West Deptford Committee Votes to Demolish Home on Cromwell Court

It took four and a half hours, but the decision was unanimous.

is coming down.

After a marathon session of testimony from contractor Michael Crowley, who was seeking to stay the order, and his bevy of experts, and arguments from residents in and around the court, the voted 5-0 Thursday to go ahead with demolition on the long-abandoned home in Sherwood Green.

Residents breathed a sign of relief after a six-month process—from the initial condemnation of the home through the appeal—finally came to a close.

“It’s nothing against Mr. Crowley,” said John Bond, who lives next door to the home. “We just want an execution of the order.”

Bond and his neighbors, both on the court and from several spots around Sherwood Green, raised concerns during the hearing on everything from the possible liabilities of staying the order to the actual viability of the project to Crowley's late arrival in a six-year process.

Maureen Compagnoni, whose house sits on the corner of Westwood and Cromwell, went so far as to call Crowley “an opportunist,” and raised concerns the rehab could end up being far more complicated than it seems.

Crowley came loaded for bear, a four-inch thick stack of manila folders under one arm, and centered his appeal effort on his claims the home could be rehabbed back into livability with some serious, focused effort. He brought out everyone from general contractors to mold remediation specialists to make his case.

To a man, they said the house was far from irreparable, with several claiming they’d either seen or worked on worse projects in the past.

Crowley also outlined a plan of action, from financing the project to getting the house back to the point where it could be on the market, that would’ve taken about six months, and even said he’d post a performance bond to ensure it all got done on schedule.

“I’m willing to make an agreement with the township,” he said.

That agreement became a point of contention as the night wore on, as township committee members pressed Crowley to assume some of the risk up front and put up money in an escrow account ahead of settlement on the house.

Crowley bucked at that suggestion initially, when township committee members asked him to put up $10,000, roughly enough to cover the cost of demoliton.

“You have to rise to a certain level of intent…to stay that order,” Mayor Ray Chintall said. “You can pull out at any time, and we still have that house.”

That balking was enough to raise serious questions from members of the public, as well.

Michael McManamy, who sits on both the zoning and planning boards, said he thought the house could be brought back to livability by a qualified contractor—someone who would have no issues with financing.

"If we’re going to sweat $10,000…then that really concerns me," said McManamy.

Eventually, Crowley acquiesced on that point, agreeing to potentially put up $5,000 up front, should the order get stayed.

He’d never get the chance, though, as township construction official Phil Zimm, who spent the entire appeal taking notes amid a spray of documents in front of him, was adamant about keeping the demolition order in place, citing the cost of the job and liability as the two biggest factors in that reaffirmation of his original November 2011 order.

The fight may not be over, as Crowley vowed to file for a Superior Court injunction as soon as possible. His eyes still fixed on the dais after the meeting, Crowley said it could very well be a protracted legal battle, and threatened to keep on appealing all the way up to the state Supreme Court, claiming "significant procedural and due process violations," which, for whatever reason, he chose not to bring up before the township committee.

“The decision by the board doesn’t surprise me,” Crowley said. “It’s another hurdle.”