is any competent evidence upon which the agency’s decision rests.” Grossman, 118 R.I. at 285-86, 373 A.2d at 501. Moreover, “the trial justice’s review should [be] restricted to a search of the record * * * and the search should [be] limited to the discovery of the necessary competent evidence.” Id. at 286, 373 A.2d at 501. (Emphases added.) Contrary to petitioner’s explicit and implicit assertions, neither § 45-23-20 nor our interpretation thereof in Grossman requires that a- trial justice identify and cite all competent evidence in the record upon which a decision is based, nor do they limit “competent evidence” to evidence that establishes unequivocally that a proposed development will have deleterious effects on the surrounding area. Cf. Grossman, 118 R.I. at 279, 373 A.2d at 498 (<HOLDING>) (citing Jeffrey v. Platting Board of Review of
holding that defendant cannot suffer compensable harm when enjoined from an unlawful activity holding that a party who can show a significant risk of irreparable harm has demonstrated that the harm is not speculative holding that likelihood of irreparable harm must be based on evidence in the record not unsupported and conclusory statements regarding harm the plaintiff might suffer holding that an aggrieved party is not required to prove that his property would in fact suffer the requisite degree of harm before he can seek judicial assistance holding that a high degree of foreseeability is required to impose a duty to hire security guards and that the requisite degree of foreseeability rarely if ever can be proven in the absence of prior similar incidents of violent crime on the landowners premises