Caboose9
I do not exactly what they are asking but I have been told that we have most of the money through a grant.
CJVRR
You are right on. Wawa needs to obtain site plans but are in no hurry to get that done. In the mean time, their option may or may not have run out. We found out that the option money only covers the owners taxes. We know the string of ownership going back to the railroad. And you are right again when you said the amount of traffic really didn't factor in. We had a sneaky suspicion it wouldn't but we figured the fact that it is the only connector road for miles, the fact that emergency vehicles would have trouble traversing the road might have held sway. We have the County Freeholders on our side because they are very keen on keeping history alive. The yard borders our station and yes, we do have the funds to buy the yard. But that money is in danger because the township has been contacted by the grantor asking for disposition. If they do nothing it goes away and so do our chances to buy the yard. They also now can say that it wasn't their fault that the money dried up. They just have to do nothing! The owner knows we want the site and that we have the money but according to which rumor you hear and believe, he is not getting any more option money and will not sell it because Wawa is also rumored to have an intimidation through litigation tactic which is keeping him from accepting our offer.

Doowoppie
That is my next step. A visit to the corporate headquarters with your request.

Thanks for all of your support.

Later!
Mr. Ed

Mr. Ed wrote:

"Funny how the solution to combat these unscrupulous politicians is to hire lawyers and bring law suits. Sadly in many cases these politicians are also lawyers. Sounds like they are trying to perpetuate their profession."

I happen to be an attorney in real life, and like most lawyers I know, I've grown a fairly thick skin. I'm therefore not particularly offended at Mr. Ed's point of view, but find it interesting that he addresses his situation by finding fault with the legal system. One certainly doesn't expect a RyPN Interchange poster to observe that it is "funny" that a cardiologist would diagnose a particular condition and a surgeon would concur and operate, thus "perpetuating the medical profession." I'm not sure what viable alternative Mr. Ed feels there might be to "bringing a lawsuit" (i.e, an administrative appeal) to challenge a zoning decision, whether or not it was made by "unscrupulous polititions, " in a system where this is the authorized recourse and means of possible remedy. The law would certainly take a dim view of torturing or assassinating a zoning board whose decision one is aggreived by, for example.

Although I do not practice in New Jersey, I am a land-use specialist, and I note that under most states' systems Mr. Ed would have had a very short window of time to take an appeal from the Board's decision. Based on the events he relates, it is almost certain that this appeal period expired months ago. Where I live, and in many states, prior appellate court decisions constrain the trial courts from re-evaluating evidence that was before the zoning commission and substituting its judgment for theirs, as long as the commission's decision could have been reasonably reached upon the evidence. However, technical noncompliance with specific and often arcane procedural requirements would be another matter altogether, and can quite possible lead to reversal (or, practically speaking, a negotiated settlement). This is where legal counsel might have been more cost-effective to Mr. Ed's group, as opposed to expensive attendance at endless agency hearings, since official tape recordings or transcripts preserve what happens there. Where resources allow, I certainly prefer to represent a client, whether pro or con, from the very beginning of a zoning application right on through to a final decision on appeal, because this creates the opportunity to build the evidenciary record that would be the basis of the subsequent review. But where this is not financially possible, I believe it to be irresponsible and unscrupulous for a lawyer to consume a client's limited resources in opposing a land use application at the zoning commission level. It seems to me (subject, of couse, to procedural differences in other states) that the time for Mr. Ed's organization to have opened its war chest would have been in the appeals process. Competant counsel would be able to evaluate the chances of success, either on the merits, or by creating delay, uncertainty and frustration for the developer. At most, a few hours research time are usually sufficient to determine whether there are viable issues to pursue in such an appeal.

In any event, no amount of criticism of lawyers (or sense of wonderment that average citizens do not share a need to love and protect an abandoned railroad yard) should dissade other custodians of context-specific historic structures from acting within the legal system to lobby for appropriate land use restrictions, preservation easements, or funds for outright purchase before it's to late, as may very well be the case here.

G.J. Churchward

Mr. Ed,

If the Freeholders are on your side, would they consider condemnation of the property? If your funding source is another gov't agency and the resultant purchase by your group makes the area a gov't owned facilty, it might just work.

It does open up a can of worms, but if you currently have the money available for purchase, and you have a receptive Freeholder Board, that may be a viable option.... I think a "saving a historical asset" argument through condemnation could work.

Chris

Sorry for the delay in replying. Verizon shut down my DSL in the process of changing from dynamic to static connection. Their gone! Dial up is so slow!

I did ask about eminent domain and forget what the response was. The funding was coming from the county and it was a grant to the township of which we are an entity. Back to square one!

Later!
Mr. Ed

I asked last weekend about eminent domain and was told that unlike many other government entities, Burlington County is unwilling to use that manor of land reclamation for historic purposes.

I sent an e-mail to the folks at Wawa and am still waiting for a response. I don't think I should hold my breath.

Later!
Mr. Ed