ÿWPCB& „¾{‘`L⓾sôòQŽfí-úÛ„žÖíPSÖ›¼ãÃ>:@8Ÿ@Çè&†îI;ÿ–+pE_†GB Z¶Æèqií>à t2Wîk•”«ÚR[1ÜÝ¥FLúßv)*±\N@ÍsÑ ±§.Þì(Íwê~þ b0Š°®ŸƒïkØ©-߱Б %*ôu¯ô.¢ó¤ä® n‹oB¡X™}×x®Ü¿Á$¹Ý›ØKßáKÐÄU â6î0ÿVÒQ-Ù‡u8}H＋HÕUªræø^9u²Êʲ6åÁg<ÕP2ÄÉ,:E2Á’ÉÌIҨħ“–øI\’»^€‡*2ƒÂãšÇ§h€ÅŠ¹~JÍYGï¤9gÄúŸX7D †%˜‹¡¿þóÇÍ[”±’|NU‚†|ÇUæf=ê°¸2Ý!ó½ðí0ȇâ" –ä¢ÝmAgc¸ô®Àä5yÖ±ç^\™6äïŠ b#Á\ % ^ # 0ˆ/ U2N· w 4 z Ò— i x mz z‘ Æ ÆÑ Æ—Æ] 0 D#Ng\iÄÅE‰¬‹a7û˜˜˜“}°°°-!-!-!-!-!-!-!-!-!-!-!-!-!-!b5!5!5!5!5!5!5!5!5!5!5!5!5!5!5!5!5!5!5!5!5!5!5!5!5!5!5!5!5!5!5!5!5!5!5!5! 0 ë=!=!=!=! B("(" 0¤E" D5é" D-# 0KK#K# AS–#Æé# 0¤¯$ 0DS% A«—%˜HP LaserJet 4050 Series PCL 6ÈÈ,,,,ÈÈ0»Ðn-s (`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman Regular9‚±,ñ¢ ˜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|x ÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ pÝ ƒR $ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôø…ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€newspaper€notice€is€not€in€the€record€before€us.€€In€their€sworn€complaint,€the€Shafers€alleged€that,€ð ðTheÐ ° ÐDefendant€City€posted€a€notice€of€a€hearing€on€the€variance€set€for€May€16,€2000€in€the€local€newspaper.ððLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó RÝ ƒR $ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôø…ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔIn€the€appeal€before€us,€the€Ô_ÔShafersÔ_Ô€do€not€assert€any€due€process€or€equal€protection€claims€unrelated€to€theÐ ° Ðrelief€they€seek€through€the€writ€of€certiorari.€ ºÝ ƒR $ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôø…ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThere€is€no€ordinance€in€place€which€requires€the€City€to€place€such€a€sign€on€property€owned€by€a€personÐ ° Ðseeking€a€variance€and€no€procedure€or€practice€in€Dickson€that€requires€applicants€for€variances€to€provide€actual€noticeÐ tÄ Ðof€a€proposed€variance€to€adjoining€landowners. ¢Ý ƒR $ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú7Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôø…ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔMr.€Shafer€requested€a€setback€variance€for€a€parcel€of€property€adjacent€and€to€the€west€of€the€parcel€on€whichÐ ° Ðhis€Storage€Building€rests,€which€is€occupied€by€Maryððs€Music,€a€business€operated€by€Shaferððs€wife.€€The€StorageÐ tÄ ÐBuilding€is€directly€adjacent€to€the€unimproved€lot€in€question€in€the€case€herein.€€Maryððs€Music€rests€upon€two€separateÐ 8ˆ Ðlots€which€together€comprise€the€parcel€which€was€the€subject€of€the€variance€request€in€1995.€€The€Ô_ÔShafersÔ_Ô€placed€onlyÐ üL Ðone€address€on€the€application€for€the€variance,€and€no€sign€was€placed€on€the€parcel€to€advise€the€public€of€theÐ À Ðapplication€for€the€variance€prior€to€the€Boardððs€approval€of€the€variance.€€ WÝ ƒR $ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú8Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôø…ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€Board€herein€granted€the€variance€on€the€basis€of€the€slope€of€the€lot€rather€than€the€size.€€The€decisionÐ ° Ðof€the€Board,€therefore,€was€not€based€on€the€inaccurate€information€in€the€site€plan. ñÝ ƒR $ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôø…ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€petition€filed€by€the€Ô_ÔShafersÔ_Ô€alleged€that€the€decision€of€the€Board€was€arbitrary€and€capricious€and€that,Ð ° Ðbased€upon€the€information€presented€to€the€City,€the€Board€had€no€basis€for€issuing€the€variance€because€the€decisionÐ tÄ Ðwas€made€notwithstanding:€(1)€an€inaccurate€survey€of€the€lot;€(2)€failure€by€Premier€to€show€that€the€slope€of€the€lotÐ 8ˆ Ðcreated€a€hardship€that€would€be€remedied€by€the€grant€of€the€variance;€and€(3)€failure€by€Premier€to€show€the€allegedÐ üL Ðhardships€were€not€self„imposed€by€the€design€of€the€proposed€structure.€€The€Ô_ÔShafersÔ_Ô€alleged€that€the€actions€of€theÐ À ÐBoard€violated€their€rights€to€due€process€and€equal€protection.€Ô‡XaXòôø…ÔÔ#†ôø…òXXa¯#Ô Ý ƒR $ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôø…ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔIn€òòAdvanced€Sales,€Inc.€v.€Wilson€County€Bd.€of€Zoning€App.óó,€No.€01„A„01„9805„CH„00245,€1999€Tenn.€App.Ð ° ÐLEXIS€333€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€May€28,€1999)€(no€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€11€application€filed),€this€court€held€that€a€boardððsÐ tÄ Ðdecision€(in€that€case€denying€an€application€for€a€zoning€variance)€was€entered€on€the€date€of€the€Boardððs€action,€notÐ 8ˆ Ðwhen€the€minutes€of€that€meeting€were€later€approved.€€The€Shafers€do€not€argue€the€variance€was€effective€only€afterÐ üL Ðthe€June€approval€of€the€May€16€minutes.€€Their€September€21€filing€was€more€than€60€days€after€that€event€also. sÝ ƒR $ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú6Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôø…ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔBecause€the€Boardððs€decision€granting€the€variance€became€final€in€July,€it€is€questionable€that€the€Board€hadÐ ° Ðauthority€or€jurisdiction€to€reconsider€its€final€decision€after€that€date€in€the€circumstances€presented€here. - ù-(|G2 $¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€[í»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôø…ò»»Ô d(|3‡”$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€[í»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV)ÿÿ!dxdx)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3‡”$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€[í»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€[í»»ddÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÔ€¼[í»»»ÔÑ8€aXXdì»»d8ÑÑ  Ñà@ü ü ìàÔ‡î^ü[íÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@kk$ìàAT€NASHVILLEÔ#†¼[í»îî^ü #ԈРÖ& ÐÓ  ÓSeptember€7,€2001€SessionÐ üL ÐÔ‡XaX»¼[íÔÌò òÔ#†¼[í»XXaö#ÔDON€SHAFER,€òòet€al.óó€v.€CITY€OF€DICKSON,€BOARDÐ úJ ÐOF€ZONING€APPEALS,€òòet€alóó.Ô‡XaX»¼[íÔó óÐ  ^ ÐÌà@@½½ìàò òAppeal€from€the€Chancery€Court€for€Dickson€CountyÐ  ^ Ðà@@øøìàNo.€6862„00€€€€€€Leonard€W.€Martin,€ChancellorÐ ú J ÐÌÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<½` AßÐ ¾  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€M2000„03175„Ô_ÔCOAÔ_Ô„R3„CV€„€Filed€August€2,€Ô_Ô2002Ô_ÔÐ ¹  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<` AßÐ ‘á  Ðó óÌÓ  ÓPetitioners€sought€common„law€writ€of€certiorari€in€suit€against€Board€of€Zoning€Appeals,€owner€ofÐ ŒÜ Ðproperty,€and€contractor,€after€the€Board€granted€a€request€for€a€setback€variance€to€allowÐ xÈ Ðconstruction€of€a€proposed€convenience€store€in€Dickson,€Tennessee,€and€the€Board€declined€toÐ d´ Ðreconsider€its€decision.€€The€trial€court€granted€the€Respondentsðð€Motion€to€Dismiss€for€lack€ofÐ P  Ðsubject€matter€jurisdiction€because€the€petition€was€filed€outside€the€mandatory,€jurisdictional€timeÐ <Œ Ðrequirement€set€forth€in€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€27„9„102.€€We€affirm€the€decision€of€the€trial€courtÐ (x Ðbecause€the€petition€was€not€filed€within€the€time€limitation€set€forth€in€the€statute€and€no€basis€wasÐ d Ðshown€for€tolling€the€limitation€period.€Ð P ÐÓçÓÌò òTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Judgment€of€the€Chancery€CourtÐ Ø( ÐAffirmedó ó€ò òand€Remandedó óÐ Ä ÐÌòòÓ  ÓÔ#†¼[í»àXa¢#ÔÔ‡XaX.¼[íÔPatricia€J.€Cottrell,€J.óó,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòWilliam€B.€Cain,€J.,óó€andÐ  ð ÐòòFrank€G.€Clement,€Jr.,€Sp.€J.óó,€joined.Ð ŒÜ ÐÌTony€L.€Turnbow,€Franklin,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellants,€Don€Shafer€and€Mary€Shafer.Ð d!´  ÐÌDudley€M.€West,€Nashville,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellees,€Welton€Investments€and€PremierÐ <#Œ" ÐConstruction€Company,€LLC.Ð ($x# ÐÌJerry€V.€Smith,€Dickson,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellee,€City€of€Dickson,€Board€of€Zoning€Appeals.Ð &P!% ÐÓ ÓÌò òOPINIONó óÔ#†¼[í»XXaC #ÔÔ‡XaX»¼[íÔÐ Ø'(#' ÐÌÓ  Óà  àThis€case€involves€an€attempt€by€landowners,€Don€and€Mary€Shafer€(ð ðShafersðð)€to€seekÐ °)%) Ðreview€of€a€decision€of€the€City€of€Dickson€Board€of€Zoning€Appeals€(ð ðBoardðð)€granting€a€setbackÐ œ*ì%* Ðvariance€for€construction€of€a€convenience€market€in€Dickson,€Tennessee€on€a€parcel€of€propertyÐ ˆ+Ø&+ Ðadjoining€the€Shafersðð€land.Ð t,Ä', ÐÐ `-°(-ý Ðà@ÉÉ&ìàI.€FactsˆÐ ° ÐÌà  àThe€parties€filed€joint€stipulations€of€fact€prior€to€the€hearing.€€From€those€stipulations,€weÐ ˆØ Ðknow€the€following.€€The€Shafers€own€a€commercial€lot€at€715€Highway€70€in€the€City€of€Dickson,Ð tÄ ÐTennessee.€€Welton€Investments€(ð ðWeltonðð)€owns€two€tracts€that€front€Highway€70€and€adjoin€theÐ `° ÐShafersðð€lot.€€Weltonððs€lot€immediately€adjacent€to€the€Shafersðð€lot€is€undeveloped€and€the€far€lot€atÐ L œ Ðthe€intersection€of€Highway€70€and€Hummingbird€Lane€houses€a€convenience€market€and€gas€stationÐ 8 ˆ Ðcommonly€referred€to€as€the€Par€Mart.€€The€lots€in€question€and€other€adjoining€lots€frontingÐ $ t ÐHighway€70€are€subject€to€a€fifty€(50)€foot€setback€line€pursuant€to€the€ordinances€of€the€City€ofÐ  ` ÐDickson.€€All€of€the€property€in€question€has€similar€topography€in€that€there€is€a€steep€slope€at€theÐ ü L  Ðrear€of€each€of€the€lots.Ð è 8  ÐÌà  àOn€May€1,€2000,€Premier€Construction€Company,€LLC€(ð ðPremierðð)€applied€to€the€Board€onÐ À  Ðbehalf€of€Welton€for€a€variance€of€ten€(10)€feet€in€front€setback€and€eight€(8)€feet€ten€(10)€inches€inÐ ¬ü  Ðrear€setback€for€the€Par€Mart€property.€€The€application€on€its€face€required€that€all€building€plans,Ð ˜è  Ðplats,€drawings€and€other€data€accompany€the€application€for€the€variance.€€The€applicationÐ „Ô  Ðsubmitted€by€Premier€was€accompanied€by€an€attached€site€plan€describing€the€combined€Welton€lotsÐ pÀ Ðand€the€proposed€expansion€of€the€Par€Mart€market.€€The€application€cited€hardships€created€by€theÐ \¬ Ðnarrow€width€of€the€property€on€the€west€side€and€the€steep€slope€on€the€north€side€of€the€propertyÐ H˜ Ðas€reasons€for€seeking€the€variance.€€Premier€sought€the€variance€so€that€the€structure€as€proposedÐ 4„ Ðand€shown€on€the€site€plan€could€be€constructed.€€The€site€plan€depicted€the€property€owned€byÐ  p ÐWelton,€including€the€portion€of€the€property€adjoining€the€Shafersðð€property€and€depicted€theÐ  \ Ðproposed€structure€which€was€designed€to€span€the€entire€property.€€The€site€plan€was€available€forÐ øH Ðpublic€inspection€upon€its€submission€at€the€City€of€Dickson€Codes€Department.€€Ð ä4 ÐÌà  àA€notice€of€the€hearing€on€the€variance€appeared€in€the€local€newspaper€and€set€the€hearingÐ ¼  Ðdate€as€May€16,€2000.׃ ×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€The€City€also€placed€a€sign€containing€notice€of€the€hearing€on€the€varianceÐ ¨ø Ðon€the€Par€Mart€property€at€least€ten€days€prior€to€the€meeting€of€the€Board.€€The€sign€remained€onÐ ”ä Ðthe€property€continuously€until€the€Boardððs€meeting.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€The€sign€provided€as€follows:Ð €Ð ÐÌà8  àThis€property€is€being€considered€for€a€variance€from€the€City€of€Dicksonððs€adoptedÐ X ¨ Ðregulations.€€A€hearing€will€be€held€before€the€Board€of€Zoning€Appeals€at€the€WarÐ D!” ÐMemorial€building€at€[designated€time]€p.m.€on€May€16,€2000.€€For€more€info.Ð 0"€  Ðcontact€the€Codes€Department€at€(615)€441„9505.€€Ð#l!Ð Ð  Ðâ âÐ $X" Ðà  àThe€Shafers€saw€the€sign€on€the€Par€Mart€property€prior€to€the€hearing€but€failed€to€appearÐ ° Ðat€the€hearing€to€contest€the€grant€of€the€variance.€€The€Board€approved€the€setback€variance€on€MayÐ œì Ð16,€2000.€€The€minutes€of€that€meeting€reflect€that€the€representative€of€Premier€Ð ˆØ Ðâ âÌà8  àexplained€that€they€propose€putting€the€new€market€on€the€adjacent€vacant€lot€withÐ `° Ðthe€canopy€remaining€on€the€existing€site.€€[He]€also€explained€that€given€the€size€ofÐ L œ Ðthe€market€and€the€large€slope€on€the€rear€of€these€lots€this€would€be€the€most€suitableÐ 8 ˆ Ðlocation€for€the€proposed€market.€€[He]€explained€that€the€proposed€canopy€wouldÐ $ t Ðalso€require€a€10€foot€front€setback€variance€and€that€the€canopy€should€not€interfereÐ  ` Ðwith€visibility€given€the€height€being€14€feet€overall.Ðü L Ð Ð  ÐÌThe€minutes€of€the€May€16,€2000,€meeting€were€approved€at€the€June€20,€2000,€Board€meeting.€Ð Ô$  ÐAfter€the€minutes€were€recorded,€no€further€action€was€taken€by€the€City€to€memorialize€the€BoardððsÐ À  Ðdecision€approving€the€variance€on€May€16,€2000.€€The€stipulated€testimony€of€Rydell€Wesson,€theÐ ¬ü  ÐDirector€of€Planning€and€Zoning€for€the€City€of€Dickson,€was€that€the€Codes€Department€considersÐ ˜è  Ðany€variance€approved€by€the€vote€of€the€Board€to€be€effective€immediately€following€the€vote.€€NoÐ „Ô  Ðformal€recording€of€a€variance€takes€place,€other€than€filing€of€the€minutes€of€the€Boardððs€meetingsÐ pÀ Ðafter€their€approval.Ð \¬ ÐÌà  àMr.€Wesson€requested€that€plans€regarding€storm€water€detention€be€submitted€for€the€ParÐ 4„ ÐMart€property€shortly€after€the€variance€was€granted.€€Premier€prepared€detailed€plans€and€boughtÐ  p Ðpipe€and€other€materials€for€a€drainage€system€in€response€to€Wessonððs€request.€€Ð  \ ÐÌà  àWelton€began€construction€on€the€proposed€convenience€market€in€mid„September€of€2000.€Ð ä4 ÐSeveral€days€later,€Don€Shafer€appeared€before€the€Board€and€requested€that€the€Board€hear€hisÐ Ð  Ðobjection€and€reconsider€the€grant€of€the€variance€to€Welton.€€At€the€Board€meeting€on€SeptemberÐ ¼  Ð19,€2000,€Mr.€Shafer€said€the€variance€affected€his€business€property€and€he€was€not€given€theÐ ¨ø Ðopportunity€to€object€to€it.€€Although€he€had€seen€the€sign€notifying€the€public€of€the€variance€requestÐ ”ä Ðand€the€date€of€the€hearing,€he€stated€that€the€sign€was€placed€on€the€lot€where€the€existing€store€wasÐ €Ð Ðlocated,€not€on€the€adjacent€vacant€lot.€€He€stated€that€his€problem€with€the€grant€of€a€variance€forÐ l¼ Ðhardship€purposes€was€one€of€ð ðequal€protectionðð€because€anyone€who€bought€property€in€that€areaÐ X ¨ Ðshould€be€aware€they€had€to€work€with€what€they€had.€€He€also€pointed€out€that€errors€existed€in€theÐ D!” Ðsite€plan€or€survey€submitted€by€Premier€in€support€of€their€application.€€He€further€stated€ð ðmy€mainÐ 0"€  Ðobjection€is€by€that€building€being€10€feet€further€out€toward€the€highway€it€obstructs€clear€visionÐ #l! Ðfrom€the€intersection€to€the€corner€of€my€building.ðð€€He€asked€the€Board€to€reconsider€and€rescindÐ $X" Ðthe€variance.Ð ô$D # ÐÌà  àA€representative€of€€Premier€stated€he€had€been€made€aware€of€the€errors€in€the€site€plan€theÐ Ì&"% Ðday€before€and€had€taken€steps€to€correct€those€errors€by€having€someone€re„survey€the€property.€Ð ¸'#& ÐThe€error,€however,€would€not€have€affected€the€request€for€variance,€he€stated,€because€it€is€theÐ ¤(ô#' Ðexisting€slope,€and€their€desire€not€to€disturb€it,€that€was€the€reason€for€the€request.€Mr.€WessonÐ )à$( Ðstated€to€the€Board€that€it€had€granted€the€variance€based€upon€the€shape€of€the€slope€which€had€notÐ |*Ì%) Ðchanged.€€With€regard€to€notice,€Mr.€Wesson€stated€that€the€newspaper€posts€the€Boardððs€meetingÐ h+¸&* Ðdates,€and€that€the€Board€also€posts€such€notices€at€city€hall.€€He€also€stated€that€his€departmentÐ ° Ðplaces€a€sign€on€property€involved€in€a€variance€request€as€a€courtesy,€that€the€lots€in€question€areÐ œì Ðone€tract€of€land,€and€that€the€sign€was€placed€on€the€part€of€the€property€with€the€biggest€changeÐ ˆØ Ðproposed.€€Mr.€Wesson€later€further€explained:Ð tÄ ÐÌà8  àI€need€to€keep€the€facts€straight€as€a€representative€before€this€Board.€€Mr.€TurnboÐ L œ Ðstated€that€the€sign€was€placed€on€the€wrong€piece€of€property.€€Once€again,€it€is€oneÐ 8 ˆ Ðpiece€of€property€not€two,€the€sign€was€placed€on€that€piece€of€property€so€I€donððtÐ $ t Ðwant€you€to€think€you€have€two€pieces€of€property€with€a€sign€on€one€and€not€on€theÐ  ` Ðother.Ðü L Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àWhen€asked€if€there€were€any€further€discussion,€one€Board€member€noted€that€the€sign€isÐ Ô$  Ðnot€required,€it€is€done€as€a€courtesy,€and€stated€that€the€Board€should€stand€on€the€variance€it€hadÐ À  Ðgranted.€€Upon€motion€to€that€effect,€the€Board€voted€to€ð ðlet€the€variance€stand.ððÐ ¬ü  ÐÌà  àThe€Shafers€sought€and€obtained€a€temporary€restraining€orderÔ#†¼[í»XXaÝ #ÔÔ‡XaX»¼[íÔ€restraining€the€parties€fromÐ „Ô  Ðproceeding€with€construction€of€the€convenience€market€within€the€front€setback€area.€€OnÐ pÀ ÐSeptember€21,€2000,€the€Shafers€filed€a€sworn€complaint€against€the€Board,€Welton,€and€Premier€forÐ \¬ Ða€Writ€of€Mandamus€and€injunctive€relief.€€An€amended€complaint€was€filed€on€September€22,€2000,Ð H˜ Ðand€a€second€amended€complaint€and€petition€for€writ€of€certiorari€was€filed€on€October€10,€2000.€Ð 4„ ÐEach€of€the€Shafersðð€pleadings€sought€review€and€recission€of€the€actions€taken€by€the€Board€inÐ  p Ðapproving€the€variance€on€May€16,€2000.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€On€appeal,€there€is€no€dispute€that€the€Shafersðð€action€wasÐ  \ Ðbrought€as€a€petition€for€writ€of€certiorari.€€Ô#†¼[í»XXaÊ1#ÔÔ‡XaX»¼[íÔ€Ô#†¼[í»XXa„5#ÔÔ‡XaX»¼[íÔ€€Ð øH ÐÌà  àThe€Board,€Welton,€and€Premier€filed€a€motion€to€dismiss.€€The€trial€court€considered€theÐ Ð  Ðmotion€and€determined€that€the€petition€for€writ€of€certiorari€was€filed€outside€the€mandatory,Ð ¼  Ðjurisdictional€sixty€(60)€day€time€limit€established€in€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€27„9„102€and€that€there€wasÐ ¨ø Ðno€basis€for€tolling€the€statute€of€limitations.€€The€court€further€found,€ð ðto€the€extent€PlaintiffsððÐ ”ä Ðpleadings€assert€additional€claims€of€denial€of€due€process€and€equal€protection€under€the€state€andÐ €Ð Ðfederal€constitutions,€the€court€concludes€that€the€record€before€the€court€does€not€support€suchÐ l¼ Ðclaims€and,€in€any€event,€such€allegations€fail€to€state€a€claim€upon€which€relief€can€be€grantedÐ X ¨ Ðagainst€Defendants€Welton€and€Premier.ðð׃(×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ô#†¼[í»XXaÇ5#ÔÔ‡XaX»¼[íÔÐ D!” Ðâ âÐ 0"€  Ðà  àIn€a€thorough€and€well„reasoned€Order€and€Memorandum€Opinion,€tÔ#†¼[í»XXaî9#ÔÔ‡XaX»¼[íÔhe€trial€court€concludedÐ ° Ðâ âthat€it€lacked€subject€matter€jurisdiction€to€issue€the€common„law€writ€of€certiorari€because€the€actionÐ œì Ðwas€not€filed€within€sixty€(60)€days€of€the€Boardððs€grant€of€the€variance€on€May€16,€2000.€€The€courtÐ ˆØ Ðobserved€that€the€Shafers€repeatedly€admitted€that€the€Board€approved€the€variance€on€May€16,€2000,Ð tÄ Ðand€that€the€Board€declined€to€reconsider€its€prior€decision€on€September€19,€2000,€when€the€ShafersÐ `° Ðappeared€before€the€Board€and€requested€reconsideration€of€the€decision.€€In€addition,€the€trial€courtÐ L œ Ðfound:Ð 8 ˆ ÐÌà8  àThe€Plaintiffs€have€argued€that€Defendantsðð€alleged€fraud€should€toll€the€statute€ofÐ  ` Ðlimitations€contained€in€T.C.A.€ðð€27„9„102.€€This€court,€however,€sees€littleÐ ü L  Ðdifference€between€this€case€and€any€other€time„barred€action.€€The€court€is€notÐ è 8  Ðpersuaded€that€any€fraud€was€perpetrated€in€this€case.€€Further,€the€fraud€asserted€isÐ Ô$  Ðnot€fraud€in€concealing€the€cause€of€action€or€inducing€the€Plaintiffs€not€to€exerciseÐ À  Ðtheir€right€to€appeal.€€In€order€for€fraudulent€concealment€to€toll€the€statute€ofÐ ¬ü  Ðlimitations,€the€alleged€fraud€must€relate€to€Plaintiffsðð€right€to€file€the€petition,€ratherÐ ˜è  Ðthan€the€merits€of€the€Defendantsðð€statements€or€position€before€the€Board€of€ZoningÐ „Ô  ÐAppeals.ÐpÀÐ Ð  ÐÌÓ  Óà @ à.€.€.€.€Ð H˜ ÐÓAÓÌà8  àThe€stipulations€reflect€that€if€Plaintiff€Don€Shafer€saw€the€sign€placed€at€the€site€byÐ  p Ðthe€Defendant€City,€as€alleged€by€Plaintiffs,€the€sign€nevertheless€placed€Don€ShaferÐ  \ Ðon€notice€that€more€information€was€available€at€the€City€of€Dickson€CodesÐ øH ÐDepartment,€including€the€application€for€the€variance€and€a€site€plan€depicting€allÐ ä4 Ðof€the€property€subject€to€the€variance.€€It€is€undisputed,€and€indeed€stipulated,€thatÐ Ð  Ðthe€site€plan€depicting€all€of€the€property€subject€to€the€variance€has€been€availableÐ ¼  Ðfor€public€inspection€in€the€City€of€Dickson€Codes€Department€at€all€times€since€theÐ ¨ø Ðapplication€for€the€variance€was€filed€on€May€1,€2000.€Ð”äÐ Ð  ÐÌà  àThe€Shafers€appeal€arguing€that:€(1)€due€process€requires€the€Board€or€an€applicant€for€aÐ l¼ Ðvariance€to€provide€notice€of€a€hearing€to€an€adjoining€landowner€whose€rights€would€be€affected;Ð X ¨ Ð(2)€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€27„9„102€does€not€bar€an€adjoining€landowner€from€appealing€a€decision€ofÐ D!” Ðthe€Board€more€than€sixty€(60)€days€after€the€final€hearing€when€there€was€no€actual€or€accurateÐ 0"€  Ðnotice€of€the€hearing€and€the€decision€of€the€Board€was€based€on€fraudulent€information;€and€(3)€theÐ #l! ÐBoard€amended€the€prior€grant€of€the€variance€by€reconsidering€the€matter€at€the€September€19,€2000Ð $X" Ðmeeting,€which€effectively€extended€the€time€limitation€of€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€27„9„102.Ð ô$D # Ðà  à¹Ó  ÓII.€€Statute€of€LimitationsÐ Ì&"% ÐÌA.€€The€Applicable€Time€PeriodÔ#†¼[í»XXa¯:#ÔÔ‡XaX»¼[íÔÐ ¤(ô#' ÐÌÓÞGÓà  àAs€a€threshold€issue,€we€must€determine€if€the€trial€court€correctly€dismissed€the€ShafersððÐ |*Ì%) Ðpetition€for€common„law€writ€of€certiorari€for€lack€of€subject€matter€jurisdiction€because€it€was€filedÐ h+¸&* Ðsome€128€days€after€the€Boardððs€decision€to€grant€the€setback€variance.€€The€trial€court€concludedÐ ° Ðthat€the€failure€of€the€Shafers€to€file€their€petition€for€common„law€writ€of€certiorari€within€sixty€(60)Ð œì Ðdays€of€the€Boardððs€May€16,€2000,€hearing€deprived€the€court€of€subject€matter€jurisdiction€to€reviewÐ ˆØ Ðthe€Boardððs€decision€granting€the€variance.Ô#†¼[í»XXa\H#ÔÔ‡XaX»¼[íÔÐ tÄ ÐÌà  àThe€Tennessee€Supreme€Court€has€determined€that€the€common„law€writ€of€certiorari€is€theÐ L œ Ðappropriate€procedure€to€review€an€administrative€zoning€decision€of€a€board€of€zoning€appeals.€Ð 8 ˆ ÐòòMcCallen€v.€City€of€Memphisóó,€786€S.W.2d€633,€639€(Tenn.€1990);€òòFallin€v.€Knox€County€Bd.€ofÐ $ t ÐCommððrsóó,€656€S.W.2d€338,€342€(Tenn.€1983).€€Ð  ` ÐÌà  àTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€27„9„102€provides€that€a€party€aggrieved€by€an€order€or€judgment€of€aÐ è 8  Ðboard€or€commission€may€have€the€order€or€judgment€reviewed€by€the€courts€by€filing€a€petition€forÐ Ô$  Ðwrit€of€certiorari€in€the€Chancery€Court€ð ðwithin€sixty€(60)€days€from€the€entry€of€the€order€orÐ À  Ðjudgment.ðð€€The€sixty€(60)€day€time€limitation€for€filing€a€petition€for€writ€of€certiorari€is€mandatoryÐ ¬ü  Ðand€jurisdictional.€€òòThandiwe€v.€Traughberóó,€909€S.W.2d€802,€804€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1995).€€InÐ ˜è  ÐòòThandiweóó,€this€court€stated:Ð „Ô  ÐÌà8  àA€petition€for€certiorari€must€be€filed€within€sixty€(60)€days€from€and€after€the€entryÐ \¬ Ðof€the€order€or€judgment€of€the€Board€decision€complained€of,€in€order€to€seekÐ H˜ Ðreview.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€27„9„102.€.€.€.Ð4„Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àThe€time€limits€apply€to€both€the€common„law€and€statutory€writs€of€certiorari.€Ð  \ ÐòòFairhaven€Corpóó.,€566€S.W.2d€at€886.€€The€failure€to€file€within€the€statutory€timeÐ øH Ðlimits€results€in€the€Boardððs€decision€becoming€final,€and€once€the€decision€hasÐ ä4 Ðbecome€final,€the€Chancery€Court€is€deprived€of€jurisdiction.€€òòWheeler€v.€City€ofÐ Ð  ÐMemphisóó,€685€S.W.2d€4,€6€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1984);€òòFairhaven€Corp.óó,€566€S.W.2d€atÐ ¼  Ð887.€€Ð¨øÐ Ð  ÐÌà8  àThe€time€requirement€for€filing€a€petition€of€certiorari€is€analogous€to€theÐ €Ð Ðrequirements€of€the€Tennessee€Rule€of€Appellate€Procedure€4.€€Our€courts€have€held,Ð l¼ Ðrelying€in€part€on€òòUnited€States€v.€Robinsonóó,€361€U.S.€220,€80€S.€Ct.€282,€4€L.€Ed.€2dÐ X ¨ Ð259€(1960),€that€the€rule€is€mandatory€and€jurisdictional.€€òòSee,€e.g.,€State€v.€Williamsóó,Ð D!” Ð603€S.W.2d€157,€158€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1980);€òòJohn€Barb,€Inc.€v.€Underwriters€atÐ 0"€  ÐLloyds€of€Londonóó,€653€S.W.2d€422,€424€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1983).€.€.€.€Ð#l!Ð Ð  ÐÌòòIdóó.€at€805„05.Ð ô$D # ÐÔ#†¼[í»XXacK#ÔÔ‡XaX»¼[íÔÌòòóóÔ#†¼[í»XXaV#ÔÔ‡XaX»¼[íÔà  àThe€ð ðtime€for€filing€a€common„law€writ€of€certiorari€is€measured€from€the€date€of€the€entryÐ Ì&"% Ðof€the€order€for€which€judicial€review€is€sought.ððòòóó€€òòBrannon€v.€County€of€Shelbyóó,€900€S.W.2d€30,€33„Ð ¸'#& Ð34€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1994)Ô#†¼[í»XXabV#ÔÔ‡XaX»¼[íÔ;òò€Residents€Against€Indus.€Landfill€Expansion,€Inc.€v.€Tennessee€Depððt€ofÐ ¤(ô#' ÐEnvððt€and€Conservationóó,€No.€01A01„9507„CH„00311,€1998€Tenn.€App.€LEXIS€125,€at€*10€(Tenn.Ð )à$( ÐCt.€App.€Feb.€20,€1998)€(no€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€11€application€filed).€€The€Board€herein€granted€theÐ |*Ì%) Ðvariance€on€May€16;€the€Shafers€consistently€alleged€it€was€granted€at€that€time;€the€Director€ofÐ h+¸&* ÐPlanning€and€Zoning€stated€a€variance€was€effective€when€granted€by€the€Board;€and€the€stipulatedÐ ° Ðfacts€reflect€the€Board€approved€the€variance€on€May€16.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€The€sixty€(60)€day€time€period€for€seekingÐ œì Ðreview€of€the€Boardððs€decision€began€running€on€May€16.€€The€filing€on€September€21€was€obviouslyÐ ˆØ Ðuntimely.Ô#†¼[í»XXaÂW#ÔÔ€XaX»¼[íÔÐ tÄ ÐÌÓ  ÓB.€€Reconsideration€of€the€Variance€by€the€Board€Ð L œ ÐÓÁ[ÓÌà  àIn€the€case€herein,€the€petition€filed€by€the€Shafers€alleged€that€ð ðon€May€16,€2000,€the€[Board]Ð $ t Ðapproved€the€variance€requested€by€[Premier/Welton].ðð€€However,€on€appeal,€the€Shafers€allege€thatÐ  ` Ðthe€Boardððs€decision€on€the€variance€was€not€final€until€the€September€19,€2000,€meeting€where€theÐ ü L  ÐShafers€asked€the€Board€to€reconsider€the€grant€of€the€variance.€€The€Shafers€argue€that€the€minutesÐ è 8  Ðof€the€Board€reflect€that€the€Board€heard€additional€evidence€from€Premier€regarding€the€survey€andÐ Ô$  Ðalso€reflect€deliberation€on€the€issue€in€addition€to€a€vote€by€the€Board€determining€that€the€grant€ofÐ À  Ðthe€variance€was€proper€under€the€circumstances.€€Consequently,€they€assert,€such€action€taken€byÐ ¬ü  Ðthe€Board€in€September€showed€that€the€May€16€decision€was€not€final,€and€that€the€statute€ofÐ ˜è  Ðlimitations€should€run€from€the€September€meeting.€€Ð „Ô  ÐÌà  àThe€minutes€from€the€September€Board€meeting€show€some€discussion€of€the€request€forÐ \¬ Ðreconsideration,€as€reflected€in€the€exposition€of€the€facts€set€out€earlier€in€this€opinion.€€As€for€asÐ H˜ Ðofficial€action€taken,€the€minutes€reflect€that€a€board€member€moved€to€let€the€variance€stand€asÐ 4„ Ðgranted.€€This€motion€was€adopted€by€the€Board.€€In€effect,€the€actions€of€the€Board€on€SeptemberÐ  p Ð19,€2000,€constituted€a€denial€of€the€request€to€reconsider.€€We€find€nothing€in€the€minutes€toÐ  \ Ðindicate€the€Board€actually€reconsidered€the€variance.€€To€the€contrary,€the€Board€gave€Mr.€ShaferÐ øH Ðthe€opportunity€to€explain€why€he€thought€the€Board€should€reconsider€the€variance€and€gave€otherÐ ä4 Ðinterested€parties€as€well€as€the€Director€of€Zoning€the€opportunity€to€speak.€€We€conclude€the€BoardÐ Ð  Ðdid€not€reconsider,€or€attempt€to€reconsider,€the€previously€granted€variance.׃d×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú6Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Ð ¼  ÐÌà  àConsequently,€because€the€decision€of€the€Board€became€final€when€no€petition€for€common„Ð ”ä Ðlaw€writ€of€certiorari€was€filed€within€sixty€(60)€days€of€the€grant€of€the€variance€on€May€16,€2000,Ð €Ð Ðand€the€Shafers€failed€to€comply€with€the€mandatory,€jurisdictional€prerequisites€for€judicial€reviewÐ l¼ Ðof€the€Boardððs€decision€to€grant€the€variance,€the€Chancery€Court€lacked€subject€matter€jurisdictionÐ X ¨ Ðand€correctly€dismissed€the€petition.Ð D!” ÐÌÌÐ $X" ÐÓ  ÓIII.€€Tolling€of€the€Statute€of€LimitationsÐ ° ÐÓèfÓÌà  àAlternatively,€the€Shafers€argue€that€even€if€the€mandatory,€jurisdictional€time€limitation€ofÐ ˆØ ÐTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€27„9„102€began€to€run€on€May€16,€2000,€it€should€have€been€tolled€because€ofÐ tÄ Ðthe€ð ðfraudulentðð€survey€submitted€by€Premier€to€the€Board€and€their€own€lack€of€actual€notice€as€toÐ `° Ðthe€proposed€variance€request.€€A€review€of€the€record,€however,€establishes€that€the€Shafers€wereÐ L œ Ðgiven€adequate€notice€of€the€hearing€on€the€variance€and€that€no€fraud€or€lack€of€notice€exists€thatÐ 8 ˆ Ðwould€toll€the€statute€of€limitations.€€Ð $ t ÐÌÓ  ÓA.€€NoticeÐ ü L  ÐÓæiÓÌà  àTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðððð€13„7„201€to€„211€contains€the€enabling€statutes€which€authorizeÐ Ô$  Ðmunicipalities€to€establish€boards€to€hear€zoning€issues.€€The€statutes€do€not€set€forth€any€specificÐ À  Ðrequirements€regarding€notice€of€hearings.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€13„7„205(3)(b)€actually€empowersÐ ¬ü  Ða€board€with€the€authority€to€develop€such€rules€as€necessary€for€carrying€out€its€duties.€€There€is€noÐ ˜è  Ðordinance€in€place€which€requires€the€City€herein€to€place€a€sign€signifying€notice€of€a€hearing€andÐ „Ô  Ðno€procedure€that€requires€applicants€for€variances€to€provide€actual€notice€of€a€proposed€varianceÐ pÀ Ðto€adjoining€landowners.Ð \¬ ÐÌà  àIn€the€case€herein,€the€City€placed€a€sign€on€the€property€owned€by€Ô_ÔWeltonÔ_Ô.€€At€the€SeptemberÐ 4„ Ðhearing€before€the€Board,€Mr.€Shafer€argued€that€although€he€had€seen€the€sign€notifying€the€publicÐ  p Ðof€the€variance€request€and€the€date€of€the€hearing,€the€sign€was€placed€on€the€lot€where€the€existingÐ  \ Ðstore€was€located,€not€on€the€adjacent€vacant€lot€and,€therefore,€he€had€no€notice€that€the€varianceÐ øH Ðwould€affect€the€unimproved€lot.Ð ä4 ÐÌà  àIt€is€undisputed€that€Welton€owns€both€lots,€which€are€adjacent€to€each€other€but€wereÐ ¼  Ðacquired€at€different€times€by€recorded€deed.€€It€is€also€undisputed€that€the€site€plan€included€bothÐ ¨ø Ðlots€and€showed€construction€of€the€market€on€the€then„unimproved€lot.€€The€parties€herein€stipulatedÐ ”ä Ðthat€it€ð ðis€not€unusual€for€an€applicant€for€a€variance€to€submit€one€site€plan€containing€one€legalÐ €Ð Ðdescription€even€though€the€lots€comprising€the€parcel€at€issue€have€not€been€legally€combinedÐ l¼ Ðthrough€the€recording€of€one€deed.ðð€€Ð X ¨ ÐÌà  àThis€acknowledged€practice€is€consistent€with€Article€III,€Section€10€of€the€zoning€ordinancesÐ 0"€  Ðof€the€City€of€Ô_ÔDicksonÔ_Ô,€which€defines€a€ð ðlotðð€as:Ð #l! ÐÌà8  àA€piece€or€parcel€or€plot€of€land€in€one€ownership€which€may€include€one€or€moreÐ ô$D # Ðlots€or€[sic]€record,€occupied€or€to€be€occupied€by€one€or€more€principal€structuresÐ à%0!$ Ðand€accessory€structures€including€the€open€spaces€required€under€the€ordinance.€€ÐÌ&"%Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àA€landowner€is€charged€with€knowledge€of€city€ordinances.€€òòUnion€Trust€Co.€v.€WilliamsonÐ ¤(ô#' ÐCounty€Bd.€of€Zoning€App.óó,€500€S.W.2d€608,€617€(Tenn.€1973)€(citing€òòCity€of€Knoxville€v.€Hargisóó,Ð )à$( Ð184€Tenn.€262,€271,€198€S.W.2d€555,€559€(1947)).€€Ð |*Ì%) ÐÐ h+¸&* Ðà  àIn€addition€to€imputed€knowledge€of€the€ordinance€allowing€combination€of€separate€lots€ofÐ ° Ðrecord,€Mr.€Shafer€had€actual€knowledge€of€the€practice.€€Mr.€Shafer€himself€had€requested€a€setbackÐ œì Ðvariance€in€1995€for€a€parcel€adjacent€to€the€Par€Mart€property€that€was€comprised€of€twoÐ ˆØ Ðuncombined€lots€of€record€with€one€address.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú7Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ð tÄ ÐÌà  àWe€agree€with€the€trial€courtððs€conclusion€that€the€Shafers€had€adequate€notice€of€theÐ L œ Ðvariance€request€because€they€saw€the€sign€on€the€Ô_ÔWeltonÔ_Ô€property€and€because€the€site€plan€showingÐ 8 ˆ Ðthe€proposed€construction€and€setback€variance€was€on€file€and€subject€to€public€inspection.Ð $ t ÐÌÓ  ÓB.€€The€Alleged€ð ðFraudðð€Ð ü L  ÐÌà @ àà @ àÓyÓà  àThe€Shafers€argue€that€the€Boardððs€May€16,€2000,€decision€was€based€upon€fraud€becauseÐ Ô$  Ðthe€Board€made€the€decision€to€grant€the€variance€based€upon€a€site€plan€or€survey€filed€by€PremierÐ À  Ðwhich€depicted€the€lot€as€being€smaller€than€it€actually€was€and€that€the€ð ðfraudulentðð€site€plan€orÐ ¬ü  Ðsurvey€should€toll€the€statute€of€limitations.€€In€addition,€the€Shafers€argue€that€the€placement€of€theÐ ˜è  Ðnotice€sign€on€the€improved€lot€only€amounted€to€a€fraud€that€should€have€tolled€the€statute€ofÐ „Ô  Ðlimitations€due€to€the€fact€that€the€variance€sought€would€apply€to€both€the€improved€lot€andÐ pÀ Ðunimproved€lot.€€Ð \¬ ÐÌà  àIn€order€for€fraud€to€toll€the€statute€of€limitations€in€the€case€herein,€the€site€plan€or€surveyÐ 4„ Ðmust€have€affected€the€Shafersðð€right€to€file€their€petition€rather€than€the€merits€of€PremierððsÐ  p Ðstatements€or€position€before€the€Board.€€òòSee€Ô_ÔFahrnerÔ_Ô€v.€SW€Mfg.,€Inc.óó,€48€S.W.3d€141€(Tenn.€2001)Ð  \ Ð(explaining€that€proof€that€actions€of€the€defendant€prevented€the€plaintiff€from€discovering€the€factsÐ øH Ðnecessary€to€file€his€complaint€would€toll€the€running€of€the€statute€of€limitations€for€the€length€ofÐ ä4 Ðtime€that€the€defendant€misled€the€plaintiff€via€the€doctrine€of€equitable€estoppel);€òòSoldano€v.€Owens„Ð Ð  ÐCorning€Fiberglass€Corp.óó,€696€S.W.2d€887€(Tenn.€1985)€(stating€that€fraudulent€concealment€tollsÐ ¼  Ðthe€statute€of€limitations€when€the€plaintiff€proves€that€ð ðthe€defendant€took€affirmative€action€toÐ ¨ø Ðconceal€his€[plaintiffððs]€cause€of€action€and€that€he,€the€plaintiff,€could€not€have€discovered€his€causeÐ ”ä Ðof€action€despite€exercising€reasonable€diligenceðð).€€Ð €Ð ÐÌà  àThe€Shafers€alleged€fraud€in€that€the€site€plan€or€survey€depicted€the€Par€Mart€property€asÐ X ¨ Ðbeing€smaller€than€it€actually€was.׃(×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú8Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€However,€the€error€in€the€survey€was€not€related€to€the€ShafersððÐ D!” Ðright€to€file€the€petition€or€notice€of€the€hearing.€€The€Shafers€have€not€alleged€that€the€inaccurate€siteÐ 0"€  Ðplan€or€survey€prevented€them€from€opposing€the€variance€or€seeking€judicial€review€in€a€timelyÐ #l! Ðmanner.€òòóó€There€are€no€allegations€or€proof€in€the€record€that€Welton,€Premier,€or€the€city€in€any€wayÐ ° Ðconcealed€the€fact€that€the€variance€had€been€granted€and€thereby€prevented€the€Shafers€fromÐ œì Ðdiscovering€their€cause€of€action€against€the€Board.Ð ˆØ ÐÌà  àWith€regard€to€the€allegations€that€notice€of€the€variance€request€was€inadequate€and€that€theÐ `° Ðplacement€of€the€notifying€sign€should€toll€the€statute€of€limitations,€we€have€already€determined€thatÐ L œ Ðthe€notice€was€adequate.€€In€addition,€a€similar€issue€was€addressed€in€òòKielbasa€v.€Wilson€County€Bd.Ð 8 ˆ Ðof€Zoning€App.óó,€No.€M1999„01155„COA„R3„CV,€2000€Tenn.€App.€LEXIS€277€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€MayÐ $ t Ð5,€2000)€(no€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€11€application€filed).€€In€òòKielbasaóó,€Mr.€and€Mrs.€Kielbasa€owned€aÐ  ` Ðparcel€of€land€adjacent€to€a€parcel€of€land€owned€by€B€&€H€Rentals.€€B€&€H€applied€for€a€buildingÐ ü L  Ðpermit€to€construct€a€concrete€plant€and€the€permit€was€approved€on€July€25,€1997.€€The€KielbasasÐ è 8  Ðfiled€their€petition€for€common„law€writ€of€certiorari€on€April€8,€1998,€257€days€after€the€decisionÐ Ô$  Ðof€the€Board,€arguing€that€the€statute€of€limitations€should€be€tolled€because€the€Board€did€notÐ À  Ðcomply€with€its€own€notice€provisions€and,€alternatively,€that€the€meeting€was€fraudulently€concealedÐ ¬ü  Ðby€the€Board.€€The€trial€court€found€that€the€notice€of€the€hearing€was€appropriately€published€in€aÐ ˜è  Ðnewspaper€of€general€circulation,€complying€with€the€Board€rules€in€an€adequate€and€timely€fashion,Ð „Ô  Ðand€dismissed€the€petition.€€This€court€affirmed€the€trial€courtððs€decision,€stating:Ð pÀ ÐÌà8  àThe€Board€was€required€under€its€rules€to€publish€a€notice€of€the€time€and€place€ofÐ H˜ Ðthe€meeting€in€a€daily€paper€of€general€circulation€in€Wilson€County,€and€the€noticeÐ 4„ Ðwhich€was€published€cited€the€time€and€place€of€the€Boardððs€meeting€and€then€gaveÐ  p Ða€list€of€requests€which€would€be€presented,€including€ððPriscilla€Hand,€use€located€onÐ  \ ÐBeckwith€Road/I40.ðð€€The€Board€met€on€April€25th€and€approved€Ms.€HandððsÐ øH Ðrequest.€€The€Minutes€reflect€that€two€adjoining€property€owners€appeared€inÐ ä4 Ðopposition€to€the€request,€and€the€record€further€shows€that€B€&€H€applied€for€aÐ Ð  Ðbuilding€permit€for€the€plant€on€October€16,€1997,€which€was€granted.€€Ð¼ Ð Ð  ÐÌÓ  Óà @ à.€.€.€.€Ð ”ä ÐÓ ŽÓÌà8  àPetitioners€argue€the€Board€fraudulently€concealed€its€meeting€and/or€decision€fromÐ l¼ Ðpetitioners€by€not€sending€them€a€mailed€notice,€as€was€done€for€other€adjoiningÐ X ¨ Ðlandowners.€.€.€.€€òòóóAs€already€stated,€the€Board€had€no€duty€in€this€case€to€mail€noticesÐ D!” Ðto€any€adjoining€landowners,€including€petitioners,€thus€there€is€no€basis€to€findÐ 0"€  Ðfraudulent€concealment.Ð#l!Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àIt€is€unfortunate€for€the€petitioners€that€they€did€not€have€actual€notice€of€the€BoardÐ ô$D # Ðof€Zoning€Appealsðð€meeting.€€However,€the€Board€discharged€its€obligations€underÐ à%0!$ Ðthe€statute.€€The€Constitution€does€not€afford€interested€landowners€a€right€to€actualÐ Ì&"% Ðnotice€in€zoning€matters.€€òòSee€Nichols€v.€Tullahoma€Open€Door,€Inc.óó,€640€S.W.2d€13Ð ¸'#& Ð(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1982).€€Ð¤(ô#'Ð Ð  ÐÌòòKielbasaóó,€2000€Tenn.€App.€LEXIS€277,€at€*4„*6.Ð |*Ì%) ÐÐ h+¸&* Ðà  àWe€find€absolutely€nothing€in€the€record€before€us€to€indicate€the€Board,€Premier,€or€WeltonÐ ° Ðattempted€to€conceal€the€variance€request,€their€meeting€where€it€was€considered,€or€the€fact€it€hadÐ œì Ðbeen€granted.€€To€the€contrary,€the€Board€provided€notice€and€made€the€site€plan€available€forÐ ˆØ Ðinspection.Ð tÄ ÐÌà  àThe€time€limitation€in€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€27„9„102€is€mandatory€and€jurisdictional€and€wasÐ L œ Ðnot€tolled€by€the€Shafersðð€unfounded€allegations€of€fraud€and€lack€of€notice.€€They€have€presentedÐ 8 ˆ Ðno€evidence€to€the€trial€court€or€this€court€that€would€justify€tolling€the€statute€of€limitations.€€TheÐ $ t Ðtrial€court€was€correct€in€its€rulings.Ð  ` ÐÓ  ÓÌIV.€€ConclusionÐ è 8  ÐÓÄ•ÓÌà  àThe€judgment€of€the€Chancery€Court€dismissing€the€petition€for€common„law€writ€ofÐ À  Ðcertiorari€is€hereby€affirmed.€€The€costs€of€the€appeal€are€taxed€to€Don€and€Mary€Shafer,€for€whichÐ ¬ü  Ðexecution€may€issue€if€necessary.€€Ð ˜è  ÐÌòòóóÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à____________________________________Ð H˜ Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àPATRICIA€J.€COTTRELL,€JUDGEÐ 4„ Ð