« &˜HP LaserJet 4050 Series PCL 5eÈÈ,,,,ÈÈ0ñ}‡) »(`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman Regularõ}|)ŒÏ£ ˜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.wpt3|xÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5 ÖÝ ƒR:w$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôõ­ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€commission€would€have€been€required€to€engage€in€spot€zoning€had€it€decided€to€zone€the€inn€propertyÐ À Ðresidential.€€Spot€zoning€refers€to€the€practice€of€singling€out€a€piece€of€property€for€a€use€classification€totally€differentÐ „Ä Ðfrom€that€of€the€surrounding€area.€€1€American€Law€of€Zoning€ðð€5.12.(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó DÝ ƒR:w$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôõ­ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔA€Ô_ÔpersonððsÔ_Ô€lawful€use€of€property€existing€before€the€enactment€of€a€zoning€ordinance€is€commonly€referredÐ À Ðto€as€a€ð ðnonconforming€Ô_Ôuse.ððÔ_Ô€€òòóó1€Kenneth€H.€Young,€Ô_ÔòòAndersonððsÔ_Ô€American€Law€of€Zoningóó€ðð€6.01€(4th€ed.€1995)Ð „Ä ÐÔ_Ô(ð ðAmericanÔ_Ô€Law€of€Ô_ÔZoningðð).Ô_Ô€€A€nonconforming€use€is€considered€Ô_Ôð ðgrandfatheredððÔ_Ô€when€the€use€is€specifically€exemptedÐ Hˆ Ðfrom€the€Ô_ÔordinanceððsÔ_Ô€application€on€grounds€that€the€property€was€being€used€that€way€when€the€ordinance€took€effect.€Ð  L ÐòòóóòòTown€of€Orono€v.€LaPointeóó,€698€A.2d€1059,€1062€(Me.€1997)€and€Bryan€A.€Garner,€òòA€Dictionary€of€Modern€LegalÐ Ð ÐUsageóó€390€(2nd€ed.€1995). åÝ ƒR:w$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôõ­ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€Boardððs€minutes€summarized€these€comments€as€follows:Ð À ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ àMr.€Steve€Waldron,€developer/owner€of€[neighboring]€North€PointÐ Hˆ ÐSubdivision,€stated€that€the€noise€was€not€the€only€issue.€€Another€[issue]€was€theÐ  L Ðdevaluation€of€neighboring€property€values.€€Mr.€Waldron€ha[d]€six€or€seven€lotsÐ Ð Ðfacing€the€Antebellum€Inn.€James€Weaver,€[another]€neighbor,€stated€that€the€policeÐ ”Ô Ðrecords€[would]€show€that€there€[were]€complaints€about€activities€at€the€Inn.€€Mr.Ð X˜ ÐWade€Anderton,€one€of€the€nearest€neighbors,€stated€that€[the€Inn€was]€no€longerÐ  \ Ða€ð ðBed€and€Breakfast.ðð€He€also€stated€that€he€was€assured€as€a€former€partner€of€theÐ à  ÐLaffertys€that€the€zoning€would€remain€R„1€[Low„Density€Residential]€and€felt€thatÐ ¤ ä  Ðthe€neighboring€property€would€devalu[e]€due€to€[the€proposed]€expansion.€€He€alsoÐ h ¨  Ðwanted€it€noted€that€he€had€attended€events€where€a€coverage€charge€was€collected,Ð , l  Ðdrinks€were€served€to€the€public€and€live€music€was€present.€€Judy€Baker,€[another]Ð ð 0  Ðneighbor,€commented€that€she€objected€to€the€drinking€and€dancing€happeningÐ ´ ô  Ðnightly.Ðx¸ ` x` x Ð ±Ý ƒR:w$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôõ­ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔIn€the€trial€Ô_ÔcourtððsÔ_Ô€words,€the€Ô_ÔLaffertysÔ_Ô€ð ðcrossed€over€the€line€of€the€[permitted€nonconforming]€use€when€theÐ À Ðbar€facility€was€constructed€and€they€got€into€the€nightclub€Ô_Ôbusiness.ððÔ_Ô ÍÝ ƒR:w$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôõ­ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€Boardððs€minutes€summarized€the€Boardððs€deliberation€and€vote€as€follows:Ð À ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ àMayor€Bean,€attempting€a€compromise,€stated€that€maybe€everythingÐ Hˆ Ðmoving€inside€would€help€resolve€some€of€the€issues.€[Board€member]€RichardÐ  L ÐBagby€made€the€motion€to€recognize€the€quality€of€the€establishment,€etc.€but€toÐ Ð Ðreject€the€expansion€based€upon€[the€cityððs]€initial€understandings€of€the€activitiesÐ ”Ô Ðregarding€the€Antebellum€Inn.€€[Board€member]€Thomas€Elliott€seconded€theÐ X˜ Ðmotion.€€In€discussion€[Board€member]€Bill€Cowan€stated€that€in€good€faith,€theÐ  \ Ðoriginal€concept€of€a€ððbed€and€breakfastðð€and€a€restaurant€facility€was€allowed€as€aÐ à  Ðnonconforming€use.€€However,€recent€activities€may€have€gone€beyond€that€concept.€Ð ¤ ä  Ð[Chairperson]€Jackie€Rose€abstained€from€the€vote.€€All€other€members€voted€inÐ h ¨  Ðfavor€of€said€motion€[rejecting€the€proposed€expansion].- ù-(|G2:w$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Z…»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôõ­ò»»Ô d(|3G‡$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Z…»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV)ÿÿ!dxdx)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3G‡$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Z…»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Z…»»ddÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑÀ°ÑÑÀ°ÑÔ€¼Z…»»»ÔÑ8€IXXdì»»d8ÑÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÔ‡îCÄZ…Ôà@ü ü ìàIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ À Ðà@kk$ìàAT€NASHVILLEˆÐ æ& Ðà@!ìàÔ#†¼Z…»îîCÄ#ÔMay€7,€1998€SessionÔ‡îCÄZ…ԈР L ÐÔ#†¼Z…»îîCÄý#ÔÔ‡XIX»¼Z…ÔÌò òÔ#†¼Z…»XXIU#ÔÓ  ÓROBERT€LAFFERTY,€òòet€al.óó€v.€CITY€OF€WINCHESTER,€òòet€alóó.Ô‡XIX»¼Z…Ôó óÐ  J ÐÓ›ÓÌà@M M ìàò òAppeal€from€the€Circuit€Court€for€Franklin€CountyˆÐ  J Ðà@( ( ìàNo.€10,025„CV€€€€€€J.€Curtis€Smith,€JudgeˆÐ ö 6 ÐÌà@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<Í ` A߈Ð Î   ÐÌà@} } ìàNo.€M1997„00224„Ô_ÔCOAÔ_Ô„R3„CV€„€Filed€December€7,€Ô_Ô2000Ô_ÔˆÐ É  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE< ` AßÐ ¡á  Ðó óÌThis€appeal€involves€a€dispute€between€the€owners€of€a€bed€and€breakfast€and€the€City€of€WinchesterÐ œÜ  Ðregarding€a€proposed€expansion€of€the€businessððs€bar€and€banquet€facilities.€€When€the€cityððs€BoardÐ ˆÈ  Ðof€Zoning€Appeals€declined€to€approve€the€expansion,€the€owners€of€the€bed€and€breakfast€filed€aÐ t´ Ðpetition€for€a€common„law€writ€of€certiorari€in€the€Circuit€Court€for€Franklin€County€challenging€theÐ `  ÐBoardððs€decision.€€After€reviewing€the€record€of€the€proceedings€before€the€Board,€the€trial€courtÐ LŒ Ðdetermined€that€the€Board€acted€within€its€discretion€when€it€declined€to€approve€the€proposedÐ 8x Ðexpansion€of€the€bed€and€breakfast.€€We€affirm€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court.Ð $d ÐÌò òà@°°ìàTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Judgment€of€the€Circuit€Court€Affirmedó óˆÐ ü< ÐÌòòÔ#†¼Z…»àXIè#ÔÔ‡XIX.¼Z…ÔWilliam€C.€Koch,€óóJr.,€J.,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòHenry€F.€Todd,€P.J.,€M.S.,óóÐ Ô Ðand€òòBen€H.€Cantrell,€J.óó,€joined.Ð À ÐÌRobert€S.€Peters,€Winchester,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellants,€Robert€Lafferty€and€Phyllis€Lafferty.Ð ˜Ø ÐÌThomas€C.€Faris,€Winchester,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellee,€City€of€Winchester.Ð p° ÐÌà@66'ìàò òOPINIONó óÔ#†¼Z…»XXI #ÔÔ‡XIX»¼Z…ԈРH ˆ  ÐÔ#†¼Z…»XXI #ÔÔ‡XIX»¼Z…ÔÌÔ#†¼Z…»XXIe #ÔÔ€XIX»¼Z…Ôà  àWade€and€Stephanie€Anderton€owned€an€architecturally€significant€house€located€on€StateÐ  "`" ÐHighway€50€in€Franklin€County.€€The€house€was€built€before€the€Civil€War€and€was€situated€on€a€oneÐ  #L# Ðand€one„half€acre€tract.€€In€early€1994,€the€Andertons€decided€to€convert€the€house€into€a€bed€andÐ ø#8 $ Ðbreakfast€and€obtained€a€business€license€for€their€new€endeavor.€€In€March€1994,€the€City€ofÐ ä$$!% ÐWinchester€annexed€the€Andertonsðð€property.€€Although€the€city€eventually€zoned€the€property€asÐ Ð%"& Ðð ðmunicipal€R„1,€Low€Density€Residential,ðð€it€ð ðgrandfatheredðð€in€the€Andertonsðð€incipient€bed€andÐ ¼&ü"' Ðbreakfast€as€a€nonconforming€commercial€use.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ð ¨'è#( ÐÐ ”(Ô$)ý Ðà  àLater€in€1994,€Robert€and€Phyllis€Lafferty€purchased€the€property€and€entered€into€anÐ À Ðinformal€partnership€with€the€Andertons€to€develop€the€bed€and€breakfast,€which€had€been€namedÐ ¬ì Ðthe€Antebellum€Inn.€€The€Laffertys€and€the€Andertons€presented€plans€to€the€city€planningÐ ˜Ø Ðcommission€showing€that€the€inn€would€have€three€rented€bedrooms€and€a€dining€facility€largeÐ „Ä Ðenough€to€accommodate€as€many€as€one€hundred€and€twenty„five€persons.€€They€told€the€commissionÐ p° Ðthat€the€inn€would€be€a€lodging€and€dining€establishment€that€could€accommodate€social€events€suchÐ \œ Ðas€wedding€receptions€and€private€parties.€€They€also€stated€that€the€inn€could€be€used€as€a€meetingÐ H ˆ Ðplace€for€other€organizations€such€as€charities€and€civic€clubs.€€In€August€1994,€the€commissionÐ 4 t Ðapproved€the€proposed€site€plan€for€the€Antebellum€Inn.€€Even€though€the€commission€consideredÐ  ` Ðzoning€the€property€as€commercial,׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€it€elected€to€leave€the€inn€as€a€grandfathered,€nonconformingÐ  L  Ðcommercial€use€in€a€residential€zone.Ð ø 8  ÐÌà  àThe€Antebellum€Inn€could€not€serve€alcoholic€beverages€when€it€first€opened.€€However,€afterÐ Ð  Ðit€opened,€the€residents€of€Winchester€approved€the€sale€of€liquor„by„the„drink,€and€the€city€beganÐ ¼ü  Ðto€license€establishments€to€sell€alcoholic€beverages€for€on„premise€consumption.€€The€Laffertys,Ð ¨è  Ðwho€by€this€time€were€the€sole€operators€of€the€Antebellum€Inn,€sensed€that€serving€alcoholicÐ ”Ô  Ðbeverages€would€increase€their€business.€€Accordingly,€they€applied€for€a€liquor€license€and€alsoÐ €À Ðsought€the€cityððs€permission€to€construct€a€20ðð€ð'ð€20ðð€one„story€addition€to€provide€space€for€an€iceÐ l¬ Ðmachine,€coolers,€and€storage€space€for€the€beverages.€€The€city€approved€the€site€plan€for€the€20ððÐ X˜ Ðð'ð€20ðð€addition.€€However,€without€the€cityððs€knowledge,€the€Laffertys,€going€way€beyond€the€planÐ D„ Ðthey€had€submitted€to€the€city,€constructed€a€two„story,€20ðð€ð'ð€38ðð€€addition€to€the€inn.€€Once€theÐ 0p Ðaddition€was€completed,€the€Laffertys€turned€it€into€a€bar€called€the€Green€Door€Pub.€€The€pub€hadÐ \ Ðan€outside€entrance€which€enabled€its€patrons€to€enter€and€leave€the€pub€without€entering€the€inn.€€Ð H ÐÌà  àThe€Laffertys,€by€their€own€admission,€were€having€a€difficult€time€operating€the€AntebellumÐ à  ÐInn€solely€as€a€bed€and€breakfast€with€occasional€social€functions.€€They€saw€the€Green€Door€PubÐ Ì  Ðas€the€key€to€profitability.€€In€time,€the€Laffertys€began€to€play€up€the€bar€side€of€their€business.€€LikeÐ ¸ø Ðmany€bars,€they€sometimes€featured€live€music€on€the€weekends,€so€that,€as€Ms.€Lafferty€put€it,Ð ¤ä Ðpeople€ð ð[could]€dance€if€they€want[ed]€to.ðð€€They€also€constructed€a€gazebo€with€a€concrete€floor€forÐ Ð Ðoutdoor€events.€€These€events€sometimes€featured€live€music€and€attracted€patrons€who€would€payÐ |¼ Ða€cover€charge€to€attend.Ð h¨ ÐÌà  àThe€outdoor€events€at€the€Laffertysðð€bar€occasionally€became€loud€enough€to€provokeÐ @!€  Ðcomplaints€from€the€neighbors.€€Eventually,€the€Laffertys€decided€to€deal€with€these€complaints€byÐ ,"l! Ðbuilding€a€38ðð€ð'ð€40ðð€banquet€room€ð ðwith€maximum€allowance€sound€absorptionðð€and€to€move€theirÐ #X" Ðoutdoor€activities€inside.€€The€Laffertys€began€constructing€the€foundation€for€the€new€additionÐ $D # Ðbefore€they€obtained€a€building€permit.€€When€the€building€inspector€discovered€that€they€had€alreadyÐ ð$0!$ Ðstarted€construction,€he€directed€the€Laffertys€to€stop€work€until€they€obtained€the€cityððs€approval€toÐ Ü%"% Ðexpand€their€business.€€The€Laffertys€did€not€completely€abide€by€the€stop„work€order€after€it€wasÐ È&#& Ðissued.Ð ´'ô#' ÐÐ  (à$( Ðà  àStymied€by€the€stop„work€order,€the€Laffertys€eventually€submitted€plans€for€the€proposedÐ À Ðaddition€to€the€Board€of€Zoning€Appeals.€€The€plans€called€for€a€large,€basically€unpartitioned,Ð ¬ì Ðrectangular€room€interrupted€only€by€a€set€of€bathrooms€and€a€small€area€for€an€ice€machine.€€TheÐ ˜Ø ÐBoard€conducted€a€ninety€minute€hearing€concerning€the€Laffertysðð€proposed€addition.€€AccordingÐ „Ä Ðto€the€Boardððs€minutes,€Ms.€Lafferty€Ð p° ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àinformed€the€Board€that€there€was€live€music€on€special€occasions.€Ð H ˆ ÐThe€live€music€occurred€only€when€specified€by€a€lessee€as€a€part€ofÐ 4 t Ða€catering€contract€for€a€special€event,€i.e.,€wedding€reception,€etc.€Ð  ` ÐMrs.€Lafferty€also€explained€that€the€proposed€addition€would€allowÐ  L  Ðtheir€outdoor€activities€to€move€inside,€thereby€closing€in€the€musicÐ ø 8  Ðand€eliminating€the€noise.Ðä $ ` x` x ÐÌOthers€present€at€the€meeting€complained€about€the€noise€and€traffic€congestion€caused€by€the€GreenÐ ¼ü  ÐDoor€Pub.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€The€Board€began€its€deliberations€after€both€sides€had€their€say.€€The€Board€membersÐ ¨è  Ðfound€themselves€in€a€quandary€because,€while€they€continued€to€favor€the€original€concept€of€theÐ ”Ô  Ðbed€and€breakfast€with€occasional€social€functions,€they€believed€that€the€current€activities€at€theÐ €À ÐGreen€Door€Pub€were€beyond€what€they€originally€envisioned.€€Eventually,€the€Board€denied€theÐ l¬ ÐLaffertysðð€application€for€a€building€permit€without€a€dissenting€vote.׃Р×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ð X˜ ÐÐ D„ Ðà  àAfter€the€Board€declined€to€issue€the€building€permit€for€their€expansion,€the€Laffertys€filedÐ À Ða€òòpro€seóó€action€in€the€Circuit€Court€for€Franklin€County€seeking€to€enjoin€the€city€from€enforcing€theÐ ¬ì Ðbuilding€inspectorððs€stop„work€order.€€The€trial€court€initially€issued€a€restraining€order€but€promptlyÐ ˜Ø Ðdissolved€it€when€the€city€protested.€€The€Laffertys€then€hired€a€lawyer€and,€on€December€2,€1996,Ð „Ä Ðfiled€a€petition€for€a€common„law€writ€of€certiorari€€requesting€the€trial€court€to€review€the€BoardððsÐ p° Ðrefusal€to€permit€the€construction€of€the€38ðð€ð'ð€40ðð€addition.€€They€also€requested€that€the€certiorariÐ \œ Ðproceeding€be€consolidated€with€their€pending€òòpro€seóó€action.€€The€trial€court€granted€the€writ€ofÐ H ˆ Ðcertiorari€but€dismissed€the€òòpro€seóó€action€with€prejudice€after€concluding€that€the€common„lawÐ 4 t Ðcertiorari€proceeding€supplanted€the€Laffertysðð€òòpro€seóó€suit.€Ð  ` ÐÌà  àFollowing€a€hearing€in€May€1997,€the€trial€court€entered€an€order€containing€the€followingÐ ø 8  Ðfindings€and€conclusions.€€First,€the€trial€court€found€that€the€original€designation€of€the€AntebellumÐ ä $  ÐInn€as€a€bed€and€breakfast€was,€for€zoning€purposes,€a€permissible€nonconforming€commercial€useÐ Ð  Ðin€a€residential€area.€€Second,€it€found€that€the€Laffertys€were€operating€a€bar€in€addition€to€the€bedÐ ¼ü  Ðand€breakfast€contrary€to€the€representations€they€had€made€to€the€beer€board€and€the€planningÐ ¨è  Ðcommission.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Third,€the€trial€court€found€that€the€current€structure€contained€more€than€enoughÐ ”Ô  Ðroom€for€the€operation€of€the€bed€and€breakfast.€€Accordingly,€the€trial€court€concluded€that€ð ðthe€newÐ €À Ðproposed€building€[was]€not€a€reasonable€extension€of€a€pre„existing€nonconforming€useðð€and,Ð l¬ Ðtherefore,€that€the€Board€had€acted€within€its€discretion€when€it€refused€to€approve€the€LaffertysððÐ X˜ Ðlatest€proposed€addition.€€The€trial€court€capped€off€its€ruling€by€directing€the€Laffertys€to€removeÐ D„ Ðthe€foundation€for€the€38ðð€ð'ð€40ðð€addition€that€had€been€constructed€before€the€stop„work€order€hadÐ 0p Ðbeen€issued.Ð \ ÐÌà@¬¬)ìàò òI.ó óˆÐ ô4 ÐÌà  àOur€inquiry€in€this€case€is€straightforward.€€The€Antebellum€Inn€sits€in€a€residential€area€ofÐ Ì  Ðthe€City€of€Winchester.€€Because€the€inn€existed,€at€least€nascently,€when€the€city€annexed€theÐ ¸ø Ðproperty,€it€has€been€permitted€to€continue€to€operate€as€a€commercial€bed€and€breakfastÐ ¤ä Ðestablishment€even€though€it€is€located€in€an€area€zoned€residential.€€As€a€nonconforming€use,€theÐ Ð Ðinn€may€expand€but€only€as€a€bigger€and€better€bed€and€breakfast.€€Without€the€approval€of€theÐ |¼ ÐBoard,€it€cannot€transform€itself€into€something€other€than€a€bed€and€breakfast.€€The€central€issue€inÐ h¨ Ðthis€lawsuit€is€whether€the€Laffertys€seek€to€expand€the€Antebellum€Inn€beyond€what€the€zoning€lawsÐ T ” Ðpermit€or,€as€succinctly€stated€by€the€Boardððs€lawyer€at€trial,€whether€the€Laffertys€ð ðhave€pushed€theÐ @!€  Ðenvelope€beyond€where€it€should€ever€have€been.ððÐ ,"l! ÐÌà  àThis€court€recognizes€that€zoning€is€a€fact€of€modern€life.€€The€days€of€Uncle€Dave€Macon,Ð $D # Ðwhen€most€Tennesseans€lived€on€more€or€less€remote€farms€or€in€small€communities,€are€gone.€Ð ð$0!$ ÐTowns,€urban€centers,€and€subdivisions,€have€largely€replaced€the€rural€environment€of€the€past.€Ð Ü%"% ÐIncreasingly,€local€governments€of€all€stripes€have€undertaken€to€harness€local€growth€and€toÐ È&#& Ðencourage€orderly€development€through€the€use€of€planning€and€zoning€measures.€€òòóóLee€S.€Greene,Ð ´'ô#' Ðet€al.,€òòGovernment€in€Tennesseeóó€351€(4th€ed.€1982)€(ð ðòòGovernment€in€Tennesseeóóðð).€€As€the€pressureÐ  (à$( Ðto€convert€farmland€into€subdivisions,€apartment€complexes,€condominiums,€and€shopping€centersÐ Œ)Ì%) Ðhas€increased,€zoning€ordinances€have€become€major€tools€to€implement€land„use€planning€at€theÐ À Ðlocal€level.€€òòGovernment€in€Tennesseeóó€at€357„63.Ð ¬ì ÐÌà  àLocal€governments€lack€the€inherent€power€to€control€the€use€of€private€property€within€theirÐ „Ä Ðboundaries.€€This€power€belongs€to€the€State€of€Tennessee.€€However,€the€General€Assembly€mayÐ p° Ðdelegate€the€power€to€local€governments,€òòHenry€v.€Whiteóó,€194€Tenn.€192,€196,€250€S.W.2d€70,€71Ð \œ Ð(1952);€òòAnderson€County€v.€Remote€Landfill€Servs.,€Inc.óó,€833€S.W.2d€903,€909€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.Ð H ˆ Ð1991),€and,€in€fact,€began€doing€so€in€1935.òò€€KLN€Assocs.€v.€Metropolitan€Dev.€&€Hous.€Agencyóó,€797Ð 4 t ÐS.W.2d€898,€902€n.3€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1990).€€Local€governmentsðð€power€to€employ€zoning€measuresÐ  ` Ðto€control€the€use€of€land€in€their€boundaries€is€now€firmly€established.€€òòDraper€v.€Haynesóó,€567Ð  L  ÐS.W.2d€462,€465€(Tenn.€1978).Ð ø 8  ÐÌà  àZoning€ordinances€are€now€the€most€prevalent€type€of€local€land€use€control.€€1€AmericanÐ Ð  ÐLaw€of€Zoning€ðð€1.14.€€In€the€most€general€terms,€zoning€involves€the€territorial€division€of€land€intoÐ ¼ü  Ðdistricts€according€to€the€character€of€the€land€and€buildings,€their€suitability€for€particular€purposes,Ð ¨è  Ðand€the€uniformity€of€these€uses.€€òòFamily€Golf€of€Nashville,€Inc.€v.€Metropolitan€Govððt€of€Nashvilleóó,Ð ”Ô  Ð964€S.W.2d€254,€258€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1997).€€Zoning€regulations€focus€primarily€on€the€use€of€theÐ €À Ðproperty€and€the€architectural€and€structural€designs€of€the€buildings.€€òòIn€re€Sundance€MountainÐ l¬ ÐRanches,€Inc.óó,€754€P.2d€1211,€1213€(N.M.€1988);€òòKaufmann€v.€Planning€&€Zoning€Commððnóó,€298Ð X˜ ÐS.E.2d€148,€153€(W.€Va.€1982);€1€E.C.€Yokley,€òòZoning€Law€&€Practiceóó€ðððð€1„2€(4th€ed.€1978).Ð D„ ÐÌà  àRarely,€if€ever,€have€local€governments€enacted€zoning€ordinances€on€a€completely€cleanÐ \ Ðslate.€€Property€is€usually€already€in€use€when€it€is€first€zoned,€and€so€it€is€inevitable€that€ideal€zoningÐ H Ðtheory€will€clash€with€the€existing€use€of€particular€pieces€of€property.€€In€order€to€avoid€the€legalÐ ô4 Ðproblems€that€would€attend€a€local€governmentððs€efforts€to€force€a€private€property€owner€toÐ à  Ðdiscontinue€an€otherwise€permissible€use€of€property,€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€13„7„208(b)€(1999)Ð Ì  Ðrequires€local€governments€to€permit€certain€types€of€pre„existing€nonconforming€uses€to€continueÐ ¸ø Ðeven€if€they€are€inconsistent€with€the€zoning€classification€of€the€surrounding€property.Ð ¤ä ÐÌà  àProperty€owners€whose€property€qualifies€as€a€nonconforming€use€under€Tenn.€Code€Ann.Ð |¼ Ððð€13„7„208(b)€may€expand€their€business€operations€or€may€even€reconstruct€their€business€premises,€Ð h¨ Ðas€long€as€they€continue€to€be€engaged€in€the€same€business€that€they€were€engaged€in€when€theÐ T ” Ðzoning€ordinance€was€passed.€€òò421€Corp.€v.€Metropolitan€Govððt€of€Nashvilleóó,€No.€M1997„00212„Ð @!€  ÐCOA„R3„CV,€2000€WL€488137,€at€*4€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€Apr.€26,€2000);€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðððð€13„7„Ð ,"l! Ð208(c),€(d).€€However,€these€provisions€do€not€permit€an€established€nonconforming€use€to€beÐ #X" Ðchanged€to€some€other€nonconforming€use.€€1€American€Law€of€Zoning€ðð€6.36.€Thus,€like€manyÐ $D # Ðother€local€zoning€ordinances,€Winchesterððs€zoning€ordinance€requires€that€a€property€owner€whoÐ ð$0!$ Ðdesires€to€change€the€use€of€property€from€one€nonconforming€use€to€another€nonconforming€useÐ Ü%"% Ðmust€first€obtain€the€written€approval€of€the€Board€of€Zoning€Appeals.€Winchester,€Tenn.€ZoningÐ È&#& ÐOrdinance€ðð€6.020€(1988).Ð ´'ô#' ÐÌà  àWhether€characterized€as€administrative€or€quasi„judicial,€òòWilson€County€Youth€EmergencyÐ Œ)Ì%) ÐShelter,€Inc.€v.€Wilson€Countyóó,€13€S.W.3d€338,€342€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1999),€decisions€by€local€zoningÐ x*¸&* Ðboards€and€officials€involve€the€exercise€of€the€local€governmentððs€police€power€to€protect€the€health,Ð d+¤'+ Ðsafety,€and€welfare€of€their€citizens.€€òòDraper€v.€Haynesóó,€567€S.W.2d€at€465;€òòHoover,€Inc.€v.Ð P,(, ÐMetropolitan€Bd.€of€Zoningóó,€955€S.W.2d€52,€54€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1997).€€In€recognition€of€the€policyÐ À Ðthat€favors€permitting€the€community€decision„makers€closest€to€the€events€to€make€the€decision,€theÐ ¬ì Ðcourts€refrain€from€substituting€their€judgments€for€the€broad€discretionary€power€of€the€localÐ ˜Ø Ðgovernmental€body.€€òòMcCallen€v.€City€of€Memphisóó,€786€S.W.2d€633,€641„42€(Tenn.€1990);Ð „Ä ÐòòWhittemore€v.€Brentwood€Planning€Commððnóó,€835€S.W.2d€11,€15€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1992).Ð p° ÐÌà  àThe€common„law€writ€of€certiorari€provides€the€procedural€vehicle€for€reviewing€theÐ H ˆ Ðdecisions€by€local€zoning€boards.€€This€writ€affords€quite€limited€judicial€review.€€òò421€Corp.€v.Ð 4 t ÐMetropolitan€Govððt€of€Nashvilleóó,€2000€WL€488137,€at€*2.€€It€empowers€the€courts€to€determineÐ  ` Ðwhether€the€local€zoning€board€exceeded€its€jurisdiction;€followed€an€unlawful€procedure;€actedÐ  L  Ðillegally,€arbitrarily,€or€fraudulently;€or€acted€without€material€evidence€to€support€its€decision.€Ð ø 8  ÐòòFallin€v.€Knox€County€Bd.€of€Commððrsóó,€656€S.W.2d€338,€342„43€(Tenn.€1983);€òòHoover,€Inc.€v.Ð ä $  ÐMetropolitan€Govððt€of€Nashvilleóó,€955€S.W.2d€at€54;€òòHemontolor€v.€Wilson€County€Bd.€of€ZoningÐ Ð  ÐAppealsóó,€883€S.W.2d€613,€616€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1994).€€Ð ¼ü  ÐÌà  àWhen€the€evidentiary€foundation€for€a€local€zoning€board€decision€is€challenged€using€theÐ ”Ô  Ðcommon„law€writ,€the€sufficiency€of€the€evidence€is€a€question€of€law.€€Hence,€the€courts€mustÐ €À Ðreview€the€record€de€novo€without€presuming€that€the€boardððs€finding€is€correct.€€òòWilson€CountyÐ l¬ ÐYouth€Emergency€Shelter,€Inc.€v.€Wilson€Countyóó,€13€S.W.3d€at€342.€€This€review€does€not€permit€theÐ X˜ Ðcourts€to€reweigh€the€evidence,€òòHoover,€Inc.€v.€Board€of€Zoning€Appealsóó,€924€S.W.2d€at€904,€or€toÐ D„ Ðscrutinize€the€intrinsic€correctness€of€the€decision.€€òò421€Corp.€v.€Metropolitan€Govððt€of€Nashvilleóó,Ð 0p Ð2000€WL€488137,€at€*2.€€It€envisions€that€the€court€will€review€the€record€independently€toÐ \ Ðdetermine€whether€it€contains€ð ðsuch€relevant€evidence€that€a€reasonable€mind€might€accept€asÐ H Ðadequate€to€support€a€rational€conclusion.ðð€€òòHedgepath€v.€Nortonóó,€839€S.W.2d€416,€421€(Tenn.€Ct.Ð ô4 ÐApp.€1992).€€A€decision€by€a€local€zoning€board€will€be€considered€arbitrary€only€when€there€is€noÐ à  Ðevidence€in€the€record€to€support€it.€€òòSexton€v.€Anderson€Countyóó,€587€S.W.2d€663,€667€(Tenn.€Ct.Ð Ì  ÐApp.€1979).€€€€€Ð ¸ø ÐÌò òà@ll(ìàII.€ó óˆÐ Ð ÐÌ€ò òó óà  àWinchesterððs€Board€of€Zoning€Appeals€knew€that€the€Laffertysðð€property€was€in€an€areaÐ h¨ Ðzoned€residential€and€that€the€commercial€use€of€their€property€as€a€bed€and€breakfast€had€beenÐ T ” Ðgrandfathered€in€as€a€nonconforming€use.€€The€Board€also€knew€about€the€first€addition€to€the€innÐ @!€  Ðand€that€the€Laffertys€had€misrepresented€that€the€addition€was€nothing€more€than€added€storageÐ ,"l! Ðspace€when,€in€fact,€it€was€intended€to€be€used€for€a€bar€called€the€Green€Door€Pub.€€At€the€hearing,Ð #X" Ðthe€Board€learned€that€the€Laffertys€regularly€held€dances€at€the€Green€Door€Pub€for€which€theyÐ $D # Ðimposed€a€cover€charge.€€The€Board€also€learned€that€the€Laffertys€had€actually€started€to€buildÐ ð$0!$ Ðanother€large€addition€to€expand€their€bar€without€first€obtaining€the€cityððs€approval€and€that€they€hadÐ Ü%"% Ðcontinued€to€erect€the€addition€even€after€the€stop„work€order€was€issued.€Ð È&#& ÐÌà  àIn€addition€to€the€Laffertysðð€less€than€candid€dealings€with€the€city€officials,€the€Board€heardÐ  (à$( Ðcomplaints€from€their€neighbors€that€the€live€music€at€the€Green€Door€Pub€created€a€noise€problemÐ Œ)Ì%) Ðin€the€neighborhood.€€The€Laffertysðð€neighbors€told€the€Board€that€they€objected€to€what€one€womanÐ x*¸&* Ðdescribed€as€ð ðthe€drinking€and€dancing€happening€nightly.ðð€€They€also€expressed€their€concern€thatÐ d+¤'+ Ðthe€operation€of€the€Green€Door€Pub€was€harming€the€value€of€their€property.Ð P,(, Їà  àWe€are€mindful€that€the€mere€complaints€and€fears€of€neighboring€property€owners€do€notÐ À Ðprovide€the€material€evidence€necessary€to€support€a€boardððs€denial€of€an€otherwise€proper€request.€Ð ¬ì ÐòòWilson€County€Youth€Emergency€Shelter,€Inc.€v.€Wilson€Countyóó,€13€S.W.3d€at€342„43;€òòHedgepathÐ ˜Ø Ðv.€Nortonóó,€839€S.W.2d€at€421.€€As€we€have€said€before,€ð ðit€is€not€a€function€of€the€Board€to€conductÐ „Ä Ða€referendum€on€public€attitudes€relative€to€the€petition.ðð€€òòSexton€v.€Anderson€Countyóó,€587€S.W.2dÐ p° Ðat€664€n.1.€€In€this€case,€however,€the€Board€was€not€simply€reacting€to€the€neighborsðð€complaints.€Ð \œ ÐIf€anything,€the€surrounding€property€ownersðð€complaints€regarding€the€nightly€activities€at€the€GreenÐ H ˆ ÐDoor€Pub€corroborated€the€Boardððs€impression€that€the€Laffertysðð€pub€had,€in€one€Board€memberððsÐ 4 t Ðwords,€ð ðgone€beyond€[the€original]€conceptðð€of€a€lodging€place€that€catered€small,€private€get„Ð  ` Ðtogethers.Ð  L  ÐÌà  àThe€most€telling€material€evidence€supporting€the€Boardððs€action€are€the€undisputedÐ ä $  Ðcircumstances€surrounding€the€construction€and€subsequent€use€of€the€first€addition€to€the€inn.€€TheÐ Ð  ÐLaffertys€portrayed€this€addition€one€way€in€order€to€obtain€approval€for€it,€and€then,€after€obtainingÐ ¼ü  Ðapproval,€they€used€the€addition€for€something€completely€different.€€Accordingly,€the€Laffertys€wereÐ ¨è  Ðable€to€transform€a€one„story€20ðð€ð'ð€20ðð€storage€addition€into€a€two„story€public€bar€with€a€separateÐ ”Ô  Ðoutside€entrance.€€The€Laffertys€high„handedness€no€doubt€weighed€on€the€Boardððs€mind€inÐ €À Ðconsidering€their€request€for€another€addition€and€undermined€the€credibility€of€their€explanationÐ l¬ Ðabout€their€plans€for€the€38ðð€ð'ð€40ðð€addition€to€the€Green€Door€Pub.€€It€seems€logical€to€us€that€atÐ X˜ Ðsome€point€the€Board€looked€at€what€was€before€it,€considered€the€track€record€of€the€propertyÐ D„ Ðowners,€remembered€what€had€happened€with€the€first€addition,€and€began€to€think,€ð ðWeððve€beenÐ 0p Ðdown€this€road€before.ððÐ \ ÐÌà  àIn€a€common„law€certiorari€proceeding€such€as€this€one,€it€is€not€necessary€that€we€agree€withÐ ô4 Ðthe€Boardððs€refusal€to€approve€the€Laffertysðð€proposed€38ðð€ð'ð€40ðð€addition€to€the€Green€Door€Pub.€Ð à  ÐIt€is€only€necessary€that€we€find€that€the€Board€did€not€act€illegally,€arbitrarily,€or€capriciously.€€TheÐ Ì  Ðrecord€contains€material€evidence€from€which€the€Board€could€have€rationally€concluded€that€theÐ ¸ø Ðproposed€addition€would€have€further€expanded€the€Antebellum€Inn€into€a€commercial€activity€€quiteÐ ¤ä Ðdifferent€from€its€original€nonconforming€use€ð!ð€a€bed€and€breakfast€that€would€be€able€toÐ Ð Ðaccommodate€occasional€small€social€events.€€Accordingly,€the€Board€could€rightly€withholdÐ |¼ Ðapproval€of€the€expansion€on€grounds€that€it€would€have€changed€the€way€the€property€was€beingÐ h¨ Ðused€to€a€different€nonconforming€use.€€Therefore,€we€agree€with€the€trial€courtððs€conclusion€that€theÐ T ” ÐBoard€did€not€err€by€rejecting€the€Laffertysðð€latest€plan€to€add€another€room€to€the€west€side€of€theÐ @!€  ÐAntebellum€Inn.€€Ð ,"l! ÐÌò òòòà@^^(ìàIII.óóó óˆÐ $D # ÐÌà  àWe€affirm€the€judgment€and€remand€the€case€to€the€trial€court€for€whatever€further€Ð Ü%"% Ðproceedings€consistent€with€this€opinion€may€be€required.€We€also€tax€the€costs€of€this€appeal€toÐ È&#& ÐRobert€Lafferty€and€Phyllis€Lafferty,€jointly€and€severally,€and€to€their€surety€for€which€execution,Ð ´'ô#' Ðif€necessary,€may€issue.Ð  (à$( ÐÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à__________________________________Ð d+¤'+ Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àWILLIAM€C.€KOCH,€JR.,€JUDGE€