Zone for age-restricted housing approved in Rocky Hill

Density of proposed project draws strong opposition from public.

By: Kara Fitzpatrick
   ROCKY HILL — Despite objections from the public, the Borough Council unanimously approved an ordinance Monday that will allow the 15-acre Schafer tract to be developed for age-restricted housing.
   The ordinance, approved last week by the Planning Board after Master Plan amendments were made, provides a zoning change allowing a maximum of 34 age-restricted housing units on the Princeton Avenue tract.
   Two Planning Board members, Susan Bristol and Tom Roshetar, spoke out against the ordinance.
   Ms. Bristol, the board chair who will be stepping down at the end of the year, said she disagreed with the way the negotiations were handled between the borough and Mr. Schafer. At a Dec. 14 Planning Board meeting, she said she was resigning because she had lost "confidence and trust" in the council due to the closed negotiations.
   "The vision should be first and the ordinance should follow," said Ms. Bristol, calling the rezoning a "narrow-minded vision" for the borough.
   "The Planning Board is concerned with planning, not just for this year — we’re concerned with planning for 10 years, 20 years, 50 years," said Mr. Roshetar.
   To applause from the audience, he urged the council to "give some thought to what this proposed project will look like in this community" and defeat the ordinance.
   But Mayor Brian Nolan said he felt it was in the best interest of the community to "settle this matter and put it behind us."
   After months of consultation and discussion on the part of borough officials and the property owner and his lawyers, the settlement agreement, said Henry Chou, a lawyer for Mr. Schafer, is one that is acceptable to the landowner.
   "There was a lot of back and forth," said Mr. Chou, adding that Mr. Schafer "is happy with the negotiated settlement."
   But several residents living near the contested property didn’t seem so happy, in part because the two-unit structures can be built as close as 10 feet from their property line.
   "I am confused about the procedure and how we got from three (zoning) ideas to where we are now," said Crescent Avenue resident Jon March. "I am also concerned with what I understand to be the 10-foot setback," he said. Crescent Avenue backs up to the north of the tract.
   Mr. March also criticized the board for not seeking public input during the negotiation process.
   Rocky Hill’s land-use attorney, Albert Cruz, said the setback is in keeping with legal requirements.
   Councilman Ed Zimmerman said, because of the "issue of marketability," most likely a builder would not construct the homes so close to a Crescent Avenue resident’s property line. "He wouldn’t be able to sell them," said Mr. Zimmerman.
   Some Crescent Avenue residents said that a 150-foot setback, designated to be open space along Princeton Avenue, should instead be positioned on the north portion of the property, adjacent to their street.
   Crescent Avenue resident Karen Wendell asked the council, "Why do you need open space on a road? So there’s a nice view for people driving by?"
   Resident Jane Oakley said she didn’t want the long-term quality of life in the borough to be compromised simply to avoid the threat of litigation.
   "The buildings," said Ms. Oakley, "sound as if they will be an eyesore."
   The controversy, which began in 2003, stems from the Planning Board’s proposed rezoning of those 15 acres. That rezoning would have reduced the number of units permitted on the property. The Planning Board offered three options it felt were fair to Mr. Schafer, but he didn’t agree — threatening litigation if the rezoning was approved.
   Mr. Schafer claims the options violated a contract he made with the borough in 1996 when he sold 95 of his 110 acres under the Green Acres program. That contact guaranteed him the right to build 28 single-family houses on the remaining 15 acres of land, he said.
   But the borough argued the agreement committed it only to provide sewer service consistent with the zoning and that the new zoning options were devised in accordance with the borough’s designation as a village center.
   As part of the new agreement with Mr. Schafer, the borough has placed a two-year time constraint for Mr. Schafer to submit plans and for the Planning Board to evaluate and vote on those plans. If that time line is not followed, the Planning Board has the right to re-evaluate the zoning for the tract, said Mayor Nolan.