In Amity: Apartments to replace age-restricted housing 
By: Sharon Spohn 
05/17/2007
Email to a friendPost a CommentPrinter-friendly
Advertisement

  
By Sharon Spohn
Special to The Mercury
Inaction by Amity Township supervisors prompted a local developer to move forward with a project that could add hundreds of students to the ever-growing Daniel Boone School District.
Greystone Capital Partners gave up trying to convince township supervisors that an age-restricted development would be in the best interest of the township at the beginning of the second joint meeting between the supervisors and the planning commission.
Joe McGrory, attorney with Hamburg, Reuben, Mullin, Maxwell and Lupis law offices, representing Greystone, said things just weren't moving forward.
"If the township is moving forward with good faith, it doesn't take three years to get an age-restricted ordinance in place," McGrory said.
McGrory said Greystone is moving forward with a development that would consist of 351 apartments on the 118-acre Schmale Farm.
"Under this zoning district medium density residential -- apartments are permitted by special exception," McGrory said.
The project could get under way in about a year.
"A special exception is neither special nor an exception," McGrory said. "It's a use permitted by right as long as you comply with the criteria of the code."
Amity resident Christine Gutekunst was so frustrated by the inaction of the board that she sent a letter to the township supervisors.
"They spent months revising and rewording. It seems at the last minute that something happened, something changed," Gutekunst said of the Transitional Age Development ordinance proposed by Greystone that was previously voted down by the supervisors.
"They're following some other kind of agenda on this instead of the agenda of what people want and what's best for the township," Gutekunst said. "It's disappointing."
Gutekunst said she has parents who would take advantage of age-restricted development, but now the opportunity is not there.
"My disappointment came through realizing the township isn't making it easier for age-restricted development," she said.
Residents were expected to protest a lack of action at Wednesday's supervisors' meeting. The meeting ended after press time.
The 118-acre property was originally going to be home to 230 age-restricted homes and 256 townhomes. Greystone offered to drop the plan to a total of 400 homes with 100 percent age-restriction to get the ordinance passed.
Supervisor Kim McGrath said the township was going to craft a 100 percent ordinance from the TAD ordinance. "Somehow that got dropped," McGrath said.
McGrath was on vacation during one of the meetings. She polled residents for a few months as she met with people in the township.
"I had, like, 90 percent for it," McGrath said.
Supervisor Richard Gokey said he was totally in favor of Transitional Age Development.
"Especially when we got up to 50 percent age-restricted," Gokey said. "The revenue stream alone was unbelievable for the school district."
Supervisor Joe Karpinski said the township had a plan for several months for a couple hundred single-family homes.
"They (Greystone) approached us about 6 weeks ago and asked to revisit the age-restricted concept," Karpinski said. The board immediately agreed to a joint meeting with the planning commission.
"At that meeting there was a strong interest in age-restricted at 100 percent with higher density." Karpinski said.
He said the verbal plan they presented seemed to be workable. Karpinski said Greystone came to the second meeting with their attorney and a stenographer and announced they were not going to move forward with an age-restricted plan.
"They came there with a less-than-friendly attitude," Karpinski said.
"As a supervisor, it's very disappointing when you're put in a position that you feel you're being strong-armed," he added.
Amity could draft an age-restricted ordinance on its own.
"I think if Amity Township adopts an age-restricted ordinance, we're doing it for all of Amity Township, we're not doing it for the profit of one developer," Karpinski said.
He said he is more than willing to pursue an age-restricted ordinance with 100 percent age restriction with higher density.




ŠThe Mercury 2007