PAULSBORO, NJ – Holt Logistics Corp. has gone to court to evict EEW Group’s U.S. affiliate from the Paulsboro Marine Terminal after planned offshore wind work failed to advance.
A complaint filed in Gloucester County Superior Court on Oct. 7 seeks to remove the manufacturer from leased waterfront property along the Delaware River.
The filing comes as Holt and an affiliated landlord cite stalled projects and safety concerns tied to the tenant’s operations.
According to court records, EEW Group, through subsidiary EEW-AOS, has leased about 70 acres at the terminal since 2021 to fabricate steel “monopiles,” turbine foundations that can reach up to 400 feet in length.
Eviction case targets EEW’s Paulsboro footprint
The lawsuit names Paulsboro Waterfront Development, an affiliate of Holt that controls port real estate, as the plaintiff.
The action asks a judge to force the company off site following years of delays as New Jersey’s offshore wind rollout encountered cancellations, political opposition, and industry setbacks. Port officials said the contract envisioned large-scale monopile production to support projects booked for the state-backed wind build-out in Paulsboro.
State and industry partners invested roughly $250 million to position the port as a wind manufacturing hub, according to the filing.
EEW did not address the eviction claims in the court papers cited, and a response was not included in the materials reviewed.
Separate Holt suit challenges Gloucester City redevelopment ordinance
On Nov. 26, Holt Logistics Corp. and Cresmont Limited Partnership filed a complaint in the Camden County Law Division seeking to invalidate Gloucester City’s Ordinance #15-2025 adopting a Fifth Amended Redevelopment Plan for the Freedom Pier Redevelopment Area.
The suit argues the City relied on a 1996 “area in need of redevelopment” designation without new evidence that parcels on Block 48, Lots 2, 2.01 and 2.02 still meet criteria under New Jersey’s Local Redevelopment and Housing Law.
Plaintiffs say the former Coast Guard building at 101 S. King Street has been renovated and now serves as Holt’s corporate headquarters, undercutting prior findings of disrepair.
They assert the plan is arbitrary and capricious because the record lacks substantial evidence of present-day blight and fails to identify qualifying statutory factors.
The complaint also claims inconsistency with the municipal Master Plan and notes the City’s finding relies on a planner’s net opinion.
Prior rounds of litigation and an active appeal
Holt and Cresmont previously challenged the Fourth Amended Redevelopment Plan adopted by Ordinance #03-2024, with the trial court denying relief on May 27. They filed a notice of appeal on June 13 under Appellate Division Docket No. A-003229-24, which remains pending.
The new suit contends the Fifth Amended Plan repeals prior plans and requires fresh findings if the City seeks to exercise redevelopment powers distinct from rehabilitation tools. The complaint emphasizes differences in available tax exemptions between areas designated for redevelopment versus rehabilitation under state law.
Relief sought includes invalidation of Ordinance #15-2025, repeal of any redevelopment designation for the listed lots, and fees and costs.
