Sica v. Board of Adjustment of Tp. of Wall

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that requirement of enhanced proofs for negative criteria does not apply to variance based on inherently beneficial use
• holding that a board should consider whether the use variance grant \would cause a substantial detriment to the public good \
• Medici's enhanced quality of proof standard was intended, in part, to minimize conflicts between the Board of Adjustment and the governing body
• when proposed use is inherently beneficial Medici does not require satisfaction of negative criteria by en- haneed standard
• applicant relieved from enhanced burden of proof normally required for non-inherently beneficial use variances and board must attempt to reduce any claimed detriment by imposition of reasonable conditions imposed pursuant to N.J.S.A. 40:55D-22(b)
• discussing the positive and negative statutory criteria for a variance

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).