Filed Complaint with Exhibit

21 the Board’s statutory obligations and the lawful rights of Plaintiff. 108. Plaintiff’s interests have been adversely affected by the Board’s arbitrary and irrational application of its planning, zoning, and land use powers, which have been exercised by indirection and in violation of governing law. 109. The Board’s actions in denying the Application and adopting the Resolution, despite the overwhelming and uncontroverted testimony and evidence presented by Plaintiff, were contrary to the fundamental principles of sound planning, violated the spirit and intent of the MLUL, and constituted an abuse of discretion. 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 IV The Denial of the Application by the Board and the Memorializing Resolution are Unsupported by both Fact and Law. 110. Plaintiff incorporates all of the foregoing paragraphs by reference as if same were fully set forth at length herein.ESX-L-001637-25 02/28/2025 2:34:16 PM Pg 21 of 32 Trans ID: LCV2025492774