The Court vacated the lower court decision dismissing the plaintiffs' claim that the City's Board of Standards and Appeals had no proper basis for a variance of its Zone Resolution regulating illuminated roof signs. The City's variance would have allowed a store to erect on the roofs of its premises an illuminated sign which would have been one hundred feet long and twelve feet high. The Court found that the "permitted use of glaringly bright electric lights would be so annoying to occupants of adjacent properties used exclusively for residential purposes as practically to constitute a nuisance to them; it would also affect adversely the value of property in this residental district."
The City's Board of Standards and Appeals granted a variance of its Zone Resolution, permitting the erection of an illuminated sign "one hundred feet long and twelve feet high on the roof of the premises of stores" in "a district zoned for residence purposes." The owners of adjacent apartment houses filed a suit against the City's Board of Standards and Appeals decision, claiming "that this enormous illuminated sign, burning throughout the night in the rear of their apartments, would have a most serious effect on their property, causing tenants to vacate."