Filed Complaint with Exhibit

8 37. At the September Hearing, the Applicant recalled its Architect, and this time testimony was given by Yogesh Mistry of Mistry Design. 38. Mr. Mistry was sworn in and accepted as a licensed architect. 39. Mr. Mistry testified to plan updates, specifically the addition of a green roof element that had been requested by the Board, totaling 1,600 sq. ft. of green infrastructure. Mr. Mistry also testified to the relocation of the trash room and lobby area, in response to prior comments from Board planner Mr. Haizel, shifting the trash area more interior to the building. 40. Mr. Mistry also testified that with the proposed changes, one unit would be changed from a “1-bedroom plus den” to a 1-bedroom. He also testified to the inclusion of an ADA bathroom in the commercial unit, in response to a prior comment from the Board. 41. Mr. Mistry also testified to changes in the exterior lighting, including warning lights near the entrance of the parking garage. 42. Mr. Mistry also testified that the design layout change allowed for the addition of a 14th parking space in the garage.1 43. Mr. Mistry responded to questions from the Board and the public related to the plan revisions. 44. Plaintiff next offered Harold Maltz, who was sworn in and accepted as an expert in the field of traffic engineering. 45. Mr. Maltz testified to the trip generation analysis and site parking analysis prepared by his firm. 46. Mr. Maltz testified that Park Drive North is a one-way traffic street where traffic is not permitted on the left side (the Property side) of the street. He also testified that Main Street 1 In the initial iteration of the Application, only 13 parking spaces were provided.ESX-L-001637-25 02/28/2025 2:34:16 PM Pg 8 of 32 Trans ID: LCV2025492774