|
|||||||||
|
Mayview State Hospital Land Reuse Task ForceMinutes of
May 8, 2008 Meeting
A tour of the grounds for task force members preceded the meeting. Representative Kotik opened with an overview of the agenda and invited Mr. Kuppelweiser to begin with an update on any changes to the grounds. Mr. Kuppelweiser indicated that no new buildings have been closed. However, DPW hopes to consolidate operations to a single building by late August or early September. Bill Callahan – Pennsylvania Historic and Museum Commission (Western Office) Mr. Callahan provided some information about the process of preserving historic buildings and determining archaeological significance. He mentioned that PHMC provides expertise and tools for adaptive reuse of certain structures that are deemed historically significant. He also said that a previous investigation of the historical significance of Mayview's building had been conducted 20+ years ago and would no longer necessarily be correct. If a building has lost its historical integrity through deterioration and decay, it would no longer be eligible for the registry. Tax credits are available from the federal government for any non-residential building (pre-1936) that is preserved. Also, any building that qualifies for placement on the National Register of Historic Places is eligible for a 20% tax credit. The PHMC offers the Keystone Program, which provides funding for the rehabilitation of historic buildings owned by nonprofits, municipalities, and selected other groups. In terms of the archaeological investigation, Mr. Callahan said that his agency would work with DGS in determining the appropriate time for the investigation. He said that in all cases where state property is transferred, an archaeological analysis must be conducted at some point. He also indicated that while the History Code gives guidelines on what types of buildings can be preserved, it does not require the preservation of any type of building. That is, the presence of buildings that qualify for preservation or recognition will have no bearing on the transfer of the property, and the new owners would not be required to retain them. Qualifying for the National Register doesn't afford buildings any protection either. One member of the public asked if the barn on the Mayview property might qualify for the Brick and Mortar program offered by PHMC. Mr. Callahan answered in the affirmative. Another member asked what the point was of the National Registry if it didn't protect buildings from being torn down. Mr. Callahan answered that the Registry is designed to serve as a clearinghouse of unique national treasures, not just any building that is of a certain age. The properties listed are used for marketing and promotional opportunities for the areas in which they are located; also, the list is useful in terms of regional and metropolitan planning purposes. Greg Mahon asked if anything of archaeological significance had ever been found on the property. Mr. Callahan pointed out the wetlands and said that they almost always contain artifacts. He also mentioned that some artifacts had been found on the Upper St. Clair property that had been transferred in the 1990s. He said that the History Code provides a timetable for archaeological investigations. Chris Goswick – Allegheny County Department of Economic Development – Planning Division Ms. Goswick provided an overview of the property using GIS integrated with Google Earth. She pointed out that the Mayview property is currently surrounded by what the Allegheny County Comprehensive Plan considers to be "greenfields" – parks and other recreation areas that are designated to remain green space. She also highlighted the wetlands and the creek and mentioned that a buffer of at least 50 ft is required. Roy Kraynyk asked about flood plains; Chris' map displayed forested flood plains but not all the flood plains. She said the county was currently working with FEMA to update the flood plain map. Mr. Kraynyk also asked about the current percentage of building coverage/impervious surface on the property. Mike Hoy responded that he guessed it was approximately 35% and said that he could do a calculation to determine it exactly, which would be helpful for zoning purposes. Mr. Kraynyk then volunteered to present at the next meeting about the Allegheny Land Trust's greenprint project and what information it provided about the Mayview property. He also observed that the steep slopes surrounding a portion of Mayview may affect commercial development. Mike Hoy – South Fayette Township Manager Mr. Hoy began his presentation with an overview of the planned expansion of Fairview Park, which borders Mayview to the west. He also provided a comprehensive presentation of current and future zoning options in South Fayette. He mentioned that the property is currently zoned R-1, which is geared toward the preservation of open space and some single family development. He provided a handout that has more lengthy definitions of all zoning categories in the township. Highlights included a new zoning district called B-1, designed for business parks such as Abele. He also indicated that the township is looking to develop a new zoning category called Commercial Village (CV), which is a mix of residential and retail or professional development. After the zoning presentation, he discussed further how the CV zoning option would work on the Mayview property and discussed the benefits of this particular development. He noted that out of the approximately 300 acres, only about 100 are developable due to the wetlands, stream buffers, and steep slopes present. 60 of the acres are on the flat lands where the majority of the Mayview buildings are located, and there are an additional 30 to 40 acres on top of the hill near Fairview Park. Public Comment The public comment period began with Dick Jevon, who is a longtime Mayview volunteer. He mentioned that he was still unhappy with the low price the state received for the portion of the property that was sold to Upper St. Clair in 1997. He would like to see the remainder of the property sold for fair market value, with the proceeds going toward the MH/MR community. Jessica Seabery from the Consumer Health Coalition indicated that her group also supported the sale of the property for fair market value and would like to see the proceeds directed toward MH/MR housing and programming. She also mentioned that she thinks it would be appropriate to place a patient on the Task Force, as they are all interested in seeing what will happen to the property. In addition, she mentioned that patients would like to comment on the proceedings but don't like returning to Mayview. She recommended holding at least one meeting in another location so that they could participate. Roy Kraynyk had a question about the road that connects from the barn to the top of the hill. He wanted to know if South Fayette Township would take it over following the transfer. Mr. Hoy responded by saying that the road currently doesn't meet standards; South Fayette has an agreement with the state to use that road as a back way to Fairview Park. Mr. Kraynyk followed up with a question about the possibility of an alternative route to that location, as he feared that bringing that road up to code would cause too great a disturbance to the slope. Mr. Hoy mentioned it could be designated as a private road, which would allow it to have less stringent standards. He said that given the current location of Fairview Park, another access road would be difficult if not impossible to create. Another question related to how the property would be offered – as one single lot or as a number of different parcels. Mr. Kuppelweiser indicated that it had been done in a variety of different ways in the past and there was no way of knowing what would be recommended in this instance. Representative Kotik addressed the question related to the set aside for the mental health community. He first indicated that it would require legislation to do this; it could not simply be a decision made by the task force. Secondly, he said that legislation on this issue has been introduced but there was a concern that passing this bill would set a precedent for all future transfers of state property, where instead of returning the money to the General Fund (which is what has been done previously) all kinds of groups would be fighting to capture the revenue through legislation. In closing, Representative Kotik indicated that the next meeting would probably be July 17th (no meeting in June as a result of the budget). As of right now, Mr. Kraynyk and PennDOT will be on the agenda.
|
||||||||
