Opinion ID: 2084878
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Surrounding Property Values

Text: The superior court found that the ZBA considered noise, traffic, aesthetics and intensity of use in considering what effect, if any, the variance would have on surrounding property values. The superior court also found that the ZBA acted reasonably and within its authority in deciding that the proposed use would not negatively impact the value of the surrounding properties. Our review of the record reveals support for this finding. The ZBA considered that the residential appearance of the building would not change, that there are currently office usages on either side of the property and that if the property was used entirely as an office buildingas permitted by the zoning ordinancethere would be greater traffic and intensity. Accordingly, we reverse the superior court's order vacating the ZBA's decision to grant Hill's use variance application. Reversed in part; affirmed in part; and remanded.