Filed Complaint with Exhibit

26 so unreasonably, based only upon bare allegations, unsubstantiated beliefs or net opinion. 132. Plaintiff’s expert testimony was clear, informative, and demonstrative of the necessary proofs. 133. The Board’s rejection of the testimony and evidence presented by Plaintiff was improper, unsupported and in direct violation of the MLUL, other statutory provisions, and governing case law. 134. The failure of the Board to properly consider the evidence in support of the Application was a violation of law and contrary to the Board’s statutory obligations and the lawful rights of Plaintiff. 135. 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 in violation of governing law. 136. The Board’s actions relative to the Application were contrary to the fundamental principles of sound planning and violated the spirit and intent of the MLUL. 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; andESX-L-001637-25 02/28/2025 2:34:16 PM Pg 26 of 32 Trans ID: LCV2025492774