Filed Complaint with Exhibit

13 Development is still consistent with median setbacks in the area and the Township is better served connecting the Proposed Development to the streetscape rather than having an incongruous setback. 66. Ms. Clark also testified regarding the parking variance, that 25 spaces are required and 14 are proposed. She testified that this deficit has been addressed through a co-parking agreement with Bethany Church across the street and the availability of permits in the municipal lot, which Plaintiff would venture to secure for the occupants of the Proposed Development as needed. Ms. Clark further testified that the Township Ordinance allows for off-site parking within 250 ft. of the subject property, with which the Proposed Development complies. 67. Ms. Clark testified to some of the benefits associated with the Proposed Development, including the improved stormwater detention system, green roof system, and improvement of a vacant lot with attractive development, and improvements to the sidewalk and crosswalk. Ms. Clark also testified that the Proposed Development meets objectives 9, 11, and 13 of the Township’s Master Plan. 68. Ms. Clark testified that pursuant to the c(2) balancing test, an applicant must show that the benefits associated with the Proposed Development substantially outweigh the detriments, if any. Ms. Clark testified that she believes the Proposed Development meets that test. 69. Ms. Clark responded to questions from the Board regarding the ground floor setbacks, stating that in a perfect world the Proposed Development would comply at the ground floor, but the proposed footprint allows for more parking and better circulation which in her opinion was a better benefit, especially given the Board’s and the public’s focus on trying to achieve parking compliance. Ms. Clark also responded to questions regarding the impact toESX-L-001637-25 02/28/2025 2:34:16 PM Pg 13 of 32 Trans ID: LCV2025492774