You choose, we deliver
If you are interested in this story, you might be interested in others from The Journal Gazette. Go to www.journalgazette.net/newsletter and pick the subjects you care most about. We'll deliver your customized daily news report at 3 a.m. Fort Wayne time, right to your email.

Worth a click

  • Today in History - Wed., July 23
    Today is Wednesday, July 23, the 204th day of 2014. There are 161 days left in the year.
  • 10 Things to Know for Wednesday, July 23
    Your daily look at late-breaking news, upcoming events and the stories that will be talked about today.
  • Flags replaced at Brooklyn Bridge
    NEW YORK – Two large American flags atop the Brooklyn Bridge – one of New York City’s most heavily secured landmarks – were replaced sometime during the night with white banners that were spotted Tuesday morning fluttering in
Advertisement
AP
This $1.8 million waterfront house was mistakenly built on park land in Narragansett, R.I., (WJAR-TV)

Oops: $1.8 million house built on park land must come down

PROVIDENCE, R.I. – A developer who mistakenly built a $1.8 million waterfront house on parkland has been ordered to remove it.

The Rhode Island Supreme Court found that the unoccupied home in Narragansett was built entirely on land owned by the Rose Nulman Park Foundation, and therefore must be removed.

The developer, Four Twenty Corp., began building the home in 2009, but it didn’t discover the error until 2011 when it tried to sell the house and the prospective buyers got a survey. Robert Lamoureux, who owns the company, then contacted one of the park’s trustees to try to work something out, but she told him the land was not for sale, according to Friday’s opinion.

The foundation was set up to preserve the property as a park in perpetuity. A 2008 agreement among the family members says that if the trustees allow the land to be used as anything other than a public park, they must pay $1.5 million to New York Presbyterian Hospital.

The developer argued it should not be penalized for an innocent surveying mistake. The court said it was sympathetic, but it said the park’s property rights outweighed that. It also said it was in the public’s interest to keep the land as a park.

“Any attempt to build on even a portion of the property would constitute an irreparable injury, not only to plaintiff but to the public,” it wrote.

Messages left with the developer’s lawyer were not immediately returned.

A judge will decide how much time the developer has to remove the house.

A lawyer for the foundation, Mark Freel, said the developer has secured most of the permits he needs to move it to the neighboring land, but that the fate of one critical permit is still up in the air. The timing of that could affect whether the house has to be torn down.

“My client has wanted for a long time for the house to be removed,” he said. “My client’s very clear and firm position is that it’s time for the house to go.”

Advertisement