Filed Complaint with Exhibit

20 104. Separately, despite the undisputed proofs which demonstrated that the Application could be granted in its entirety, the Board arbitrarily, capriciously, and unreasonably adopted the Resolution, which did not include accurate factual findings or legal conclusions. 105. Plaintiff’s interests have been adversely affected by the Board’s arbitrary application of its zoning and land use powers, which have been exercised in violation of the MLUL, other statutory provisions, and governing case law. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully request that this Honorable Court enter judgment against Defendants as follows: A. Declaring that the Board’s denial of the Application was arbitrary, capricious, unreasonable and contrary to the MLUL, the Zoning Ordinance, and the lawful rights of the Plaintiff; B. Declaring that the Resolution memorialized by the Board was arbitrary, capricious, unreasonable and contrary to the MLUL, the Zoning Ordinance, and the lawful rights of the Plaintiff; C. Granting Plaintiff preliminary and final major site plan and conditional use approval and bulk variance relief, which approval shall expressly include the right of Plaintiff to develop the Property with a three (3) story, mixed-use building with 12 residential units and approximately 900 sq.ft. of commercial space; and D. Awarding such other and further relief as this Honorable Court may deem equitable and just, including attorney’s fees and costs of suit. COUNT III The Denial of the Application by the Board and the Memorializing Resolution Constituted an Abuse of Discretion. 106. Plaintiff incorporates all of the foregoing paragraphs by reference as if same were fully set forth at length herein. 107. The individual actions, as well as the totality of the actions, of the Board were arbitrary, capricious, unreasonable, and otherwise without basis in law or fact, and contrary toESX-L-001637-25 02/28/2025 2:34:16 PM Pg 20 of 32 Trans ID: LCV2025492774