As stated in the Historic Preservation Section by the NJ Office of Cultural and Environmental Services; "This house was one of the principle remaining 19th Century residences associated with Shark River Village, an early settlement in Neptune which developed along an old Indian route (now known as Old Corlies Avenue) that ran along the north side of Shark River to the sea. This 164 year old Victorian style home was built by brothers Charles and James Tilton in 1846, long before the Civil War. Its features included a parlor with an ornate ceiling and fireplace, a living room, seven good sized bedrooms, a front porch, side porch, three chimneys, bay windows, two staircases, and gingerbread detailing in its six roof peaks. It was located next door to the Dewitt Shafto house - the oldest home in Neptune Township dating back to 1790. Because of its historic significance to the community, the 1019 Old Corlies Avenue home was awarded Century Home status by Neptune Township at the time of the Bicentennial. Despite its good repair, it was razed on October 2, 2007 to make room for a car wash and lube facility. The Old Corlies Avenue Preservation Alliance is presently in litigation to prevent further commercial development of the property.

Watch Fox News, January 4th, 6:50am

December 31st, 2009

On Monday, January 4th, 2010, Mr. William Potter, OCAPA’s  legal representative in our efforts to reverse the Neptune Board of Adjustments approval of the application for a car wash and lubrication facility proposed to be built on the site of historic 1019 Old Corlies Avenue, will be appearing on Fox News (channel 26 on Cablevision) at 6:50am to discuss Eminent Domain Abuse.

Learn how the positive use  of Eminent Domain for public benefit, as presented in an opinion letter by Mr. Potter to the Neptune Township Committee, applies in the case of protecting the historic 1019 Old Corlies Avenue property by clicking on “Eminent Domain” in the categories list on the right side of this home page.

Filed under Eminent Domain | Comment (1)

Eminent Domain Letter

October 17th, 2008

Download Full Letter

Dear Mayor Bishop and Committee Members:

Please accept this letter opinion regarding the efforts by the Old Corlies Avenue Preservation Alliance (“OCAPA”) to protect the historic 1019 Corlies Avenue property against improper development for a car wash / quick lube and to preserve the site and area for historic purposes and public use. Put bluntly, this is a classic example of when eminent domain should be used to protect the public interest.
By way of introduction, this law firm frequently represents property owners and even entire communities against eminent domain abuse (“EDA”) which is defined generally as the use of municipal condemnation powers in order to take unblighted private property from its owner and transfer it to a developer who has obtained an exclusive “redeveloper” contract with the municipality. In fact, a few years ago, I personally organized what has become the “Stop Eminent Domain Abuse Coalition of New Jersey,” which is active statewide in opposing EDA.

In my professional opinion, this request to acquire the 1019 property is not eminent domain abuse. Instead it is a totally proper acquisition of property that may otherwise be improperly developed — to the detriment of the neighborhood and the entire community — for the purpose of preserving the historic character of the property and the neighborhood.
The New Jersey Supreme Court has recently handed down two important cases on both the proper uses of eminent domain and the abuse of it. As to the proper use, the court in Mt. Laurel v. MiPro Homes, 188 N.J. 531 (2006), cert. den. 128 SCt 46, upheld that township’s use of eminent domain to acquire open space that was threatened with massive development, for the express purpose of creating a public park. This is an example of acquisition for a traditional “public use.” By way of contrast, eminent domain abuse typically occurs when a municipality seeks to condemn private property because it is deemed to be “under utilized” and not as “productive” as it could be if the property was turned over to a designated “redeveloper.” That is the essence of the holding of the Supreme Court in a case argued (successfully) by this law firm. Gallenthin v. Borough of Paulsboro, 191 N.J. 344 (June 12, 2007).

In short, just to sum up: It is entirely proper for government to use eminent domain to preserve property for the express public use of that property, paying just compensation, of course, for that privilege. But it is very often the essence of abuse of the powers of eminent domain to condemn private property that is not causing harm to anyone for the express purpose of transferring ownership to another private property “redeveloper,” simply because the latter has promised to increase tax ratables or add employment. That is a so called “public purpose” that has proved to be a “slippery slope” leading to sweetheart deals to benefit politically well connected builders who benefit from eminent domain to subsidize their future profits.
Accordingly, what OCAPA is proposing is anything but abuse of the power of eminent domain; it is the proper and historic use of this essential government power to acquire property to preserve it, to prevent improper development, to protect the character of a residential neighborhood, and to use the land as a public historic space.

Respectfully submitted,

By R. William Potter, Esquire

Filed under Eminent Domain | Comment (0)