Filed Complaint with Exhibit

23 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 V The Denial of the Application by the Board and the Memorializing Resolution were Ultra Vires. 117. Plaintiff incorporates all of the foregoing paragraphs by reference as if same were fully set forth at length herein. 118. Plaintiff made extensive efforts to design the proposed development so as to minimize any negative impacts upon surrounding properties by stepping back the upper levels of the Proposed Development to create better conforming setbacks. 119. In denying the Application, the Board implicitly and expressly acknowledged that its opposition to the Application stemmed from public opposition to the Proposed Development. In so doing, the Board failed to effectuate the intent and purpose of the governing body as expressed within the Borough’s Master Plan, and as set forth in detail above, thus usurping the powers of the governing body in contravention of the MLUL, other statutory provisions, and governing case law. 120. Moreover, the Board’s concern regarding traffic and safety were only brought up after there had been a vehicular-pedestrian collision along Main Street, which was after Plaintiff’s traffic expert had concluded testifying. This accident is even referenced in the Resolution (paragraph 45) and had no bearing on the subject Application and should have been given no weight. In fact, reasonable minds would conclude that this unrelated traffic accident unduly influenced the Board in coming to its decision on the subject Application. 121. As a result of the aforementioned ultra vires actions of the Board, Plaintiff has been,ESX-L-001637-25 02/28/2025 2:34:16 PM Pg 23 of 32 Trans ID: LCV2025492774