Rocky Hill civic group wants to revive Schafer tract lawsuit

By Emily Laermer, Staff Writer
   ROCKY HILL — Rocky Hill Citizens for Responsible Growth is appealing a Superior Court rejection of its October suit challenging a housing development on the Schafer tract.
   The court concluded, contrary to the citizens’ group contention, that the 34 age-restricted, duplex-style, single-family homes could be built on this piece of land and would not have to adhere to the typical look and size constraints that other similar borough properties must.
   The group listed the Rocky Hill Borough Council, the Planning Board, proposed project developer Pulte Homes and property owner David Schafer as defendants.
   ”This violates the land-use laws,” said William Bliss, the attorney for Rocky Hill Citizens for Responsible Growth of the most recent court ruling. “They cannot make special rules for properties in the same class for some property owners and not others.”
   Between December, when the original notice of the appeal was filed, and June, when the briefs for the appeal were submitted, the Rocky Hill Citizens for Responsible Growth engaged in a settlement discussion and met informally with community leaders, including Mayor Ed Zimmerman.
   ”We told them that they should meet with the builder,” Mayor Zimmerman said. “They should talk to the applicant, not me.”
   According to Mr. Bliss, the Rocky Hill Citizens for Responsible Growth met with Pulte Homes to discuss alterations to the current development plan. Mr. Bliss was not in attendance.
   ”The essence of the controversy is making sure that they are keeping with the historic preservation standards,” he said.
   Mayor Zimmerman said that he is not sure if the discussion with Pulte Homes has influenced what they have proposed to the borough.
   He also said that Pulte Homes approached the borough with some possible alterations to the existing plan that the company believed would work better with the existing market.
   ”It was nothing concrete,” Mayor Zimmerman said. “Because of the change in market, Pulte wanted to explore other options besides what was approved.”
   Pulte Homes has not discussed these changes with the Planning Board, which must approve the alterations.
   The date for the appeal has not yet been determined, and is not on any set time frame, said Jim Mullen, the development manager for Pulte Homes. During the last similar controversy he was involved with, which was in Clinton Township, it took the appellate court about 2½ years to make a decision, he said.
   ”We hope to reach an agreement sooner rather than later,” he said. “We don’t want to have to wait for the court the make a decision.”