Twin Elms was a famous commune founded by hippie idealists in 1972. Each person or family who joined the commune purchased a fee simple absolute in a one-acre lot and built a home. Because the commune was located in a county that had no zoning, the homes were unusual and sometimes bizarre, ranging from domes made from adobe clay to pyramidal cabins built from recycled plywood. Tourists were barred from ever visiting the commune, though they could see it (barely) from a scenic overlook located 5 miles away on the nearest paved road. Last year the county adopted its first zoning ordinance. The ordinance placed all the commune lots into the Residential Preservation Zone, on the basis that this would foster local pride, attract tourists to the county, and promote the general welfare of our people. These were the only homes in the county that were placed in this zone. The ordinance further provided that the owner of a home in this zone may not make any physical changes of any kind to the exterior of his or her home, except to restore the exterior to its prior condition if it has deteriorated over time. Because all of the homes have deteriorated since they were built and the ordinance prevents the owners from building new homes, an appraiser estimates that each home has lost 80% of its value due to the ordinance. Three owners sued the county, asserting that the ordinance was unconstitutional. 

Who will win the lawsuit? Why? Please Use the IRAC Format when formatting your response.