ÿWPC > N# TUN_ %­ 0N³ 0 ÍbÎw@Ö4* 0D9Æ}NC 0@E…† 0L 0Da m¥ AQ¼ 0D BQ 0Jn D/¸ Bç D3 0T7 0^‹ 0hé 0rQ 0|à 0†? 0Å 1uU 0dÊ 0L.U.>zB)¸DCá AM$U*qI›”ä}xÙõƒÎ¸Q"ð %Ðù)SÉ+¹.æÕ/N»1³ 5v~¼6vÓ:8˜HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,ü,,,,,ü0nLhÎ'í€"  Z 6Times New Roman Regular¼(&öy$¡¡Ó  ÓÙñÓ Ù(}(2;Þ$¤¤Ý ƒöy!ÝÓ  ÓÙñÓ ÙÝ  ÝÒ°ÒÒX°ÒÔ€X®òX¼¼Ôà ` àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó- ù- /P01E23D4P56Ó€@ADzƒ=#3|xA(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  ÒLion's Head opinion Í; ' IB011C20IB011C2 .   > ÿÿ$Large Circleððà0 à($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ "&Cþÿ<< Cÿÿ(3¯$¢¢Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý d2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô(('÷ÿ dxdüÿP Pd$$$$'ÿÿdxd2" 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%*+,-./0 ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ>ßb$Large Circleððà0 à< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman% Line 7 d;;;;7Border 1dd <Cþÿ << Gÿÿ< Œ 9p`(Arial ?Ý ƒ!ÝÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÔ€:ÔÔ€:¼ÔÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÝ ƒ""ÝÝ  ÝÔ€>ÔÔ€>ÔÓ  Óò òÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€>XÔÌÌOctober€1,€1997ÌÌCecil€W.€CrowsonÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔ  Ôó ó ŠÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€:ÔÔ€:¼ÔÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$ÝÒ  ÒÒ X ÒÔ€:XÔà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ_ÔBosleyÔ_Ô€Springs€Road€is€a€minor€road€that€empties€onto€Harding€Road€near€the€intersectionÏof€Harding€and€White€Bridge€Roads.Ì sÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€:ÔÔ€:¼ÔÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$ÝÒ  ÒÒ X ÒÔ€:XÔà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_ÔFor€the€purposes€of€the€zoning€ordinance,€a€ð ðÔ_ÔfloodplainÔ_Ôðð€means€ð ðthe€relatively€flat€orÏlowland€area€adjoining€a€river,€stream,€watercourse,€lake,€or€other€body€of€standing€water€whichÏmay€be€covered€temporarily€by€Ô_ÔfloodwaterÔ_Ô.€€For€administrative€purposes,€the€ð ðÔ_ÔfloodplainÔ_Ôðð€isÏdefined€as€the€area€that€would€be€inundated€by€high€water€at€the€flood€profile€from€which€floodÏprotection€evaluation€is€established.ðð€€Metropolitan€Government€of€Nashville€and€DavidsonÏCounty,€Tennessee,€Code€ðð€17.04.500€(1991)€(ð ðMetro.€Codeðð).Ì ÏÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€:ÔÔ€:¼ÔÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$ÝÒ  ÒÒ X ÒÔ€:XÔà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_ÔMO€districts€are€ð ðdesigned€to€permit€a€grouping€of€linked€medical€functions€in€an€areaÏspecializing€in€community€facility€activities€in€sections€of€the€community€where€more€generalÏcommercial€districts€with€a€broader€range€of€permitted€activities€would€be€inappropriate.€€WithÏlimited€exceptions€all€activities€are€to€be€conditional€uses€to€avoid€an€adverse€impact€upon€theÏcharacter€of€the€surrounding€community.€€Community€facilities€and€utilities€necessary€to€serveÏthese€districts€or€the€general€community€welfare€are€also€permitted.€€Required€bulk€limitations€areÏdesigned,€in€part,€to€maximize€compatibility€with€lesser€intense€use€of€land€or€building€inÏproximate€residential€districts.ðð€€Metro.€Code€ðð€17.56.030€(1991).Ì yÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€:ÔÔ€:¼ÔÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$ÝÒ  ÒÒ X ÒÔ€:XÔà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€pertinent€portion€of€the€discussion€is€as€follows:ÌÌ‚à8 àMr.€Ô_ÔHowserÔ_Ô:à0 àà0 àPoint€of€Order.€€Mr.€Chairman,€when€we€prepare€the€order,Ïif€it€fails,€it€will€be€a€finding€of€fact?Ìà8 àMr.€Ô_ÔSpannÔ_Ô:à0 àà0 àWell€it€hasnððt€failed€yet€sir.€€Since€it€tied€3€to€3€on€votes€itÏwill€come€up€again€in€two€weeks€to€see€if€someone€wishes€toÏchange€their€vote.Ìà àMr.€Ô_ÔPetreyÔ_Ô:à0 àà0 àThe€action€will€come€up€again€in€thirteen€days.Ìà8 àMr.€Ô_ÔHowserÔ_Ô:à0 àà0 àThatððs€not€the€way€I€read€the€rules,€but€thatððs€O.K.Ìà àMr.€Ô_ÔPetreyÔ_Ô:à0 àà0 àIf€itððs€tied€up€on€votes€then,€.€.€.Ìà8 àMr.€Shepherd:à0 àThatððs€right.€€I€explained€it€to€you€the€other€day.€€It€stays€on€theÏdocket€for€two,€no.€€It€stays€on€the€docket€for€thirty€days€to€see€ifÏanyone€changes€their€vote.€€After€thirty€days,€and€no€one€changesÏtheir€vote€with€more€than€5€people€participated€in€the€case€then€itÏbecomes€a€denial€by€operation€of€law.Ì ®Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€:ÔÔ€:¼ÔÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$ÝÒ  ÒÒ X ÒÔ€:XÔà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThese€conditions,€which€reflected€commitments€Martin€had€already€made,€included:€(1)€Ïproviding€an€additional€westbound€lane€on€Harding€Road€beginning€at€Ô_ÔBosleyÔ_Ô€Springs€Road€andÏending€at€White€Bridge€Road,€(2)€constructing€a€new€curb€on€the€north€side€of€Harding€Road,€(3)Ïagreeing€upon€the€width€of€the€westbound€and€center€lanes€on€Harding€Road,€and€(4)€providing€aÏperformance€bond€for€the€highway€improvements.Ì æÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€:ÔÔ€:¼ÔÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$ÝÒ  ÒÒ X ÒÔ€:XÔà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_ÔLions€Head€Homeownersðð€Association€and€the€other€appellants€have€the€burden€ofÏdemonstrating€that€the€Board€exceeded€its€jurisdiction,€acted€illegally,€Ô_ÔarbitrarilyÔ_Ô,€or€withoutÏmaterial€evidence€to€support€its€decision.€€òòSeeóó€òòHoover,€Inc.€v.€Metropolitan€Bd.€of€ZoningÏAppeals,óó€924€S.W.2d€900,€904€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1996);€òòÔ_ÔHemontolorÔ_Ô€v.€Wilson€County€Bd.€ofÏZoning€Appeals,€óó883€S.W.2d€613,€616€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1994);€òòRoberts€v.€Knoxville€TransitÏLines,€óó36€Tenn.€App.€595,€612,€259€S.W.2d€883,€890€(1952).€€If€it€were€to€succeed€in€strikingÏthe€record€of€the€proceedings€before€the€Board,€it€would€have€a€difficult€time€overcoming€theÏpresumption€that€the€lower€tribunalððs€proceedings€and€decision€were€regular€and€valid.€€òòSeeóóÏòòTennessee€Cartage€Co.€v.€Ô_ÔPharrÔ_Ô,óó€184€Tenn.€414,€421,€199€S.W.2d€119,€122€(1947);€òòGay€v.€CityÏof€Somerville,óó€878€S.W.2d€124,€127€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1994).Ì ÆÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€:ÔÔ€:¼ÔÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$ÝÒ  ÒÒ X ÒÔ€:XÔà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_ÔTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€57„5„108(e)€(Supp.€1996)€requires€local€beer€boards€to€file€a€completeÏrecord€of€their€proceedings€ð ð[Ô_Ôi]mmediatelyÔ_Ô€upon€the€grant€of€the€writ€of€certiorari.ððÌ IÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€:ÔÔ€:¼ÔÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$ÝÒ  ÒÒ X ÒÔ€:XÔà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_ÔFor€the€purpose€of€the€zoning€ordinances,€ð ðFloor€area€ratioðð€means€ð ðthe€total€floor€area€onÏa€zone€lot,€divided€by€the€lot€area€of€that€zone€lot.€€For€example,€a€building€containing€twentyÏthousand€square€feet€of€floor€area€on€a€zone€lot€of€ten€thousand€square€feet€has€a€floor€area€rationÏof€2.0.ðð€€Metro.€Ord.€ðð€17.04.520€(1991).Ì ¯Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€:ÔÔ€:¼ÔÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$ÝÒ  ÒÒ X ÒÔ€:XÔà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_ÔSince€this€change€was€limited€only€to€MO€zoning€classifications,€it€ostensibly€benefittedÏonly€St.€Thomas€Hospital,€Memorial€Hospital,€Tennessee€Christian€Medical€Center,€and€MadisonÏHospital.Ì ÜÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€:ÔÔ€:¼ÔÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$ÝÒ  ÒÒ X ÒÔ€:XÔà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThis€provision€was€originally€designated€as€Metro.€Code€ðð€17.124.140(D).€€In€1994,€theÏMetropolitan€Council€deleted€Metro.€Code€ðð€17.124.140(C)€and€Ô_ÔredesignatedÔ_Ô€the€remainingÏsubsections€accordingly.Ì DÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€:ÔÔ€:¼ÔÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$ÝÒ  ÒÒ X ÒÔ€:XÔà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€Metropolitan€Planning€Commissionððs€staff€report€pointed€out€that€the€zoningÏordinance€permitted€a€similar€increase€in€the€floor€area€ratio€for€projects€on€property€in€OP€or€OGÏclassifications.€€Metro.€Code€ðð€17.64.020(B)€(1992)€permits€an€0.50€maximum€floor€area€ratio€inÏthese€districts;€however,€Metro.€Code€ðð€17.124.380€(1992)€permits€a€floor€area€ratio€ð ðup€to€.75"Ïunder€certain€conditions.€€While€the€language€used€in€Metro.€Code€ðð€17.124.380€is€clearer€thanÏthat€found€in€Metro.€Code€ðð€17.124.140(C),€the€language€in€Metro.€Code€ðð€17.€124.140(C)€hasÏthe€same€effect.Ì ©Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€:ÔÔ€:¼ÔÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$ÝÒ  ÒÒ X ÒÔ€:XÔà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€relevance€and€materiality€of€the€April€20,€1995€letter€is€now€even€further€underminedÏby€the€Commissionerððs€January€23,€1996€letter€approving€the€plans€for€improving€Harding€Road.ÌPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'hStyl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÒ  h HD: Geneva ÒÒ  h HD: Geneva ÒÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€:ÔÔ€:¼ÔÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÒ ° ÒÒ X ÒÔ_ÔÒ  ÒÒ X ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ  ÑÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ€ÑÑ7€¾¼¼ddÈ7ÑÑ  ÑÑ  Ñ›Þ ÞÌà@ àÔ€:„Ôò òIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÌà@ àMIDDLE€SECTION€AT€NASHVILLE̜ـ ÙßR€=?<A1-j|ñþâ` ç `€€@ÿRß›ÌÔ€:¼ÔÌó óLIONS€HEAD€HOMEOWNERSððà àà à)ÌASSOCIATION,€A€not€for€profit€œTennessee)›ÌCorporation,€WHITE€BRIDGE€œ€€€€à à›à à)ÌNEIGHBORHOOD€ASSOCIATION,€INC.,à à)ÌFRIENDS€OF€RICHLAND€CREEK,€INC.,à à)ÌMIKE€LAMB,€and€THE€DOMINICANà à)ÌCAMPUS,à àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àPlaintiffs/Ô_ÔAppellantsÔ_Ô,à àà àà à)à àDavidson€ChanceryÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àNo.€95„2071„IÌVS.à àà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àAppeal€No.ÌMETROPOLITAN€BOARD€OF€ZONINGà à)à à01A01„9611„CH„00505ÌAPPEALS,€METROPOLITANà àà àà à)ÌGOVERNMENT€OF€NASHVILLE,à àà à)ÌDAVIDSON€COUNTY,€TENNESSEE,à à)Ìand€THE€MARTIN€COMPANIES,€INC.,à à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àDefendants/Ô_ÔAppelleesÔ_Ô.à àà àà à)ÌÌÌà@ àAPPEAL€FROM€THE€CHANCERY€COURT€FOR€DAVIDSON€COUNTYÌà@ àAT€NASHVILLE,€TENNESSEEÌÌà@ àTHE€HONORABLE€IRVIN€H.€KILCREASE,€JR.,€CHANCELLORÌÌÌòòFor€the€Plaintiffs/AppeÔ_ÔllantsÔ_Ôóó:à àà àòòFor€Metropolitan€BoÔ_Ôard€of€ZoningÔ_ÔóóÌà àà àà àà àà àà àòòAppeals€and€Metropolitan€GovernmentóóÌGeorge€E.€Barrettà àà àà àà àòòof€Nashville€and€Davidson€Countyóó:ÌPhillip€A.€PurcellÌBarrett,€Johnston€&€Parsleyà àà àThomas€G.€CrossÌNashville,€Tennesseeà àà àà àNashville,€TennesseeÌÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àòòFor€The€Martin€Companies,€Inc.óó:ÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àHugh€C.€Howser,€Jr.Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àTrabue,€Sturdivant€&€DeWittÌà àà àà àà àà àà àNashville,€TennesseeÌÌÌà@ àÔ€:„Ôò òAFFIRMED€AND€REMANDEDó óÌÌÔ€:¼ÔÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àWILLIAM€C.€KOCH,€JR.,€JUDGEÇÑ H ÑÑ ì ÑÓ€ÓÔ€:„Ôà@ àò òòòO€P€I€N€I€O€Nóóó óÌÌÔ€:¼Ôà àThis€appeal€stems€from€a€decision€of€the€Metropolitan€Board€of€ZoningÏAppeals€to€grant€a€conditional€use€permit€for€a€medical€office€building€andÏparking€garage€adjacent€to€St.€Thomas€Hospital.€€The€homeownersðð€association€ofÏa€neighboring€condominium€development€and€other€parties€who€opposed€theÏproject€filed€a€petition€for€a€writ€of€certiorari€in€the€Chancery€Court€forÏDavidson€County.€€The€trial€court€heard€the€case€without€a€jury€and€upheld€theÏBoardððs€decision€to€grant€the€conditional€use€permit.€€On€this€appeal,€the€projectððsÏopponents€take€issue€with€the€procedures€followed€by€the€Board€in€granting€theÏconditional€use€permit€and€also€assert€that€the€project€does€not€comply€with€theÏZoning€Ordinances€for€the€Metropolitan€Government€of€Nashville€and€DavidsonÏCounty.€€We€affirm.ÌÌà@ àò òI.€ó óÌÌà àThe€Knights€of€Columbus€Council€544€maintain€their€clubhouse€on€a€6.2Ïacre€tract€on€Ô_ÔBosleyÔ_Ô€Springs€RoadÔ_Ô× ƒ@ ××  ×Ô_Ô€immediately€behind€St.€Thomas€Hospital€inÏNashville.€€The€property€adjoins€Ô_ÔRichlandÔ_Ô€Creek€and€is€located€in€a€floodplain.Ô_Ô× ƒA ××  ×Ô_Ô€ÍIt€is€also€in€a€district€zoned€MO€(Medical€office€and€service€district).× ƒB ××  ×€€TheÏMartin€Companies,€Inc.€(ð ðMartinðð),€a€Nashville€developer,€obtained€an€option€forÏthe€property€intending€to€construct€a€ten€story,€261,000€square€foot€medicalÏoffice€building€and€400,000€square€foot€parking€garage.€€However,€before€itÏcould€begin€construction,€Martin€was€Ñ Ü ÑÑ ° Ñobliged€to€obtain€a€conditional€use€permitÏfrom€the€Metropolitan€Board€of€Zoning€Appeals.Ìà àThe€Board€of€Zoning€Appeals€conducted€a€public€hearing€concerning€theÏproject€on€March€30,€1995.€€A€representative€of€the€Knights€of€Columbus€andÏseveral€representatives€of€Martin€spoke€in€favor€of€the€development€and€answeredÏthe€Board€membersðð€questions€about€the€projectððs€impact€on€the€surroundingÏcommunity.€€Other€€property€owners€and€organizations,€including€St.€ThomasÏHospital,€the€Dominican€Campus,€the€Friends€of€Ô_ÔRichlandÔ_Ô€Creek,€the€CherokeeÏPark€Neighborhood,€the€White€Bridge€Neighborhood€Association,€and€theÏKenner€Avenue€Neighborhood€Group€opposed€the€project€because€of€concernsÏover€its€impact€on€area€traffic.ÌÌà àÔ_ÔAtÔ_Ô€the€time€of€the€hearing,€the€cityððs€Traffic€and€Parking€Division€hadÏapproved€the€project€subject€to€several€conditions,€even€though€the€MetropolitanÏPlanning€Commission€had€not€given€the€project€a€favorable€recommendation.€ÏThe€Tennessee€Department€of€Transportation€had€not€acted€on€Martinððs€proposedÏmodifications€to€Harding€Road.€€At€the€close€of€the€proof,€the€chair€of€the€BoardÍof€Zoning€Appeals€moved€to€approve€the€conditional€use€permit.€€Three€BoardÏmembers€voted€in€favor€of€the€project,€three€voted€against,€and€one€memberÏabstained.€€After€some€discussion€concerning€the€voting€procedure,Ô_Ô× ƒC ××  ×Ô_Ô€the€Board€ofÏZoning€Appeals€voted€to€defer€further€consideration€of€the€project€until€April€27,Ï1995,€in€the€hope€that€the€Tennessee€Department€of€Transportation€would€haveÏcompleted€its€Advanced€Planning€Report.ÌÌà àThe€Department€of€Transportationððs€Advanced€Planning€Report€had€notÏbeen€released€by€the€time€the€Board€of€Zoning€Appeals€reconvened€on€April€27,Ï1995.€€After€considering€the€comments€of€two€members€of€the€MetropolitanÏCouncil€who€opposed€the€project,€the€Board,€by€a€vote€of€five€to€two,€grantedÏMartin€a€conditional€use€permit€subject€to€several€conditions€intended€to€lessenÏthe€projectððs€impact€on€the€traffic€in€the€area.Ô_Ô× ƒD ××  ×Ô_Ô€€With€regard€to€the€projectððsÏcompliance€with€the€Advance€Planning€Report,€the€Board€member€who€moved€toÍgrant€the€conditional€use€permit€explained€that€ð ðif€the€advanced€traffic€study€hasÏsomething€in€it€that€their€proposed€plan€would€not€conform€to€then,€by€the€veryÏnature€of€this€motion,€they€donððt€have€a€conditional€use€permit.ðð€€ÌÌà àThe€Lions€Head€Homeownersðð€Association€and€other€opponents€of€theÏproject€filed€suit€in€the€Chancery€Court€for€Davidson€County€seeking€review€ofÏthe€decision€of€the€Board€of€Zoning€Appeals.€€The€trial€court€considered€theÏrecord€made€before€the€Board€and€upheld€the€decision€to€grant€the€conditionalÏuse€permit.€€The€opponents€have€appealed€to€this€court.ÌÌà@ àò òII.ó óÌà@ àòòò òThe€Contents€of€the€Record€on€Appealó óóóÌÌà àAt€the€outset,€we€take€up€Lions€Head€Homeownersðð€Associationððs€assertionÏthat€the€trial€court€erred€by€denying€its€motion€to€strike€the€record€of€theÏproceedings€before€the€Board€of€Zoning€Appeals€because€it€was€not€timely€filed.€ÏWe€need€not€tarry€long€with€the€seemingly€self„defeating€argumentÔ_Ô× ƒE ××  ×Ô_Ô€because€theÏBoard€filed€the€record€as€soon€as€practicable€and€because€Lions€HeadÏHomeownersðð€Association€was€not€prejudiced€by€the€time€taken€by€the€Board€toÏprepare€and€file€the€record.à àÌÌà àTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€27„9„109(a)€(1980)€provides€that€boards€whoseÏdecisions€are€being€reviewed€in€a€certiorari€proceeding€file€a€complete€record€ofÏthe€proceedings€with€the€reviewing€court€ð ðimmediately€upon€the€grant€of€a€writ.ðð€ÏWhile€we€have€not€had€occasion€to€construe€this€particular€requirement,€theÏTennessee€Supreme€Court€has€construed€similar€languageÔ_Ô× ƒF ××  ×Ô_Ô€to€require€that€theÏrecord€be€filed€ð ðas€soon€as€practicable.ðð€€òòCooper€v.€Alcohol€Ô_ÔCommððnÔ_Ôóó,€745ÏS.W.2d€278,€281€(Tenn.€1988).€€The€supreme€court€also€indicated€that€its€decisionÏto€set€aside€the€reversal€of€a€local€administrative€agencyððs€decision€because€ofÏdelay€in€filing€the€record€was€heavily€influenced€by€the€lack€of€prejudice€to€theÏpetitioner.€€òòSee€Cooper€v.€Alcohol€Ô_ÔCommððnÔ_Ôóó,€745€S.W.2d€at€282.ÌÌà àIn€this€case,€the€Board€of€Zoning€Appeals€filed€the€record€with€the€trialÏcourt€approximately€five€and€one„half€months€after€the€projectððs€opponents€filedÏtheir€petition€for€writ€of€certiorari.€€The€record€was€492€pages€long,€andÏincluded€over€two€hundred€pages€of€oral€testimony€that€the€Board€was€requiredÏto€have€transcribed.€€The€record€shows€that€the€Boardððs€staff€began€compiling€theÏrecord€shortly€after€the€petition€for€writ€of€certiorari€was€filed€and€that€theÏrecord€had€been€filed€with€the€trial€court€for€approximately€six€months€beforeÏthe€trial€court€hearing.€€The€projectððs€opponents€have€not€claimed€that€they€wereÏprejudiced€by€this€delay,€and€indeed,€it€is€difficult€for€us€to€conceive€how€theyÏcould€have€been€prejudiced€because€the€project€has€not€moved€forward€since€theseÏproceedings€were€commenced.€€Accordingly,€we€find€that€the€trial€courtÏcorrectly€denied€the€motion€to€strike€the€record€of€the€proceedings€before€theÏBoard€of€Zoning€Appeals.ÌÌà@ àò òIII.ó óÌà@ àòòò òApplication€of€Metro.€Code€ðð€17.124.140(C)€(1994)ó óóóÌÌà àLions€Head€Homeownersðð€Association€and€the€projectððs€other€opponentsÏtake€issue€with€the€Board€of€Zoning€Appealsðð€decision€that€Martin€was€notÏrequired€to€satisfy€the€three€requirements€in€Metro.€Code€ðð€17.124.140(C)€andÏwith€its€alternative€conclusion€that€the€project€actually€satisfied€theseÏrequirements.€Our€primary€inquiry€concerns€the€applicability€of€Metro.€Code€ððÏ17.124.140(C)ððs€requirements€to€this€project.€€Because€we€have€determined€thatÏthese€requirements€do€not€apply€to€Martinððs€project,€we€need€not€address€theÏlatter€issue.ÌÌà@ àò òA.ó óÌÌà àPrior€to€1992,€the€zoning€ordinances€permitted€owners€of€property€in€anÏMO€zoning€classification€to€construct€certain€types€of€buildings€and€structuresÏwhose€maximum€floor€area€ratio× ƒG ××  ×€did€not€exceed€1.0.€òòSeeóó€Metro.€Code€ððÏ17.64.020(B)€(1992).€€Property€owners€desiring€to€construct€one€of€theseÏbuildings€were€required€to€obtain€a€conditional€use€permit€from€the€Board€ofÏZoning€Appeals€and€thus€were€required€to€satisfy€the€Board€that€the€project:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 àà àA.à àIs€so€designed,€located,€and€proposed€to€beÏoperated€that€the€public€health,€safety€and€welfare€willÏbe€protected;Ìà8 àà8 àà àB.à àWill€not€adversely€affect€other€property€inÏthe€area€in€which€it€is€located;Ìà8 àà8 àà àC.à àIs€within€the€provision€of€ð ðconditional€usesððÏas€set€out€in€this€title;€andÌà8 àà8 àà àD.à àConforms€to€all€applicable€provisions€ofÏthis€title€for€the€district€in€which€it€is€to€be€located€andÏnecessary€for€public€convenience€in€that€location.ÌÌÓ€ÓMetro.€Code€ðð€17.124.040€(1995).€€The€zoning€ordinances,€as€they€read€at€theÏtime,€did€not€permit€any€project€whose€floor€area€ratio€exceeded€1.0.ÌÌà àIn€1992,€St.€Thomas€Hospital€requested€the€Metropolitan€Council€to€permitÏthe€construction€of€larger€buildings€on€smaller€lots€with€an€MO€zoningÏclassification.× ƒH ××  ×€€With€the€Metropolitan€Planning€Commissionððs€blessing,€theÏMetropolitan€Council€amended€the€zoning€ordinances€to€permit€projects€onÏproperty€with€an€MO€zoning€classification€whose€maximum€floor€area€ratio€didÏnot€exceed€1.5€subject€to€three€conditions€in€addition€to€those€already€contained€inÏMetro.€Code€ðð€17.124.040.€€This€amendment,€now€found€in€Metro.€Code€ððÏ17.124.140(C)Ô_Ô× ƒI ××  ×Ô_Ô€states,€in€part,€that€ÌÓÓà8 àà8 àà àIn€the€MO€district€the€board€may€authorize€siteÏdevelopment€plans€proposing€a€floor€area€ratio€of€up€toÏand€including€1.5,€provided€that:Ìà8 àà8 àà à1.à àThe€principal€access€of€the€facility€shall€beÏto€any€street€designated€on€the€major€street€plan€adoptedÏby€the€metropolitan€planning€commission;Ìà8 àà8 àà à2.à àThe€facility€shall€abut€or€be€across€a€publicÏright„of„way€from€areas€policied€by€the€general€plan€forÍeither€nonresidential,€mixed„use,€or€high„densityÏresidential€uses;Ìà8 àà8 àà à3.à àThe€application,€at€the€time€of€filing,€shallÏcontain€a€traffic€impact€study€that€has€been€approved€byÏthe€staff€of€the€traffic€and€parking€commission.€€TheÏrecommendations€of€the€staff€of€the€traffic€and€parkingÏcommission€shall€become€a€condition€of€the€approvalÏresolution€of€the€board.ÌÌÌÓ€Óà àEven€though€it€is€undisputed€that€the€floor€area€of€Martinððs€proposedÏproject€is€0.98,€the€Lions€Head€Homeownersðð€Association€and€the€projectððs€otherÏopponents€insist€that€Martin€must€satisfy€the€three€additional€requirements€inÏMetro.€Code€ðð€17.124.140(C).€€Thus,€we€must€determine€whether€the€phrase€ð ðupÏto€and€including€1.5"€in€Metro.€Code€ðð€17.124.140(C)€means€that€theÏrequirements€in€this€ordinance€apply€to€all€buildings€and€structures€constructedÏon€property€with€an€MO€zoning€classification€or€whether€it€means€that€theseÏrequirements€apply€only€to€projects€whose€floor€area€ratio€is€greater€than€1.0€butÏless€than€or€equal€to€1.5.ÌÌà@ àò òB.ó óÌÌà àThe€courts€construe€zoning€ordinances€using€the€same€principles€used€toÏconstrue€statutes.€€òòSee€City€of€Knoxville€v.€Brown,óó€195€Tenn.€501,€507,€260ÏS.W.2d€264,€267€(1953);€òòAnderson€County€v.€Remote€Landfill€Servs.,€Inc.,óó€833ÏS.W.2d€903,€908„09€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1991).€€Thus,€when€the€language€of€a€zoningÏordinance€is€clear,€the€courts€will€enforce€the€ordinance€as€written.€€If,€however,Ïthe€language€is€ambiguous,€the€courts€will€bring€to€bear€the€customaryÏinterpretational€canons€in€order€to€arrive€at€the€ordinanceððs€meaning.€€òòSeeÍÔ_ÔWhittemoreÔ_Ô€v.€Brentwood€Planning€Ô_ÔCommððnÔ_Ô,óó€835€S.W.2d€11,€15€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.Ï1992).€€ÌÌà àAccordingly,€the€courts€construe€zoning€ordinances€as€a€whole,€òòseeóóÏòòTennessee€Manufactured€Ô_ÔHousÔ_Ô.€Ô_ÔAssððnÔ_Ô€v.€Metropolitan€Ô_ÔGovððtÔ_Ô,óó€798€S.W.2d€254,Ï257€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1990),€and€give€their€words€their€natural€and€ordinaryÏmeaning€unless€the€ordinance€requires€otherwise.€€òòSeeóó€òòBoles€v.€City€ofÏChattanooga,óó€892€S.W.2d€416,€420€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1994).€€A€properÏconstruction€furthers€the€ordinanceððs€general€purposes,€òòseeóó€òòÔ_ÔJagendorfÔ_Ô€v.€City€ofÏMemphis,óó€520€S.W.2d€333,€335€(Tenn.€1974);€òòState€ex€rel.€Smith€v.€City€ofÏNashville,óó€51€Tenn.€App.€23,€29,€364€S.W.2d€106,€109€(1962),€but€at€the€sameÏtime€prevents€the€ordinance€from€being€applied€to€circumstances€beyond€itsÏscope.€€òòSeeóó€òòRed€Acres€Imp.€Club,€Inc.€v.€Ô_ÔBurkhalterÔ_Ô,óó€193€Tenn.€79,€84„85,€241ÏS.W.2d€921,€923€(1951).€€€ÌÌà àThe€courts€must€also€construe€zoning€ordinances€with€some€deferenceÏtoward€a€property€ownerððs€right€to€the€free€use€of€his€or€her€property.€€òòSee€StateÏex€rel.€Morris€v.€City€of€Nashville,óó€207€Tenn.€672,€680,€343€S.W.2d€847,€850Ï(1961);€òòBoles€v.€City€of€Chattanooga,óó€892€S.W.2d€at€420;€òòState€ex€rel.€Ô_ÔSCAÔ_ÔÏChem.€Ô_ÔServsÔ_Ô.,€Inc.€v.€Sanidas,óó€681€S.W.2d€557,€562€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1984).ÏAccordingly,€the€courts€should€resolve€ambiguities€in€a€zoning€ordinance€in€favorÏof€a€property€ownerððs€unrestricted€use€of€his€or€her€property.€€òòSee€State€ex€rel.ÏWright€v.€City€of€Oak€Hill,óó€204€Tenn.€353,€356,€321€S.W.2d€557,€559€(1959).€€Ìà àÌà@ àò òC.ó óÌÌà àThe€language€in€Metro.€Code€ðð€17.124.140(C)€empowering€the€Board€ofÏZoning€Appeals€to€authorize€projects€with€a€floor€area€ratio€ð ðup€to€and€includingÏ1.5"€is€amenable€to€two€interpretations.€€First,€it€could€mean€that€theÏrequirements€in€Metro.€Code€ðð€17.124.140(C)€apply€to€all€projects€on€propertyÏwith€an€MO€zoning€classification€with€a€floor€area€ratio€equal€to€or€less€than€1.5.€ÏSecond,€it€could€mean€that€the€requirements€in€Metro.€Code€ðð€17.124.140(C)Ïapply€only€to€projects€on€property€with€an€MO€zoning€classification€with€a€floorÏarea€ratio€greater€than€1.0.€€The€Board€of€Zoning€Appeals€and€the€trial€courtÏfollowed€the€latter€interpretation,€and€we€find€this€interpretation€to€be€mostÏconsistent€with€the€language€and€purposes€of€the€zoning€ordinances.ÌÌà àMetro.€Code€ðð€17.124.140(C)€should€be€considered€in€pari€materia€with€theÏother€zoning€ordinances€applicable€to€property€with€an€MO€zoning€classificationÏand€in€light€of€the€history€of€the€ordinanceððs€enactment.€€In€this€context,€itÏbecomes€clear€that€the€purpose€of€Metro.€Code€ðð€17.124.140(C)€was€to€imposeÏadditional€requirements€only€on€projects€in€MO€districts€whose€floor€area€ratioÏexceeds€1.0,€not€to€impose€additional€requirements€on€projects€whose€floor€areaÏratio€is€less€than€1.0.€€The€additional€requirements€in€Metro.€Code€ððÏ17.124.140(C)€relate€to€the€anticipated€increased€burden€on€traffic€that€could€beÏcaused€by€higher€density€developments.€€Both€the€ordinanceððs€caption€and€theÏMetropolitan€Planning€Commissionððs€analysis€state€that€its€purpose€was€to€permitÏan€increase€in€the€floor€area€ratio€from€1.0€to€1.5€under€strictly€controlledÍconditions.× ƒJ ××  ×ÌÌà àMetro.€Code€ðð€17.124.140(C)€applies€only€to€projects€whose€floor€areaÏratio€exceeds€1.0.€€Since€the€floor€area€ratio€of€Martinððs€proposed€project€is€0.98,Ïthe€Board€of€Zoning€Appeals€correctly€determined€that€Martin€was€not€requiredÏto€demonstrate€compliance€with€the€three€conditions€in€Metro.€Code€ððÏ17.124.140(C).ÌÌà@ àò òIV.ó óÌà@ àòòò òThe€Boardððs€Voting€Procedureó óóóÌÌà àLions€Head€Homeownersðð€Association€also€insists€that€the€voting€procedureÏused€by€the€Board€of€Zoning€Appeals€was€inconsistent€with€Metro.€Code€ððÏ17.16.060€and€that€the€failure€of€the€proposal€to€receive€four€or€more€votes€at€theÏMarch€30,€1995€meeting€necessarily€means€that€Martinððs€request€for€a€conditionalÏuse€permit€was€denied.€€We€have€concluded€that€the€Boardððs€voting€procedureÏwas€consistent€with€the€zoning€ordinance€and€that€the€Boardððs€action€on€April€27,Ï1995€effectively€approved€Martinððs€request€for€a€conditional€use€permit.ÌÌà àThe€zoning€ordinances€requires€the€Board€of€Zoning€Appeals€to€adopt€rulesÏof€procedure€for€the€conduct€of€its€meetings.€€Metro.€Code€ðð€17.16.060(A)Í(1992)€specifically€requires€the€Board€to€adopt€a€rule€of€procedure€governingÏvoting€that€requiresÌÓÓà8 àà8 àà àThe€presence€of€four€members€shall€constitute€aÏquorum€and€the€concurring€vote€of€at€least€fourÏmembers€of€the€board€shall€be€necessary€to€deny€orÏgrant€any€application€before€the€board.€€In€the€event€thatÏfive€or€more€members€are€present,€failure€to€receiveÏfour€concurring€votes€within€thirty€days€of€the€publicÏhearing€shall€be€deemed€a€denial.€€In€the€event€there€areÏless€than€five€members€present€and€failure€to€receiveÏfour€concurring€votes€within€thirty€days€of€the€publicÏhearing,€then€the€application€shall€again€be€advertisedÏand€set€for€public€hearing€at€the€next€regular€meeting€atÏwhich€said€application€shall€be€eligible.ÌÓ€ÓÌIn€response€to€the€ordinanceððs€directions,€the€Board€adopted€Rule€9(C)€whichÏstates:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 àà àWhere€an€application€does€not€receive€four€(4)Ïvotes€of€approval€or€denial,€the€application€shall€beÏconsidered€at€all€subsequent€meetings€held€within€theÏfollowing€thirty€(30)€days.€€At€such€subsequent€meeting,Ïa€member€may€change€his„her€vote€or€a€member€notÏpresent€at€the€original€hearing€on€the€case€may€add€his„her€vote€if€he„she€has€listened€to€the€tape€recording€ofÏthe€public€hearing€and€reviewed€the€entire€file.ÌÓ€ÓÌà àLions€Head€Homeownersðð€Association€interprets€Metro.€Code€ððÏ17.16.060(A)€€to€mean€that€an€application€for€a€conditional€use€permit€must€beÏdeemed€denied€if€it€receives€less€than€four€favorable€votes€at€any€meeting€heldÏwithin€thirty€days€of€the€public€hearing.€€Relying€on€this€interpretation,€LionsÏHead€Homeownersðð€Association€asserts€that€Martinððs€application€for€a€conditionalÏuse€permit€was€effectively€denied€on€March€30,€1995€when€it€received€only€threeÏfavorable€votes.€€ÌÌà àThe€interpretation€of€Metro.€Code€ðð€17.16.060(A)€advanced€by€Lions€HeadÏHomeownersðð€Association€is€at€odds€with€the€ordinanceððs€plain€and€ordinaryÏmeaning€and€would€cause€internal€inconsistencies€in€the€ordinance€itself.€€UnderÏboth€Metro.€Code€ðð€17.16.060(A)€and€the€Boardððs€Rule€9(C),€an€application€isÏdeemed€passed€if€it€receives€four€or€more€votes€at€any€meeting€held€within€thirtyÏdays€of€the€public€hearing.€€The€Board€approved€Martinððs€application€for€aÏconditional€use€permit€on€April€27,€1995€Ô_Ôby€aÔ_Ô€vote€of€five€to€two.€€Because€thisÏvote€was€taken€within€thirty€days€of€the€public€hearing,€it€complies€with€bothÏMetro.€Code€ðð€17.16.060(A)€and€Rule€9(C).€€ÌÌà@ àò òV.ó óÌà@ àòòò òThe€Boardððs€Refusal€to€Reopen€the€Recordó óóóÌÌà àAs€a€final€matter,€Lions€Head€Homeownersðð€Association€and€the€projectððsÏother€opponents€take€issue€with€the€Boardððs€refusal€to€reopen€the€record€to€permitÏthem€to€file€additional€evidence.€€They€insist€that€the€Boardððs€decision€wasÏarbitrary€and€capricious€and€deprived€them€of€a€fair€hearing€because€the€BoardÏreopened€the€record€to€receive€other€evidence.€€Since€the€substance€of€theÏevidence€offered€by€the€projectððs€opponents€was€largely€immaterial€to€whetherÏMartin€met€the€requirements€for€obtaining€a€conditional€use€permit,€we€haveÏconcluded€that€any€error€on€the€part€of€the€Board€did€not€affect€the€outcome€ofÏthe€proceeding€and€was,€at€most,€harmless.ÌÌà@ àò òA.ó óÌÌà àMuch€of€the€discussion€at€the€March€30,€1995€hearing€concerned€the€effectÏof€the€project€on€area€traffic€and€whether€Martinððs€proposed€improvements€toÏHarding€Road€would€be€consistent€with€an€Advance€Planning€Report€beingÏprepared€by€the€Tennessee€Department€of€Transportation.€€When€it€became€clearÏthat€the€project€would€not€be€approved€by€four€or€more€board€members,€theÏBoard€decided€to€defer€further€consideration€of€the€project€until€April€27,€1995.ÌÌà àIn€an€effort€to€buttress€their€position,€the€projectððs€opponents€convinced€theÏCommissioner€of€the€Tennessee€Department€of€Transportation€to€send€a€letterÏdated€April€20,€1995€to€the€Metropolitan€Department€of€Public€Works,€stating,€inÏpart,€that€ð ðthis€Department€will€not€approve€the€plan€proposed€by€RPM€&ÏAssociates€for€improvement€to€US€70€(Harding€Road).€€The€plan€has€substandardÏtraffic€lane€widths€(nine€and€ten€foot€lanes)€and€could€be€totally€contrary€to€theÏrecommendations€of€the€Advance€Planning€Report€(APR).ðð€€Even€though€counselÏfor€the€opponents€sent€a€copy€of€the€Commissionerððs€letter€to€each€boardÏmember,€the€Board€declined€to€reopen€the€evidentiary€record€to€include€thisÏletter.€€However,€the€Board€permitted€its€staff€to€add€an€April€27,€1995€letterÏfrom€the€Department€of€Transportation€stating€that€the€Advance€Planning€ReportÏð ðhas€not€been€completed€by€Ô_ÔTDOTÔ_Ô€at€this€time.ðð€€ÌÌà àDuring€its€consideration€of€this€case,€the€trial€court€permitted€Martin€toÏsupplement€the€record€with€a€letter€dated€January€23,€1996,€from€theÏCommissioner€of€the€Department€of€Transportation€stating€that€the€DepartmentÏhad€approved€Martinððs€plans€for€the€improvement€of€Harding€Road€dated€OctoberÏ25,€1995.€The€trial€court€also€permitted€the€opponents€of€the€project€toÏsupplement€the€record€with€copies€of€the€Commissionerððs€April€20,€1995€letter€asÍwell€as€a€March€24,€1995€letter€from€the€Executive€Director€of€the€MetropolitanÏPlanning€Commission€stating€that€the€Commission€recommended€that€MartinððsÏapplication€for€a€conditional€use€permit€be€denied.€€ÌÌà@ àò òB.ó óÌÌà àGovernmental€agencies€conducting€adjudicatory€hearings€are€not€requiredÏto€leave€the€evidentiary€record€open€indefinitely.€€They€have€the€discretion€toÏdecide€when€the€record€should€be€closed€and€whether€the€record€should€beÏreopened€for€the€presentation€of€new€evidence.€€òòSeeóó€òòNLRB€v.€Staten€Island€HotelÏLtd.€Partnership,óó€101€F.3d€858,€861€(2d€Cir.€1996);€òòUpper€Ô_ÔMorelandÔ_Ô€TownshipÏDist.€v.€Pennsylvania€Labor€Relations€Bd.,óó€695€A.2d€904,€907€(Pa.€Ô_ÔCommwÔ_Ô.€Ct.Ï1997);€òòCity€of€El€Paso€v.€Public€Ô_ÔUtilÔ_Ô.€Commððn,óó€609€S.W.2d€574,€578€(Tex.€Civ.ÏApp.€1980).€€Decisions€with€regard€to€reopening€the€record€should€take€intoÏconsideration€(1)€the€status€of€the€decision„making€process,€(2)€the€relevance€andÏmateriality€of€the€evidence€sought€to€be€added,€and€(3)€the€propriety€of€affordingÏthe€parties€an€opportunity€to€respond€to€the€new€evidence.ÌÌà àThe€Board€of€Zoning€Appeals€actually€reopened€the€record€in€this€caseÏwhen€it€reconvened€on€April€27,€1995.€€It€permitted€two€members€of€theÏMetropolitan€Council€to€speak€in€opposition€to€the€project,€and€it€accepted€a€letterÏfrom€the€Department€of€Transportation€confirming€what€the€Board€already€knewÏ„€that€the€Advance€Planning€Report€œhad›€not€yet€been€completed.€€Since€the€BoardÏadmitted€additional€evidence€and€had€not€yet€decided€whether€to€grant€MartinððsÏrequest€for€a€conditional€use€permit,€it€should€have€also€permitted€the€projectððsÍopponents€to€file€with€the€record€the€April€20,€1995€letter€from€theÏCommissioner€of€the€Department€of€Transportation.ÌÌà àThe€Boardððs€refusal€to€include€the€April€20,€1995€letter€in€the€record€doesÏnot€necessarily€mean€that€the€projectððs€opponents€did€not€receive€a€fair€hearing€orÏthat€the€Board€acted€arbitrarily€and€capriciously€when€it€granted€the€conditionalÏuse€permit.€€The€Board€members€were€aware€of€the€substance€of€the€April€20,Ï1995€letter€because€the€attorney€representing€the€projectððs€opponents€had€mailed€aÏcopy€to€them€prior€to€the€hearing.€€The€relevance€of€the€letter€was,€at€most,Ïmarginal€since€prior€state€approval€of€a€projectððs€proposed€road€improvements€isÏnot€required€for€obtaining€a€conditional€use€permit.€€All€parties€present€at€theÏApril€27,€1995€hearing€understood€that€the€project€could€not€proceed,€even€if€theÏBoard€granted€the€conditional€use€permit,€without€eventual€approval€by€theÏTennessee€Department€of€Transportation.× ƒK ××  ×ÌÌà àIn€summary,€the€Board€of€Zoning€Appeals€should€have€included€the€AprilÏ20,€1995€letter€in€its€formal€record.€€However,€the€Boardððs€failure€to€do€so€doesÏnot€require€us€to€overturn€its€decision€to€grant€the€conditional€use€permit.€€TheÏdecision€with€regard€to€opening€the€record€to€include€the€April€20,€1995€letterÏdid€not€affect€the€outcome€of€the€proceeding,€and€thus€the€projectððs€opponentsÏsuffered€no€prejudice€by€the€Boardððs€action.€€Ì̛̜ÌÌÌà@ àò òVI.€ó óÌÌà àWe€affirm€the€trial€courtððs€judgment€upholding€the€decision€of€theÏMetropolitan€Board€of€Zoning€Appeals€to€grant€The€Martin€CompaniesððÏapplication€for€a€conditional€use€permit.€€We€also€remand€the€case€to€the€trialÏcourt€for€whatever€other€proceedings€may€be€required,€and€we€tax€the€costs€ofÏthis€appeal,€jointly€and€severally,€to€Lions€Head€Homeownersðð€Association,€WhiteÏBridge€Neighborhood€Association,€Inc.,€Friends€of€Ô_ÔRichlandÔ_Ô€Creek,€Inc.,€MikeÏLamb,€and€The€Ô_ÔDominicanÔ_Ô€Campus,€and€their€surety€for€which€execution,€ifÏnecessary,€may€issue.ÌÌÓÓà àà àà àà àà àà àà à____________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà àWILLIAM€C.€KOCH,€JR.,€JUDGEÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌ__________________________________ÌSAMUEL€L.€LEWIS,€JUDGEÌÌÌ__________________________________ÌDAVID€H.€WELLES,€SPECIAL€œJUDGE›