ÿWPC’Y +Û´Ã3îÑgµŽ …äÑe—3yS€`ð;{ÒñÒÙ¾î@Ã/£/¤x°“ƒÏÇÕ®(ÿÕ£ó&oËÚ3ÙX5ßÅ_ˆå ÊÒ,¥žYQÛª"'¢¤NwlÚH!¼Z=ûÓl_[”†4¯)Ûaä'±Â>ëõ?Iò± Òfõ»‹)&*»2Ó½»Ü9Òy#N¦ö}Ö¯±+ ûrK³#q‘4ÉíÍj‰¼û¦`ÌDÁD c¼qÀVxªÈÁmÔVzvã"½ú¢W¯X˜¨SÜ!¤¡ÔRÝ!;Ì.ásüÕfÝ›}Ñ‹†YÔ9u¬I¶ŽìÎK3 ¼d»ìØÌT"¿3?ÛeüIàéÎõ7w÷©¶ídrâÁ¢~"|›B€Çís71Ï?ù0Y ¿í–Ž#FÑk¨ë8zv£Í7Ê¢Iñ#¦Iã¬ÝìI@Бz¯íÿt¡Â¥Á¡‰äkE@“{ϳžÜ·l‚aoìH„ êÆz²ÙÍô ¦¢LЃê¥£ý¨C•¢T+±=0·§9h[áž8,;0€ß #ë3;Ø›H•¹’ϯ p2Oë© ,nµU朦W±€å*}˩ݫp+v?¸Ëzm;px#É %Y ^ _ 0ˆk wó UN÷ 4E zY ÒÓ ¥ ´ m¶ ¶ ÆÍ Æ“ÆYÆ 0ÅåNª 0U¬\E] 0Ñ_ 0³0 0­ã 0§ 0¡7 0›Ø 0•sU>ŠFMÐÐ 1u 72’ 0ãÄ 0ŧ 0¿l 0¹+ 0³ä —! 0­¯' 0§\( 0¡) 0¤)b1* 0Â9* 0Îû* 0°É+ 0ªy, 0¤#- 0žÇ- 0˜e. 0’ý. 0Š/ 0²0 0¾Ë0 0¾‰1 0>G2 0ø…2 0â}3 0â_4 0âA5 0â#6 0â7 0ºç7 0Ò¡8 02s9 0ü¥9 0:¡: 1eÛ: 0Y@; 0_™; 0 ø;È= 0‚Ê= 0 DL?e?? 0õA B*ûC 0 ë%D D/E 0?E D/EG BtGe‘G 0¤öJ D3šK D-ÍK 0KúK 0ÎEL ASMÆfM 0¤,N 0DÐN A«O 06¿O 0õO 0:ýP 0^7Q 0<•QU6ÑQU*R 0c1R1Rã”R”R”R”R@wVwV+·W·W·W·W·W·W°âX˜\\IB01S01\CLERK1NASÈÈ,,,,ÈÈ0»UŸž/Ï (`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman Regularqdj/B011C2 ˜C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wpt3|x ÿU‹ÿÀÀÀLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5*AA ÿÿ(_17Ó  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ  Ó*+ ÿÿ(_26Ô2ÔÔ3  Ôà..à RÝ ƒR@ä$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô/ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔAt€the€time€of€the€conversation€between€Messrs.€Abbott€and€Shahan€in€1990,€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€13„3„406Ð À Ð(1999)€provided€that€ð ðno€county€or€court€or€board€or€officer€thereof€or€any€other€public€officer€or€authority€shall€accept,Ð „Ä Ðlay€out,€open,€improve,€grade,€pave€or€light€any€road€.€.€.€unless€such€road€has€been€accepted€or€opened€or€has€otherwiseÐ Hˆ Ðreceived€the€legal€status€of€a€public€road€.€.€..ðð€*GG ÿÿ(_16Ó ¨ý ÓÓ ° ÓÓ/%` ` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ /ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó/%` ` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ /ÓÓ ¨ý ÓÓ ° Ó*88 ÿÿ(_15Ó  ÓÓ,"¸ ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ ,ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó,"¸ ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ ,ÓÓ  Ó*55 ÿÿ(_14Ó ` ÓÓ) hÀpÈ xÐ )ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó) hÀpÈ xÐ )ÓÓ ` Ó*22 ÿÿ(_13Ó ¸ ÓÓ&hhÀpÈ xÐ &ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó&hhÀpÈ xÐ &ÓÓ ¸ Ó*// ÿÿ(_12Ó  ÓÓ#ÀÀpÈ xÐ #ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó#ÀÀpÈ xÐ #ÓÓ  Ó*,, ÿÿ(_11Ó h ÓÓ pÈ xÐ ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó pÈ xÐ ÓÓ h Ó*)) ÿÿ(_10Ó À ÓÓppÈ xÐ ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€ÓppÈ xÐ ÓÓ À Óô\  `‹&Times New Roman Ó . ' ib011c190ib011c19 .    CÝ ƒR@ä$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô/ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔIn€November€1993,€prior€to€the€countyððs€rejection€of€the€roads,€Mr.€Shahan€had€sold€one€5.5„acre€tract€to€hisÐ À Ðson€and€daughter„in„law.€€They€constructed€a€home€on€this€tract.3#37=CIQYag­­1.a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a)"i)*G+G ÿÿ(_25Ó ¨ý ÓÓ ° ÓÓ/%` ` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ /ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ/%` ` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ /ÓÓ ¨ý ÓÓ ° Ó*8+8 ÿÿ(_24Ó  ÓÓ,"¸ ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ ,ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ,"¸ ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ ,ÓÓ  Ó*5+5 ÿÿ(_23Ó ` ÓÓ) hÀpÈ xÐ )ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ) hÀpÈ xÐ )ÓÓ ` Ó*2+2 ÿÿ(_22Ó ¸ ÓÓ&hhÀpÈ xÐ &ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ&hhÀpÈ xÐ &ÓÓ ¸ Ó*/+/ ÿÿ(_21Ó  ÓÓ#ÀÀpÈ xÐ #ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ#ÀÀpÈ xÐ #ÓÓ  Ó  P.J.WalkupTullahomaWoodallPeckinpaughHuprichPeckinpaughsGrahamsGanzevoortGilreathAssocs NuttIntlAssnPlacenciaHamblen LiabestoppedBokor E.K.Hardison CasAussenberg HiteMiddletonPaduchBledsoeMcReynoldsElizabethton Hous J.A.Kreis S.W.GovtLoftinLangsdonchertedt]hese Winn WPMC ByrnMcKinney Dych SainGov'tAss'n n]oD.R.R. t]heHeiskAycockSizzlinDep'tOverstreetShoneyLamonsReshaMcGaughGalbreathInmanNat'lShahan COA DeekSneeddisentitlesShuptrineBeatyMcGraw GRWLintonCorbinRobinetteHillardImbodenCatheyMezzacappaCoyne ERMCantrellnon-actionUtilsWachtel*,+, ÿÿ(_20Ó h ÓÓ pÈ xÐ ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ pÈ xÐ ÓÓ h Ó*)+) ÿÿ(_19Ó À ÓÓppÈ xÐ ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓppÈ xÐ ÓÓ À Ó*&+& ÿÿ(_18Ó  ÓÓÈÈ xÐ ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓÈÈ xÐ ÓÓ  Ó(&& ÿÿ&_9Ó  ÓÓÈÈ xÐ ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€ÓÈÈ xÐ ÓÓ  Ó- ù-(AA ÿÿ&_8Ó  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ  Ó(GG ÿÿ&_7Ó ¨ý ÓÓ ° ÓÓ/%` ` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ /ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔÓ/%` ` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ /ÓÓ ¨ý ÓÓ ° Ó(88 ÿÿ&_6Ó  ÓÓ,"¸ ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ ,ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔÓ,"¸ ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ ,ÓÓ  Ó(55 ÿÿ&_5Ó ` ÓÓ) hÀpÈ xÐ )ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔÓ) hÀpÈ xÐ )ÓÓ ` Ó(22 ÿÿ&_4Ó ¸ ÓÓ&hhÀpÈ xÐ &ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔÓ&hhÀpÈ xÐ &ÓÓ ¸ Ó(// ÿÿ&_3Ó  ÓÓ#ÀÀpÈ xÐ #ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔÓ#ÀÀpÈ xÐ #ÓÓ  Ó(,, ÿÿ&_2Ó h ÓÓ pÈ xÐ ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔÓ pÈ xÐ ÓÓ h Ó()) ÿÿ&_1Ó À ÓÓppÈ xÐ ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔÓppÈ xÐ ÓÓ À Ó&&& ÿÿ$_Ó  ÓÓÈÈ xÐ ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔÓÈÈ xÐ ÓÓ  Ó0AAÿÿ.NormalÓ  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ  Ó<AAÿÿ:Definition TÓ  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ  Ó<AAÿÿ:Definition LÓ , ÓÓ5+Ü Ü` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5Ó8ÿÿ6Definitionòòóó(hhÿÿ&H1Ó  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5Óò òÔ  ÔÔ‡°°°ÔÔ‡ôôôÔó óÔ  ÔÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ  Ó(]]ÿÿ&H2Ó  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5Óò òÔ‡„„„ÔÔ‡ôôôÔó óÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ  Ó(]]ÿÿ&H3Ó  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5Óò òÔ‡¼¼¼ÔÔ‡ôôôÔó óÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ  Ó(]]ÿÿ&H4Ó  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5Óò òÔ‡XXXÔÔ‡ôôôÔó óÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ  Ó(]]ÿÿ&H5Ó  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5Óò òÔ‡ôôôÔó óÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ  ÓÔ‡ôôôÔ(]]ÿÿ&H6Ó  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5Óò òÔ‡ÔÔ‡ôôôÔó óÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ  Ó2DDÿÿ0AddressÓ  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓòòóóÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ  Ó8MMÿÿ6BlockquoteÓ , ÓÓ , ÓÓ5+Ü Ü` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ  ÓÓ  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5Ó,ÿÿ*CITEòòóó,dlÿÿ*CODEÔ‡ôôôÔÔK‡g<þ6X9`(‹Courier NewKÔÔ‡ôôôÔÔS‡ô\  `‹&Times New RomanSÔ4ÿÿ2Emphasisòòóó ÿÿ35;AGMSY_11.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.6ÿÿ4HyperlinkóóòòÔ ÿ ÔóóÔ  Ô<ÿÿ:FollowedHypeóóòòÔ €€ ÔóóÔ  Ô4goÿÿ2Keyboardò òÔ‡ôôôÔÔK‡g<þ6X9`(‹Courier NewKÔÔ‡ôôôÔÔS‡ô\  `‹&Times New RomanSÔó ó ¾Ý ƒR@ä$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô/ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔRoads€which€have€not€received€the€legal€status€of€a€public€road.<Ÿ§ÿÿ:PreformattedÓ  ÓÓ/%° °Ïî ,KkŠ©È %#/ÓÔ‡ôôôÔÔK‡g<þ6X9`(‹Courier NewKÔÔ‡ôôôÔÔS‡ô\  `‹&Times New RomanSÔÓ/%° °Ïî ,KkŠ©È %#/ÓÓ  Ó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó [Ý ƒR@ä$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú9Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô/ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔTheir€lawyer€included€property€taxes€in€his€damage€calculations.€€For€the€Peckinpaughs,€the€attorney€calculatedÐ À Ðthe€total€amount€of€lost€interest€from€October€1994€to€January€2002€to€be€$10,540€plus€$4,444€in€real€estate€taxes,€forÐ „Ä Ða€total€of€$14,984€in€damages.€€For€the€Grahams,€he€calculated€$7,906€in€lost€interest,€$1,200€for€constructing€a€well,Ð Hˆ Ðplus€$572€in€real€estate€taxes,€for€a€total€of€$9,678€in€damages.<Ûïÿÿ:z©Bottom of Ó7€S(€X7ÓÓ  ÓÓ  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÔ‡ÔÔ?‡h%ä2¼A`‹Arial?ÔÓ  ÓÔ‡ôôôÔÔS‡ô\  `‹&Times New RomanSÔÓ7€Z(€X7ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ  Ó&ÿÿ  d d(|G2@ä$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Šm»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô/ò»»ÔQ)1dxd<Ûïÿÿ:z©Top of ForÓ7€U(€X7ÓÓ  ÓÓ  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÔ‡ÔÔ?‡h%ä2¼A`‹Arial?ÔÓ  ÓÔ‡ôôôÔÔS‡ô\  `‹&Times New RomanSÔÓ7€Z(€X7ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ  ÓQ)2dxd d [Ý ƒR@ä$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô/ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔIn€1990,€these€regulations€required:€€(1)€a€fifty„foot€cleared€right„of„way;€(2)€proper€grading€and€drainage;€(3)Ð À Ða€thirty„foot€minimum€graded€road€top;€(4)€a€minimum€of€six€inches€of€compacted€crushed€stone€extending€from€shoulderÐ „Ä Ðto€shoulder€for€thirty€feet;€(5)€a€minimum€of€two€inches€of€asphalt€extending€at€least€twenty„two€feet€wide€with€shoulderÐ Hˆ Ðstone;€(6)€properly€installed€cross€drains€and€drainage€tiles;€(7)€properly€installed€road€signs;€(8)€painted€reflective€centerÐ  L Ðand€side€lines€a€minimum€of€four€inches€wide;€and€(9)€written€verification€from€the€developer€that€all€of€the€required€roadÐ Ð Ðregulations€have€been€met.€(|3O”$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Šm»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV'ÿÿdxd)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó0KSÿÿ.SampleÔK‡g<þ6X9`(‹Courier NewKÔÔS‡ô\  `‹&Times New RomanSÔ^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3O”$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Šm»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKK0ÿÿ.Strongò òó ó8dlÿÿ6TypewriterÔ‡ôôôÔÔK‡g<þ6X9`(‹Courier NewKÔÔ‡ôôôÔÔS‡ô\  `‹&Times New RomanSÔ4ÿÿ2Variableòòóó: ÿÿ8HTML MarkupÔB  ÔÔ ÿ ÔÔ  Ô2 ÿÿ0CommentÔB  Ô<þ6X9`(‹Courier New%ä2¼A`‹Arial(;3£$´´Ô2#ÔÚ  Ú0Ú  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0  à ÙÝ ƒR@ä$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú6Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô/ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔOf€course,€approval€of€a€plat€by€the€regional€planning€commission€ð ðshall€not€be€deemed€to€constitute€or€effectÐ À Ðan€acceptance€by€any€county€or€by€the€public€of€the€dedication€of€any€road€or€other€ground€shown€upon€the€plat.ðð€Tenn.Ð „Ä ÐCode€Ann.€ðð€13„3„405€(1999).€€The€Tennessee€Supreme€Court€has€explained€that€ð ðthe€exception€carved€out€of€the€actÐ Hˆ Ðproviding€that€plat€approval€is€not€acceptance€of€roads€therein€clearly€shows€the€legislative€intent€of€requiring€specificÐ  L Ðand€separate€acceptance€of€roads,€over€and€above€the€steps€required€to€get€plat€approval.ððòòFoley€v.€Hamiltonóó,€659€S.W.2dÐ Ð Ðat€360.€€Such€acceptance€would€depend€upon€whether€the€road€at€issue€complied€with€the€countyððs€regulations€regardingÐ ”Ô Ðnew€roads. 6Ý ƒR@ä$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú7Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô/ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔWe€note€that€Mr.€Shahan€violated€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€13„3„410(a)€(1999)€by€selling€tracts€of€land€in€hisÐ À Ðdevelopment€before€obtaining€planning€commission€approval. !Ý ƒR@ä$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú8Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô/ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔBased€on€this€record,€the€Franklin€County€Highway€Commission€now€requires€new€roads€to€comply€with€theÐ À Ð1995€Franklin€County€new€road€standards. ¦Ý ƒR@ä$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô/ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€13„4„301(4)€(1999).Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Šm»»ddÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑTRXì3Ø'Avery 5163 ShippingXà3Ø' Letter3Ø'Avery 5163 ShippingÔñ(ññ'ñÑTRXì3Ø'ÿ3Ø'LetterTÑÑÀ°ÑÑÀ°ÑÑ  ÑÔ€¼Šm»»»ÔÑ8€ÝýXXdì»»d8ÑÑ  Ñà@ü ü ìàÔ‡î´î»¼ŠmÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ À Ðà@kk$ìàAT€NASHVILLEÔ#†¼Šm»îî´|#ԈРæ& ÐÓ  ÓMay€6,€2003€SessionÐ  L ÐÔ‡XÝýX»¼ŠmÔÌò òÔ#†¼Šm»XXÝý`#ÔEARL€M.€SHAHAN€v.€FRANKLIN€COUNTY,€òòet€alóó.Ð  J Ðó óÔ‡XÝýX»¼ŠmÔÌà@@½½ìàò ò€Appeals€from€the€Chancery€Court€for€Franklin€CountyÐ  J Ðà@@øøìàNos.€16,129€&€16,235€€€€€€John€W.€Rollins,€JudgeÐ ö 6 ÐÌÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<¹ ` AßÐ º ú  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€M2002„00725„Ô_ÔCOAÔ_Ô„R3„CV€„€Filed€December€30,€Ô_Ô2003Ô_ԀРµõ  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<Œ` Aßó óÐ Í  ÐÓ  ÓÔ#†¼Šm»XXÝýí#ÔÔ€XÝýX»¼ŠmÔÌThis€case€involves€a€dispute€between€Franklin€County€and€the€developer€and€residents€of€aÐ ˆÈ  Ðsubdivision€over€the€maintenance€of€roads€in€the€subdivision.€€After€the€county€declined€theÐ t´ Ðdeveloperððs€public€dedication€of€the€roads€and€denied€applications€for€building€permits€in€theÐ `  Ðsubdivision€because€of€inadequate€roads,€the€developer€and€several€property€owners€filed€separateÐ LŒ Ðsuits€against€the€county€in€the€Chancery€Court€for€Franklin€County€to€determine€the€responsibilityÐ 8x Ðfor€maintaining€the€roads.€€The€property€owners€also€sought€specific€performance€and€damages€fromÐ $d Ðthe€developer.€€The€trial€court€consolidated€the€cases€and,€following€a€bench€trial,€held€that€theÐ P Ðcounty€was€not€responsible€for€maintaining€the€roads.€€The€trial€court€also€directed€the€developer€toÐ ü< Ðbring€the€roads€up€to€1990€subdivision€standards.€€The€developer€asserts€on€this€appeal€that€there€hadÐ è( Ðbeen€an€implied€public€dedication€of€the€roads€and,€therefore,€that€the€county€was€responsible€forÐ Ô Ðmaintaining€them.€€For€their€part,€two€property€owners€assert€that€they€are€entitled€to€damages€inÐ À Ðaddition€to€specific€performance.€€We€have€determined€that€the€trial€court€correctly€determined€thatÐ ¬ì Ðthe€roads€were€not€public€roads€and€that€the€property€owners€were€not€entitled€to€damages€as€wellÐ ˜Ø Ðas€specific€performance.€€However,€we€have€also€determined€that€the€trial€court€should€have€orderedÐ „Ä Ðthe€developer€to€bring€the€roads€up€to€the€countyððs€current€road€standards.Ð p° ÐÓ"ÓÌò òTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Judgment€of€the€Chancery€Court€Ð H ˆ  ÐModified€and€Affirmedó óÐ 4!t! ÐÌòòÓ  ÓWilliam€C.€Koch,€Jr.,óó€J.,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòBen€H.€Cantrell,€P.J.,€M.S.,óóÐ  #L# Ðand€òòWilliam€B.€Cain,€J.óó,€joined.Ð ø#8 $ ÐÌClifton€N.€Miller€and€Felicia€B.€Walkup,€Tullahoma,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellant,€Earl€M.€Shahan.Ð Ð%"& ÐÌJohn€B.€Curtis€and€Steve€E.€Smith,€Chattanooga,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellees,€Franklin€County,Ð ¨'è#( ÐTennessee,€Montgomery€Adams,€and€John€W.€Woodall.Ð ”(Ô$) ÐÌJ.€Stanley€Rogers,€Christina€Henley€Duncan,€and€Laura€D.€Riddle,€Manchester,€Tennessee,€for€theÐ l*¬&+ Ðappellees,€Ron€Cunningham,€Linda€Hudson,€George€Peckinpaugh,€Dorothy€Peckinpaugh,€JacksonÐ X+˜', ÐGraham,€and€Joyce€Graham.Ð D,„(- ÐÌÐ .\*/ý ÐÔ_ÔÓí Óò òOPINIONó óÐ À ÐÌÓ  Óà@¬¬)ìàò òI.ó óˆÐ ˜Ø ÐÌà  àEarl€M.€Shahan€has€owned€and€operated€a€real€estate€business€in€Franklin€County€for€overÐ p° Ðfifty€years.€€He€had€acquired€many€tracks€of€real€property€over€the€years,€and€by€November€1989,€heÐ \œ Ðowned€approximately€eighty€acres€bordering€Radio€Beam€Lane€and€Deer€Creek€Lane€by€inheritance,Ð H ˆ Ðgift,€and€purchase.€€At€that€time,€Radio€Beam€Lane€and€Deer€Creek€Lane€were€only€unimproved€dirtÐ 4 t Ðroads€running€over€fields€and€farmland.€Ð  ` ÐÌà  àIn€September€1990,€Mr.€Shahan€and€Charles€Abbott,€one€of€Franklin€Countyððs€roadÐ ø 8  Ðcommissioners,€discussed€the€need€for€a€connecting€road€between€Highway€41A€and€Rock€CreekÐ ä $  ÐRoad.€€Mr.€Abbott€told€Mr.€Shahan€that€the€county€would€ð ðtry€to€get€a€road€thereðð€if€he€would€obtainÐ Ð  Ða€50„foot€right„of„way€and€make€certain€improvements€to€Radio€Beam€Lane€and€Deer€Creek€Lane.€Ð ¼ü  ÐOver€the€next€three€years,€Mr.€Shahan€obtained€the€50„foot€right„of„way€and€made€$37,000€inÐ ¨è  Ðimprovements€to€Radio€Beam€Lane€and€Deer€Creek€Lane.€€He€bulldozed€the€roads,€placed€drainageÐ ”Ô  Ðtiles,€and€cleared€and€graded€the€roadbed.€€In€addition,€he€recorded€easements€for€ingress€and€egressÐ €À Ðfor€all€his€property€along€Deer€Creek€Lane€and€Radio€Beam€Lane,€and€he€prepared€a€plat€showingÐ l¬ Ða€50„foot€right„of„way€for€power€lines.€Ð X˜ ÐÌà  àOn€November€30,1993,€Mr.€Shahan€delivered€a€deed€to€Mr.€Abbott€conveying€ownership€ofÐ 0p Ðthe€rights„of„way€for€Radio€Beam€Lane€and€Deer€Creek€Lane€to€Franklin€County.€€However,€theÐ \ ÐFranklin€County€Highway€Commission€declined€to€accept€the€deed€for€the€rights„of„way,€and€in€earlyÐ H Ð1994,€Mr.€Abbott€returned€the€deed€to€Mr.€Shahan.€€The€county€declined€to€accept€the€roads€becauseÐ ô4 Ðthey€failed€to€meet€county€standards.€€Specifically,€they€(1)€were€not€wide€enough,€(2)€lackedÐ à  Ðsufficient€gravel,€and€(3)€were€not€paved€with€asphalt.€€In€addition,€the€drainage€tiles€wereÐ Ì  Ðinadequate,€and€the€ditches€running€along€the€roads€were€obstructed.€€Because€it€had€declined€toÐ ¸ø Ðaccept€these€roads,€the€county€also€declined€to€maintain€them.€€However,€the€public€has€used€bothÐ ¤ä ÐRadio€Beam€Lane€and€Deer€Creek€Lane€as€a€connector€between€Rock€Creek€Road€and€HighwayÐ Ð Ð41A.Ð |¼ ÐÌà  àMr.€Shahan€continued€to€subdivide€and€sell€his€property€along€Radio€Beam€Lane€and€DeerÐ T ” ÐCreek€Lane€even€though€Franklin€County€declined€to€accept€the€roads.׃ ×Ý ƒM#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€He€advertised€the€propertyÐ @!€  Ðalong€Deek€Creek€Lane€as€a€ð ðperfect€setting€for€your€dream€homeðð€and€that€the€tracts€he€was€sellingÐ ,"l! Ðwere€ð ðperfect€building€sites.ðð€€In€October€1994,€George€and€Dorothy€Peckinpaugh€purchased€fifteenÐ #X" Ðacres€from€Mr.€Shahan€for€$36,000.€€In€February€1997,€Linda€Hudson€and€Ron€CunninghamÐ $D # Ðpurchased€six€acres€from€Mr.€Shahan€for€$21,400.€€Later€in€1997,€Dennis€and€Brenda€HuprichÐ ð$0!$ Ðpurchased€five€and€one„half€acres€for€$17,250.€€In€September€1998,€Jackson€and€Joyce€GrahamÐ Ü%"% Ðpurchased€nine€acres€for€$27,750,€and€€Larry€Evans€purchased€five€acres€and€a€home€from€WilliamÐ È&#& Ðand€Sharon€Devine,€who€had€purchased€the€lot€from€Mr.€Shahan€in€1995.€€Mr.€Shahan€assured€allÐ ´'ô#' Ðof€the€purchasers€that€Deer€Creek€Lane€and€Radio€Beam€Lane€would€be€taken€over,€improved,€andÐ  (à$( Ðmaintained€by€the€county.Ð Œ)Ì%) Їà  àThe€property€owners€eventually€began€applying€for€building€permits€to€construct€homes€onÐ À Ðtheir€property.€€The€Peckinpaughs€obtained€a€building€permit€in€1996,€and€Ms.€Hudson€and€Mr.Ð ¬ì ÐCunningham€obtained€a€building€permit€in€October€1997.€€Thereafter,€Mark€Dudley,€FranklinÐ ˜Ø ÐCountyððs€building€commissioner,€declined€to€issue€other€building€permits€because€neither€theÐ „Ä Ðsubdivision€nor€Radio€Beam€Lane€and€Deer€Creek€Lane€had€been€approved€by€the€planningÐ p° Ðcommission.€€As€a€result€of€the€moratorium€on€building€permits,€the€Grahams€have€been€unable€toÐ \œ Ðconstruct€a€home€on€their€lot.€€Their€efforts€to€sell€the€property€have€been€unsuccessful€becauseÐ H ˆ Ðpotential€buyers€lost€interest€in€the€property€when€they€discovered€that€they€would€be€unable€toÐ 4 t Ðobtain€a€building€permit.Ð  ` ÐÌà  àMr.€Shahan€had€not€given€up€on€turning€over€the€responsibility€for€Radio€Beam€Lane€andÐ ø 8  ÐDeer€Creek€Lane€to€the€county.€€In€January€1998,€he€surreptitiously€recorded€a€deed€dedicating€theÐ ä $  Ðlanes€to€the€county.€€However,€the€county€discovered€the€plot€and€again€rejected€the€deed.€€In€1999,Ð Ð  ÐMr.€Shahan€again€asked€the€county€to€accept€the€roads;€however,€the€county€again€declined€toÐ ¼ü  Ðconsider€accepting€the€roads€until€he€improved€them€up€to€county€standards.Ð ¨è  ÐÌà  àOn€November€16,€1999,€Mr.€Shahan€filed€suit€against€the€Franklin€County€officials€in€theÐ €À ÐChancery€Court€for€Franklin€County.€€He€argued€that€the€county€was€now€responsible€for€theÐ l¬ Ðmaintenance€of€Radio€Beam€Lane€and€Deer€Creek€Lane€on€the€alternative€theories€of€impliedÐ X˜ Ðdedication€and€€promissory€estoppel.€€He€also€requested€a€declaratory€judgment€that€the€propertyÐ D„ Ðowners€along€these€roads€were€entitled€to€building€permits.€€On€February€22,€2000,€several€personsÐ 0p Ðwho€had€purchased€property€from€Mr.€Shahan€filed€suit€in€the€Chancery€Court€for€Franklin€CountyÐ \ Ðagainst€the€county€and€Mr.€Shahan.€€The€property€owners€sought€a€declaratory€judgment€regardingÐ H Ðthe€responsibility€for€maintaining€the€roads,€specific€performance€against€Mr.€Shahan,€andÐ ô4 Ðcompensatory€damages€against€both€the€county€and€Mr.€Shahan.Ð à  ÐÌà  àThe€trial€court€consolidated€the€two€cases€in€August€2000,€and€thereafter€the€county€movedÐ ¸ø Ðfor€a€summary€judgment,€and€Mr.€Shahan€moved€for€a€partial€summary€judgment.€€The€trial€courtÐ ¤ä Ðdenied€Mr.€Shahanððs€motion€but€partially€granted€the€countyððs€motion€by€dismissing€(1)€Mr.Ð Ð ÐShahanððs€and€the€property€ownersðð€claims€for€monetary€damages,€(2)€the€claims€arising€out€of€theÐ |¼ Ðdenial€of€building€permits,€and€(3)€all€claims€against€individual€county€defendants.€€Following€aÐ h¨ Ðbench€trial€in€January€2002,€the€trial€court€filed€an€order€on€February€7,€2002,€directing€Mr.€ShahanÐ T ” Ðto€improve€Radio€Beam€Lane€and€Deer€Creek€Lane€up€to€its€1990€road€standards€and€to€submit€hisÐ @!€  Ðsubdivision€to€the€Franklin€County€Planning€Commission€for€approval€within€six€months.€€The€trialÐ ,"l! Ðcourt€also€denied€the€property€ownersðð€claims€for€monetary€damages€against€Mr.€Shahan.€€Both€Mr.Ð #X" ÐShahan€and€the€property€owners€have€appealed.Ð $D # ÐÌà@……)ìàò òII.ó óˆÐ Ü%"% Ðà@† † ìàòòò òMr.€Shahanððs€Equitable€Estoppel€Claimó óóóˆÐ È&#& ÐÌà  àMr.€Shahan€insists€that€Franklin€County€is€estopped€from€applying€its€subdivision€regulationsÐ  (à$( Ðto€his€property€and€from€declining€to€accept€Radio€Beam€Lane€and€Deer€Creek€Lane€as€public€roads.Ð Œ)Ì%) ÐHe€argues€that€Mr.€Abbott,€in€his€official€capacity€as€a€county€road€commissioner,€promised€him€thatÐ x*¸&* Ðthe€county€would€take€over€the€responsibility€for€the€roads€once€he€acquired€a€50„foot€right„of„wayÐ d+¤'+ Ðand€improved€them€and€that€he€had€fully€performed€his€end€of€the€bargain.€€Mr.€Shahanððs€equitableÐ P,(, Ðestoppel€claim€must€fail€for€three€reasons.€€First,€Mr.€Abbott€lacked€the€authority€to€bind€the€countyÐ À Ðto€accept€these€roads€as€public€roads.€€Second,€the€evidence€does€not€support€Mr.€Shahanððs€claim€thatÐ ¬ì ÐMr.€Abbott€promised€to€accept€these€roads€as€public€roads.€€Third,€Mr.€Shahan€never€constructed€theÐ ˜Ø Ðroads€to€existing€county€standards.Ð „Ä ÐÌà@‹‹)ìàò òA.ó óˆÐ \œ ÐÌà  àThe€doctrine€of€equitable€estoppel€is€not€favored€in€Tennessee,€and€parties€seeking€to€invokeÐ 4 t Ðit€have€the€burden€of€€proving€each€and€every€element.€€òòRobinson€v.€Tennessee€Farmers€Mut.€Ins.Ð  ` ÐCo.,óó€857€S.W.2d€559,€563€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1993).€€The€doctrine€protects,€rather€than€creates,€rights.€Ð  L  ÐòòFranklin€v.€St.€Paul€Fire€&€Marine€Ins.€Co.óó,€534€S.W.2d€661,€666€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1975);€òòE.K.Ð ø 8  ÐHardison€Seed€Co.€v.€Continental€Cas.€Co.óó,€56€Tenn.€App.€644,€652,€410€S.W.2d€729,€733€(1967).€Ð ä $  ÐEquitable€estoppel€€may€be€invoked€in€appropriate€circumstances€to€prevent€one€party€from€takingÐ Ð  Ðunfair€advantage€of€another€partyððs€justifiable€reliance€on€his€or€her€representations€or€conduct.Ð ¼ü  ÐòòBokor€v.€Holder,óó€722€S.W.2d€676,€680€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1986).€Ð ¨è  ÐÌà  àApplying€the€doctrine€of€equitable€estoppel€to€local€governments€is€even€less€favored,€andÐ €À Ðso€the€doctrine€is€not€applicable€to€governmental€defendants€to€the€same€extent€that€it€is€applicableÐ l¬ Ðto€private€parties.€€òòPaduch€v.€City€of€Johnson€City,óó€896€S.W.2d€767,€772€(Tenn.€1995).€€In€fact,Ð X˜ Ðexcept€for€ð ðvery€exceptional€circumstances,ðð€the€doctrine€does€not€apply€to€government€actions.€Ð D„ ÐòòBledsoe€County€v.€McReynolds,óó€703€S.W.2d€123,€124€(Tenn.€1985).€€As€the€Tennessee€SupremeÐ 0p ÐCourt€has€explained,€ð ðin€those€Tennessee€cases€where€estoppel€was€applied,€or€could€have€beenÐ \ Ðapplied,€the€public€body€took€affirmative€action€that€clearly€induced€a€private€party€to€act€to€his€orÐ H Ðher€detriment,€as€distinguished€from€silence,€non„action€or€acquiescence.ðð€òòBledsoe€County€v.Ð ô4 ÐMcReynolds,óó€703€S.W.2d€at€125.€Ð à  ÐÌà  àThis€court€has€held€that€equitable€estoppel€may€be€invoked€against€governmental€agenciesÐ ¸ø Ðonly€when€the€agency€induced€the€party€to€give€up€property€or€a€right€in€exchange€for€a€promise.Ð ¤ä ÐòòThompson€v.€Department€of€Codes€Admin,€óó20€S.W.3d€654,€664€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1999);€òòElizabethtonÐ Ð ÐHous.€and€Dev.€Agency,€Inc.€v.€Price,óó€844€S.W.2d€614,€618€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1992).€€Accordingly,Ð |¼ Ða€party€may€invoke€equitable€estoppel€against€a€governmental€agency€only€when€the€facts€clearlyÐ h¨ Ðestablish€the€existence€of€an€implied€contract€or€that€the€government€has€induced€a€party€to€relinquishÐ T ” Ða€cause€of€action.€òòThompson€v.€Department€of€Codes€Admin,€óó20€S.W.3d€at€664;€òòElizabethton€Hous.Ð @!€  Ð&€Dev.€Agency,€Inc.€v.€Price,óó€844€S.W.2d€at€618.€Ð ,"l! ÐÌà@)ìàò òB.ˆÐ $D # Ðó óÌà  àThe€essence€of€Mr.€Shahanððs€equitable€estoppel€claim€is€that€Mr.€Abbott€induced€him€toÐ Ü%"% Ðspend€money€to€improve€Radio€Beam€Lane€and€Deer€Creek€Lane€by€promising€him€that€the€countyÐ È&#& Ðwould€take€over€the€responsibility€for€maintaining€the€roads€once€they€were€constructed.€€He€insistsÐ ´'ô#' Ðthat€he€could€reasonably€rely€on€Mr.€Abbottððs€promise€because€Mr.€Abbott€was€the€Franklin€CountyÐ  (à$( Ðroad€commissioner€in€charge€of€the€roads€in€that€part€of€the€county.€€Because€the€trial€court€made€fewÐ Œ)Ì%) Ðfindings€of€fact€regarding€Mr.€Shahanððs€equitable€estoppel€claim,€we€have€reviewed€the€record€deÐ x*¸&* Ðnovo€and€have€determined€that€the€evidence€does€not€support€Mr.€Shahanððs€claim.Ð d+¤'+ ÐÐ P,(, Ðà  àDespite€the€fact€that€Mr.€Abbott€may€have€been€a€county€road€commissioner€in€the€earlyÐ À Ð1990s,€he€did€not€have€authority€to€bind€the€county€to€accept€private€roads€as€public€roads.׃×Ý ƒM#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€PartiesÐ ¬ì Ðwho€deal€with€governmental€officials€are€presumed€to€know€the€limits€of€the€officialððs€authority.€Ð ˜Ø ÐòòJ.A.€Kreis€&€Co.€v.€City€of€Knoxvilleóó,€145€Tenn.€297,€305,€237€S.W.€55,€57€(1921);€òòStones€RiverÐ „Ä ÐUtils.€v.€Metro.€Govððtóó,€981€S.W.2d€175,€178€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1998).€€Accordingly,€when€Mr.€ShahanÐ p° Ðhad€his€conversation€about€the€roads€with€Mr.€Abbott€in€1990,€he€knew€or€should€have€known€thatÐ \œ ÐMr.€Abbott€could€not€unilaterally€bind€the€county€to€accept€the€roads€and,€therefore,€that€anyÐ H ˆ Ðcommitment€Mr.€Abbott€might€have€made€regarding€the€roads€was€legally€unenforceable.€Ð 4 t ÐÌà  àIn€addition€to€our€conclusion€that€Mr.€Abbott€lacked€authority€to€bind€the€county,€we€haveÐ  L  Ðalso€determined€that€the€record€does€not€bear€out€Mr.€Shahanððs€claim€that€Mr.€Abbott€actuallyÐ ø 8  Ðpromised€that€the€county€would€accept€these€roads€if€they€were€improved.€€Mr.€Abbottððs€recollectionÐ ä $  Ðof€his€conversation€with€Mr.€Shahan€differs€significantly€from€Mr.€Shahanððs.€€Mr.€Abbott€recalls€thatÐ Ð  Ðhe€told€Mr.€Shahan€that€the€county€would€ð ðtry€to€help€him€build€a€road€through€there.ðð€€We€do€notÐ ¼ü  Ðconstrue€this€comment€to€be€an€unequivocal€promise€to€accept€the€roads€or€some€impliedÐ ¨è  Ðauthorization€to€construct€roads€that€did€not€meet€the€existing€county€requirements€for€new€roadÐ ”Ô  Ðconstruction.€€Mr.€Shahan€was€far€from€a€neophyte€in€1990€when€he€had€his€conversation€with€Mr.Ð €À ÐAbbott€and€should€have€known€the€difference€between€encouragement€and€a€binding€commitment.Ð l¬ ÐÌà  àFinally,€the€evidence€establishes€beyond€question€that€Mr.€Shahanððs€improvements€to€RadioÐ D„ ÐBeam€Lane€and€Deer€Creek€Lane€did€not€meet€the€countyððs€existing€requirements€for€new€roadÐ 0p Ðconstruction.׃W ×Ý ƒM#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€It€is€essentially€undisputed€that€these€roads€(1)€were€not€wide€enough,€(2)€lackedÐ \ Ðsufficient€gravel,€(3)€were€not€paved€with€asphalt,€and€(4)€lacked€adequate€drainage€tiles.€€Mr.Ð H ÐShahan,€as€an€experienced€developer,€knew€or€should€have€known€the€requirements€for€new€roadÐ ô4 Ðconstruction,€and,€therefore,€it€was€not€reasonable€for€him€to€entertain€the€notion€that€the€countyÐ à  Ðwould€accept€or€could€be€required€to€accept€newly€constructed€roads€that€did€not€meet€the€countyððsÐ Ì  Ðminimum€standards.€Ð ¸ø ÐÌà  àMr.€Shahan€cannot€use€a€casual€conversation€with€a€county€road€commissioner€to€circumventÐ Ð Ðthe€county€standards€for€new€road€construction€or€to€force€the€county€taxpayers€to€bear€the€expenseÐ |¼ Ðof€properly€constructing€and€then€maintaining€his€roads.€€The€record€demonstrates€that€Mr.€ShahanÐ h¨ Ðhas€not€proved€the€existence€of€the€sort€of€exceptional€circumstances€that€would€warrant€invokingÐ T ” Ðthe€doctrine€of€equitable€estoppel€against€Franklin€County.€€Accordingly,€we€affirm€the€trial€courtððsÐ @!€  Ðconclusion€that€Mr.€Shahan€failed€to€substantiate€his€equitable€estoppel€claim.Ð ,"l! ÐÐ #X" Ðà@^^(ìàò òIII.ó óˆÐ À Ðà@ž ž ìàò òòòMr.€Shahanððs€Implied€Dedication€Claimóóó óˆÐ ¬ì ÐÌà  àMr.€Shahan€also€argues€that€there€has€been€an€implied€dedication€of€Radio€Beam€Lane€andÐ „Ä ÐDeer€Creek€Lane€as€public€roads€because€the€public€has€been€using€these€roads€since€he€improvedÐ p° Ðthem.€€While€it€is€undoubtedly€true€that€the€public€has€used€the€roads,€we€have€determined€that€theÐ \œ Ðdoctrine€of€implied€dedication€does€not€apply€because€the€roads€are€in€an€unapproved€subdivision.€Ð H ˆ ÐThe€doctrine€of€implied€dedication€cannot€be€used€to€circumvent€duly€enacted€subdivisionÐ 4 t Ðregulations.Ð  ` ÐÌà@‹‹)ìàò òA.ó óˆÐ ø 8  ÐÌà  àA€dedication€of€real€property€for€public€use€requires€an€offer€of€the€property€for€public€useÐ Ð  Ðby€its€owner€and€the€publicððs€acceptance€of€the€property€ownerððs€offer.€€òòStoker€v.€Brown,óó€583€S.W.2dÐ ¼ü  Ð765,€766€(Tenn.€1979);€òòWinn€v.€Tucker€Corp.,óó€848€S.W.2d€64,€68€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1992).€€Both€theÐ ¨è  Ðoffer€and€the€acceptance€need€not€be€express.€€They€may€be€implied.€€òòState€ex€rel.€Matthews€v.Ð ”Ô  ÐMetropolitan€Govððtóó,€679€S.W.2d€946,€948€(Tenn.€1984);òò€West€Meade€Homeowners€Assððn,€Inc.€v.Ð €À ÐWPMC,€Inc.,óó€788€S.W.2d€365,€366€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1989).€Ð l¬ ÐÌà  àParties€seeking€to€prove€an€implied€dedication€must€present€clear€and€convincing€evidenceÐ D„ Ðthat€the€property€owner€intended€to€permanently€part€with€the€real€property€and€to€vest€it€in€theÐ 0p Ðpublic.€€òòJackson€v.€Byrn,óó€216€Tenn.€537,€543,€393€S.W.2d€137,€140€(1965);€òòMcKinney€v.€Duncan,óóÐ \ Ð121€Tenn.€265,€271,€118€S.W.€683,€684€(1909).€€This€evidence€may€be€circumstantial.€€òòCole€v.€Dych,óóÐ H Ð535€S.W.2d€315,€319€(Tenn.€1976);€òòRogers€v.€Sain,óó€679€S.W.2d€450,€453€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1984).€Ð ô4 ÐThey€must€also€prove€that€the€property€has€been€accepted€for€public€use.€€The€governmentððsÐ à  Ðacceptance€of€the€property€likewise€need€not€be€express.€€It€too€may€be€implied.€€òòNashville€&€D.R.R.Ð Ì  Ðv.€Stateóó,€60€Tenn.€55,€57„58€(1873);€òòHackett€v.€Smith€Countyóó,€807€S.W.2d€695,€699€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.Ð ¸ø Ð1990);€òòCartwright€v.€Bellóó,€57€Tenn.€App.€352,€368-369,€418€S.W.2d€463,€470-471€(1967).Ð ¤ä ÐÌà  àAn€implication€of€public€acceptance€arises€from€ð ða€general€and€long„continued€use€by€theÐ |¼ Ðpublic€as€of€right.ðð€€òòDoyle€v.€City€of€Chattanoogaóó,€128€Tenn.€433,€438,€161€S.W.€997,€998€(1913).€Ð h¨ ÐWhile€the€common„law€does€not€require€a€particular€duration€of€public€use,€ð ðit€ought€to€be€for€suchÐ T ” Ða€length€of€time€that€the€public€accommodation€and€private€rights€might€be€materially€affected€byÐ @!€  Ðan€interruption€of€the€enjoyment.ðð€òòScott€v.€State,óó€33€Tenn.€(1€Sneed)€629,€633€(1854);€òòsee€also€TownÐ ,"l! Ðof€Benton€v.€Peoples€Bank€of€Polk€County,óó€904€S.W.2d€598,€602€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1995).€€TheÐ #X" ÐTennessee€Supreme€Court€has€explained€that€€€Ð $D # ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð à[n]o€particular€period€is€controlling.€Use€for€twenty€years€might€beÐ Ü%"% Ðinsufficient€to€establish€dedication€in€one€case€and€yet€it€might€beÐ È&#& Ðestablished€in€another€in€one€year.€Dedication€is€not€dependent€uponÐ ´'ô#' Ðthe€duration€of€use.€Use€for€a€long€period€of€time€is,€however,€aÐ  (à$( Ðcircumstance€tending€to€show€the€fact€of€dedication.€òòÐŒ)Ì%)` x` x ÐÌCole€v.€Dychóó,€535€S.W.2d€at€320.€€Ð d+¤'+ ÐÐ P,(, Ðà  àHowever,€the€doctrine€of€implied€dedication€should€not,€as€a€general€matter,€apply€to€roadsÐ À Ðthat€are€part€of€a€subdivision€as€defined€in€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€13„3„401(4)€(1999).€€The€regionalÐ ¬ì Ðplanning€statutes,€like€their€municipal€counterparts,׃w×Ý ƒM#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€exist€to€promote€the€health,€safety,€and€welfareÐ ˜Ø Ðof€the€local€residents€and€property€owners€by€prescribing€uniform€rules€for€the€orderly€developmentÐ „Ä Ðof€real€property.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€13„3„302€(1999).€€They€protect€the€public€by€guaranteeing€thatÐ p° Ðadequate€streets€will€be€provided€when€property€is€subdivided.€€òòFoley€v.€Hamiltonóó,€659€S.W.2d€356,Ð \œ Ð360€(Tenn.€1983).€€Accordingly,€persons€desiring€to€develop€their€property€should€not€be€permittedÐ H ˆ Ðto€use€the€doctrine€of€implied€dedication€to€circumvent€these€statutes€and€regulations.Ð 4 t ÐÌà  àThe€regional€planning€statutes€themselves€cannot€easily€accommodate€the€implied€dedicationÐ  L  Ðdoctrine.€€Subdivisions€must€be€approved€by€the€regional€planning€commission.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.Ð ø 8  Ððð€13„3„402€(1999).€€Once€the€ð ðplatting€jurisdictionðð€of€a€regional€planning€commission€has€attached,€Ð ä $  ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àno€county€or€court€or€board€or€officer€thereof€or€any€other€publicÐ ¼ü  Ðofficer€or€authority€shall€accept,€lay€out,€open,€improve,€grade,€paveÐ ¨è  Ðor€light€any€road€.€.€.€unless€such€road€has€been€accepted€or€opened€orÐ ”Ô  Ðhas€otherwise€received€the€legal€status€of€a€public€road€prior€to€theÐ €À Ðattachment€of€the€planning€commissionððs€jurisdiction,€or€unless€suchÐ l¬ Ðroad€corresponds€in€its€location€and€lines€with€a€road€shown€on€aÐ X˜ Ðsubdivision€plat€approved€by€the€planning€commission.ÐD„` x` x ÐÌTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€13„3„406€(1999).€€Accordingly,€a€county€may€not€accept€new€or€improved€roads׃KT×Ý ƒM#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ð \ Ðin€a€subdivision€without€first€approving€the€subdivision€plat€and€then€accepting€the€roads.׃kà×Ý ƒM#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú6Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ׀РH ÐÌà  àThe€doctrine€of€implied€acceptance€has€only€limited€application€to€property€withinÐ à  Ðsubdivisions€governed€by€local€planning€statutes.€€It€may€be€invoked€when€a€local€government€hasÐ Ì  Ðdeclined€or€refused€to€explicitly€accept€property€after€a€developer€of€an€approved€subdivision€hasÐ ¸ø Ðcomplied€with€all€applicable€regulations.€€Accordingly,€we€have€employed€the€doctrine€in€a€caseÐ ¤ä Ðwhere€the€developer€had€complied€with€all€applicable€regulations€and€had€not€only€obtained€theÐ Ð Ðplanning€commissionððs€approval€of€the€subdivision€plat€but€also€had€obtained€a€certification€by€theÐ |¼ Ðcounty€road€commission€that€the€roads€in€the€subdivision€complied€with€county€standards.€€EvenÐ h¨ Ðthough€the€local€government€had€not€expressly€accepted€the€roads,€we€held€that€an€impliedÐ T ” Ðacceptance€had€occurred€because€the€residents€in€the€subdivision€and€the€public,€including€mailÐ @!€  Ðcarriers,€school€buses,€and€law€enforcement€vehicles€had€used€the€road.€€òòHackett€v.€Smith€Countyóó,Ð ,"l! Ð807€S.W.2d€at€699.€€Ð #X" Їà@)ìàò òB.ó óˆÐ À ÐÌà  àTo€determine€whether€Mr.€Shahan€may€take€advantage€of€the€doctrine€of€implied€dedication,Ð ˜Ø Ðwe€must€first€determine€whether€his€development€of€the€property€along€Radio€Beam€Lane€and€DeerÐ „Ä ÐCreek€Lane€is€a€subdivision.€€Mr.€Shahan€insists€that€his€development€is€not€a€subdivision€becauseÐ p° Ðthe€lots€in€the€subdivision€exceed€five€acres.€€While€we€have€no€doubt€that€Mr.€Shahan€set€out€toÐ \œ Ðavoid€the€regional€planning€commission,€we€find€that€he€has€not€succeeded.Ð H ˆ ÐÌà  àTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€13„3„401(4)(B)€defines€a€ð ðsubdivisionðð€as€ð ðthe€division€of€a€tract€orÐ  ` Ðparcel€of€land€into€two€(2)€or€more€lots,€sites,€or€other€divisions€requiring€new€streets€or€utilityÐ  L  Ðconstruction,€or€any€division€of€less€than€five€(5)€acres€for€the€purpose,€whether€immediate€or€future,Ð ø 8  Ðof€sale€or€building€development.ðð€€This€definition€plainly€includes€a€development€containing€lotsÐ ä $  Ðlarger€than€five€acres€if€the€development€required€new€streets€or€utility€construction.€€Accordingly,Ð Ð  Ðwe€determined€that€a€project€requiring€the€developer€(1)€to€make€major€improvements€in€an€existingÐ ¼ü  Ðroad€running€through€the€property,€(2)€to€arrange€for€providing€power€to€various€lots,€and€(3)€toÐ ¨è  Ðinstall€a€new€water€line€was€a€subdivisionòò.€€Loftin€v.€Langsdonóó,€813€S.W.2d€475,€479„80€(Tenn.€Ct.Ð ”Ô  ÐApp.€1991).€€Ð €À ÐÌà  àMr.€Shahan€made€$37,000€in€improvements€to€Radio€Beam€Lane€and€Deer€Creek€Lane€solelyÐ X˜ Ðfor€the€purpose€of€making€his€property€attractive€to€potential€purchasers.€€Like€the€developer€in€òòLoftinÐ D„ Ðv.€Langsdonóó,€he€improved€the€existing€roads€by€bulldozing€brush€and€trees,€grading,€and€installingÐ 0p Ðdrainage.€€He€also€prepared€a€plat€to€enable€the€local€electric€utility€to€install€power€lines€for€theÐ \ Ðdevelopment.€€Like€the€developer€in€òòLoftin€v.€Langsdonóó,€Mr.€Shahan€did€not€begin€selling€the€tractsÐ H Ðin€his€development€until€he€had€completed€the€improvements€to€the€road.€€There€is€little€doubt€thatÐ ô4 Ðthe€improvements€to€Radio€Beam€Lane€and€Deer€Creek€Lane€were€required€by€ð ðthe€imperatives€ofÐ à  Ðthe€marketplace.ðð€€òòLoftin€v.€Langsdonóó,€813€S.W.2d€at€480.€€Accordingly,€we€conclude€that€Mr.Ð Ì  ÐShahanððs€development€is€a€subdivision€because€it€required€new€street€and€utility€construction.׃o×Ý ƒM#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú7Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ׀Р¸ø ÐÌà@‹‹)ìàò òC.ˆÐ Ð ÐÌà  àó óBecause€Mr.€Shahanððs€development€is€a€ð ðsubdivisionðð€as€defined€in€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€13„3„Ð h¨ Ð401(4)(B),€he€was€required€not€only€to€obtain€approval€of€his€plat,€but€he€was€also€required€to€obtainÐ T ” Ðapproval€of€his€improvements€to€the€roads€in€his€subdivision€before€the€county€could€be€required€toÐ @!€  Ðaccept€the€roads€and€assume€responsibility€for€their€maintenance.€€Mr.€Shahan€did€neither.€€InÐ ,"l! Ðaddition,€his€improvements€to€Radio€Beam€Lane€and€Deer€Creek€Lane€did€not€comply€with€theÐ #X" Ðapplicable€county€requirements€for€new€roads.€€These€facts€distinguish€this€case€from€òòHackett€v.Ð $D # ÐSmith€County€óóin€which€the€developer€had€complied€with€all€applicable€requirements€for€new€roads.€Ð ð$0!$ ÐMr.€Shahanððs€wholesale€disregard€for€the€subdivision€regulations€and€road€requirements€disentitlesÐ Ü%"% Ðhim€to€claim€the€benefit€of€the€doctrine€of€implied€dedication.€€Accordingly,€the€trial€court€properlyÐ È&#& Ðdeclined€to€find€that€there€had€been€an€implied€acceptance€of€Radio€Beam€Lane€and€Deer€CreekÐ ´'ô#' ÐLane.Ð  (à$( ÐÐ Œ)Ì%) Ðà@dd)ìàò òIV.ó óˆÐ À Ðà@DD ìàòòò òThe€Standards€Applicable€to€Radio€Beam€Lane€and€Deer€Creek€Laneó óóóˆÐ ¬ì ÐÌà  àBecause€Mr.€Shahan€has€failed€to€pass€along€the€obligation€to€maintain€Radio€Beam€LaneÐ „Ä Ðand€Deek€Creek€Lane€to€Franklin€County,€he€has€the€continuing€obligation€to€maintain€these€roads.€Ð p° ÐThe€evidence€convincingly€demonstrates€he€has€shirked€his€responsibility.€€Several€property€ownersÐ \œ Ðtestified€that€the€roads€were€barely€passable€because€of€deep€potholes€and€that€they€had€become€ð ðanÐ H ˆ Ðobstacle€course.ðð€€When€it€rained,€poor€drainage€caused€water€to€cover€the€roadway€in€certain€areas.€Ð 4 t ÐAccordingly,€the€trial€court€properly€ordered€Mr.€Shahan€to€maintain€these€roads.Ð  ` ÐÌà  àHowever,€we€have€determined€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€only€requiring€Mr.€Shahan€to€bringÐ ø 8  Ðthese€roads€up€to€the€standards€as€they€existed€in€1990.€€This€decision€effectively€rewards€Mr.€ShahanÐ ä $  Ðfor€ignoring€the€subdivision€regulations€that€were€clearly€applicable€to€his€property.€€These€roads€areÐ Ð  Ðlocated€in€a€subdivision€that€has€yet€to€be€approved€by€the€regional€planning€commission.€€Mr.Ð ¼ü  ÐShahan€has€never€requested€the€planning€commission€to€approve€his€subdivision,€and€the€planningÐ ¨è  Ðcommission€will€not€be€required€to€approve€his€subdivision€until€he€submits€a€plat€that€meets€allÐ ”Ô  Ðapplicable€requirements.€€Likewise,€the€commission€will€not€be€required€to€accept€the€roads€in€theÐ €À Ðsubdivision€until€they€meet€applicable€requirements.Ð l¬ ÐÌà  àIn€light€of€the€fact€that€Mr.€Shahan€never€sought€appropriate€public€acceptance€of€these€roads,Ð D„ Ðhe€must€take€the€appropriate€steps€required€by€law€before€Franklin€County€can€be€required€to€acceptÐ 0p Ðthem.€€It€is€his€obligation€to€bring€these€roads€up€to€present€standards,€not€the€standards€existing€inÐ \ Ð1990.€€Accordingly,€we€modify€the€judgment€to€require€Mr.€Shahan€to€repair€or€improve€Radio€BeamÐ H ÐLane€and€Deer€Creek€Lane€so€that€they€meet€the€countyððs€current€road€standards.׃q×Ý ƒM#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú8Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ð ô4 ÐÌà@‹‹)ìàò òV.ó óˆÐ Ì  Ðà@v v ìàòòò òThe€Property€Ownersðð€Requests€for€Damagesó óóóˆÐ ¸ø ÐÌà  àTwo€of€the€property€owners€living€along€Radio€Beam€Lane€and€Deer€Creek€Lane€insist€thatÐ Ð Ðthey€are€entitled€to€collect€monetary€damages€from€Mr.€Shahan€in€addition€to€specific€performance.€Ð |¼ ÐThey€assert€that€they€have€lost€the€beneficial€use€of€the€money€they€used€to€purchase€the€propertyÐ h¨ Ðand,€therefore,€that€they€are€entitled€to€interest€on€the€money€between€the€time€they€purchased€theÐ T ” Ðproperty€and€the€time€that€Mr.€Shahan€obtains€approval€of€the€subdivision€and€the€roads.€€We€haveÐ @!€  Ðdetermined€that€the€trial€court€properly€denied€these€damage€claims.Ð ,"l! ÐÌà@‹‹)ìàò òA.ó óˆÐ $D # ÐÌà  àA€breach€of€contract€triggers€both€legal€and€equitable€remedies.€€The€preferred€remedy€is€theÐ Ü%"% Ðlegal€remedy€ð!ð€monetary€damages.€€òòShuptrine€v.€Quinnóó,€597€S.W.2d€728,€730€(Tenn.€1979);Ð È&#& ÐòòRobinson€v.€Kenneyóó,€526€S.W.2d€115,€119€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1973).€€The€purpose€of€monetaryÐ ´'ô#' Ðdamages€is€to€compensate€a€party€to€a€contract€for€the€loss€or€injury€sustained€by€the€other€partyððsÐ  (à$( Ðbreach.€€òòBeaty€v.€McGrawóó,€15€S.W.3d€819,€829€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1998).€€However,€there€areÐ Œ)Ì%) Ðoccasions€when€monetary€damages€are€insufficient€to€protect€a€contracting€partyððs€expectationÐ À Ðinterests.€€In€those€circumstances,€the€equitable€remedy€of€specific€performance€is€warranted.€€òòGRWÐ ¬ì ÐEnters.,€Inc.€v.€Davisóó,€797€S.W.2d€606,€614€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1990);€Restatement€(Second)€ofÐ ˜Ø ÐContracts€ðð€359(1)€(1981).Ð „Ä ÐÌà  àSpecific€performance€is€proper€whenever€there€is€any€reasonable€doubt€regarding€theÐ \œ Ðadequacy€of€monetary€damages.€€12€òòArthur€Linton€Corbin,€Corbin€on€Contracts€óóðð€1139,€atÐ H ˆ Ð188€(Interim€ed.€2002)€(ð ðòòCorbin€on€Contractsóóðð).€€While€granting€specific€performance€isÐ 4 t Ðdiscretionary,€òòNorth€v.€Robinetteóó,€527€S.W.2d€95,€98€(Tenn.€1975);€òòHillard€v.€Franklinóó,€41€S.W.3dÐ  ` Ð106,€111€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€2000),€the€courts€frequently€grant€specific€performance€with€regard€toÐ  L  Ðcontracts€for€the€sale€of€real€property.€€òòRadiophone€Broadcasting€Station€v.€Imbodenóó,€183€Tenn.€215,Ð ø 8  Ð219,€191€S.W.2d€535,€537€(1946);€òòMcGaugh€v.€Galbreathóó,€996€S.W.2d€186,€191€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.Ð ä $  Ð1998).Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àIn€proper€circumstances,€a€trial€court€may€award€both€specific€performance€and€damagesÐ ¨è  Ðwhen€specific€performance€will€not€make€the€injured€party€whole.€€òòBush€v.€Catheyóó,€598€S.W.2d€777,Ð ”Ô  Ð783€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1979).€€As€Professor€Corbin€has€explained:Ð €À ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àA€decree€for€specific€performance€seldom€brings€about€performanceÐ X˜ Ðwithin€the€time€that€the€contract€requires.€€In€this€respect,€such€aÐ D„ Ðdecree€is€nearly€always€a€decree€for€less€than€exact€and€completeÐ 0p Ðperformance.€€For€the€partial€breach€involved€in€the€delay€or€in€otherÐ \ Ðexisting€non„performance,€money€damages€will€be€awarded€alongÐ H Ðwith€the€decree€for€specific€performance.€Ðô4` x` x ÐÌ12€òòCorbin€on€Contracts€óóðð€1160,€at€254„55.€€Thus,€for€example,€a€court€may€properly€decreeÐ Ì  Ðspecific€performance€of€a€contract€to€convey€real€property€and€also€award€damages€for€delay€inÐ ¸ø Ðoccupancy.€€òò330€Michigan€Ave.,€Inc.€v.€Cambridge€Hotel,€Inc.óó,€183€So.€2d€725,€728€(Fla.€Ct.€App.Ð ¤ä Ð1966);€òòCohn€v.€Mezzacappa€Bros.,€Inc.óó,€547€N.Y.S.2d€367,€369€(App.€Div.€1989).Ð Ð ÐÌà@)ìàò òB.ó óˆÐ h¨ ÐÌà  àThe€trial€court€determined€that€the€property€owners€were€entitled€to€specific€performance€ofÐ @!€  ÐMr.€Shahanððs€agreement€to€provide€adequate€roads€for€ingress€and€egress€to€their€property.€€WhileÐ ,"l! Ðthe€property€owners€do€not€take€issue€with€the€trial€courtððs€decision€to€grant€them€specificÐ #X" Ðperformance,€they€assert€that€specific€performance€alone€is€insufficient€to€make€them€whole.€€WeÐ $D # Ðhave€determined€that€their€evidence€of€damages€is€far€too€speculative€to€warrant€an€award€ofÐ ð$0!$ Ðdamages€in€addition€to€specific€performance.Ð Ü%"% ÐÌà  àAs€the€parties€seeking€damages,€the€property€owners€must€prove€that€specific€performanceÐ ´'ô#' Ðalone€is€not€an€adequate€remedy.€€They€must€also€prove€the€nature€and€amount€of€their€damages,Ð  (à$( ÐòòHogan€v.€Coyne€Intððl€Enters.€Corp.óó,€996€S.W.2d€195,€206€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1998).€€While€their€proofÐ Œ)Ì%) Ðneed€not€be€mathematically€precise,€it€should€be€reasonably€certain€enough€to€enable€a€reasonableÐ x*¸&* Ðtrier„of„fact€to€make€a€fair€and€reasonable€assessment€of€the€damages.€€òòBaker€v.€Hooperóó,€50€S.W.3dÐ d+¤'+ Ð463,€470€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€2001);€òòTire€Shredders,€Inc.€v.€ERM„North€Central,€Inc.óó,€15€S.W.3d€849,Ð P,(, Ð857€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1999);€òòWachtel€v.€Western€Sizzlin€Corp.óó,€986€S.W.2d€2,€6€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.Ð À Ð1998).Ð ¬ì ÐÌà  àThe€Peckinpaughs€and€the€Grahams€assert€that€they€are€entitled€to€monetary€damages€becauseÐ „Ä Ðthey€lost€the€beneficial€use€of€their€property€due€to€the€substandard€roads€and€Mr.€Shahanððs€failureÐ p° Ðto€obtain€planning€commission€approval€for€the€subdivision.€€They€equate€their€damages€with€theÐ \œ Ðinterest€they€would€have€earned€on€the€money€they€used€to€purchase€their€property€had€they€investedÐ H ˆ Ðthe€funds€at€eight€percent€as€well€as€the€expenses€they€incurred€after€purchasing€the€property.׃N×Ý ƒM#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú9Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€WeÐ 4 t Ðfind€these€calculations€unrelated€to€the€actual€losses,€if€any,€that€the€parties€actually€incurred€becauseÐ  ` Ðof€Mr.€Shahanððs€conduct.Ð  L  ÐÌà  àThe€Grahams€purchased€their€9.25„acre€tract€because€they€wanted€access€to€the€back€ofÐ ä $  Ðanother€piece€of€property€they€owned.€€After€they€decided€to€build€a€house€on€the€property,€theyÐ Ð  Ðdiscovered€that€they€would€be€unable€to€obtain€a€building€permit€because€the€subdivision€wasÐ ¼ü  Ðunimproved.€€They€attempted€to€sell€the€property€in€1999,€but€potential€buyers€lost€interest€after€theyÐ ¨è  Ðdiscovered€that€they€would€be€unable€to€obtain€a€building€permit.€€They€introduced€no€evidenceÐ ”Ô  Ðregarding€the€diminished€value€of€the€property,€how€much€their€offering€price€was,€the€number€ofÐ €À Ðpotential€buyers€of€the€property,€or€whether€they€received€counter„offers€for€the€property€and,€if€so,Ð l¬ Ðthe€amount€of€these€counter„offers.€€More€importantly,€they€presented€no€evidence€that€the€amountÐ X˜ Ðthey€will€be€able€to€sell€the€property€for€after€Mr.€Shahan€improves€the€roads€and€obtains€approvalÐ D„ Ðof€the€subdivision€will€not€adequately€compensate€them.Ð 0p ÐÌà  àThe€Peckinpaughs€purchased€three€tracts€from€Mr.€Shahan.€€They€obtained€a€building€permitÐ H Ðto€construct€their€home€on€the€middle€lot€but€had€not€applied€for€building€permits€for€their€twoÐ ô4 Ðremaining€lots.€€In€addition,€the€Peckinpaughs€had€not€attempted€to€sell€any€of€their€property,€evenÐ à  Ðthough€they€planned€at€some€point€to€sell€the€two€undeveloped€lots€to€fund€their€retirement.€€In€lightÐ Ì  Ðof€this€proof,€the€Peckinpaughs€have€failed€to€prove€that€they€have€actually€been€harmed€by€Mr.Ð ¸ø ÐShahanððs€failure€to€construct€adequate€roads€or€to€obtain€approval€of€his€subdivision.Ð ¤ä ÐÌà@dd)ìàò òVI.ˆÐ |¼ Ðòòà@ìì*ìàóóˆÌó óà  àWe€affirm€the€judgment€as€modified€herein€and€remand€the€case€to€the€trial€court€withÐ T ” Ðdirections€to€enter€an€order€amending€its€final€decree€to€require€Mr.€Shahan€to€bring€Radio€BeamÐ @!€  ÐLane€and€Deer€Creek€Lane€up€to€Franklin€Countyððs€current€standards€for€new€roads.€€We€tax€theÐ ,"l! Ðcosts€of€this€appeal€to€Earl€M.€Shahan€for€which€execution,€if€necessary,€may€issue.Ð #X" ÐÌÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à_____________________________€Ð È&#& Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àWILLIAM€C.€KOCH,€JR.,€J.