Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Zoning Bulletin <br /> <br />The court disagreed with Phillips argument that to find there <br />was a "discontinuance" of the non-conforming multi-family use <br />under the statute, there had to be an intention to abandon that <br />use. Looking at the findings of courts in prior court cases involving <br />similar circumstances, the court found that a voluntary discontinu- <br />ance of the non-conforming use was ill that was need for the loss <br />of the "grandfather" protection. The court found that nothing pre- <br />vented the prior owners of the property from renting out the units. <br />Therefore, the court said, the cessation of the non-conforming use <br />was voluntary. The court agreed with the trial court's finding that <br />the lack of any tenant for approximately 20 months' resulted in the <br />loss of the grandfather clause's protection. <br /> <br />See also: Bramblett v. Coffee County Planning Com'n, 2007 WL <br />187894 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2007). <br /> <br />See also: Toles v. City of Dyersburg, 39 S. W,3d 138 (Tenn. Ct. <br />App. 2000). <br /> <br /> <br />12 <br /> <br />152 <br /> <br />.-" <br />