In Davis v. Richardson, 507 S.W.2d 446, 447 (Ky. 1974), Davis's application for a permit to locate a private social club in a residential zone was granted. Several residents, including one owning property adjacent to the proposed club, appealed. Id. Davis contended the residents did not have standing as persons who were injured or aggrieved by the decision to grant the permit. Id. at 448. The court explained that the restrictions imposed by "the statutory scheme of the concept of an area called a zone" required the conclusion "that property owners within the affected zone to whom the same regulations are applicable are sufficiently interested in preserving the character and integrity of the zone" to have standing. Id. The court held that the property owners residing within the affected zone were within the definition of "injured or aggrieved parties." Davis, 507 S.W.2d at 448-49. In 21st Century Development Co., LLC v. Watts, a neighbor objected to a requested amendment to the zoning ordinance that would allow increased residential density in a portion of the zone. 958 S.W.2d 25 (Ky. Ct. App. 1997). In determining that Watts had standing to challenge the zone change, the court stated, "Kentucky courts [have recognized] that zoning issues affected more than just the adjacent property owner or those in the same neighborhood." Id. at 28. The court quotes the Kentucky high court, "The purpose of zoning is not to protect the value of the property of particular individuals but rather to promote the welfare of the community as a whole." Id.