close

Development proposals in N. Strabane draw opposition

4 min read
article image -

Opponents of plans by a group of developers that would bring hundreds of new residents to a North Strabane Township neighborhood packed a hearing this week.

Speaker after speaker Tuesday voiced objections to Laurel Communities’ requests for supervisors’ conditional-use approval on two projects – a four-story, 202-unit senior housing facility on one lot and 52 townhouses on another – on about 70 acres of land zoned residential off McDowell Lane.

Mike Swisher of nearby Indian Ridge Lane told supervisors the proposal is “in conflict with what’s going on in the neighborhood.”

“The scale of this development, specifically the non-family (senior housing), is right in the confluence of three, possibly four, residential neighborhoods,” Swisher said.

The proposed site of the townhouses also reaches Valleyview and Meadowview drives.

One of the developers involved, Mike Wetzel of Victor-Wetzel Associates, said a traffic study was submitted in August and reviewed by the township engineer.

Still, Swisher and others questioned whether the already-congested roads in the area could support the additional traffic from the proposed projects and other ongoing development nearby.

Swisher said the “worst condition” is where McClelland Lane intersects with McDowell near the off-ramp from Interstate 79 south. There, he said cars on the off ramp back up onto the interstate at peak hours.

“With this development, it’s only going to get worse,” Swisher said. He urged officials to address the problem sooner rather than later.

The planning commission voted 4-1 to recommend approving Laurel Communities’ applications on Oct. 15. The hearing before supervisors started Nov. 20 but was continued until Tuesday.

Township manager Andy Walz said the applications will be on the agenda during supervisors’ next meeting Tuesday.

It’s unclear if they’ll vote then. The township has 45 days to decide on the applications.

Presbyterian Senior Care – which operates a string of housing complexes throughout Western Pennsylvania – would own the land and develop it if Laurel Communities’ application for the senior facility is successful.

Following the hearing, developer Terry Bove told officials that despite that group’s status as a not-for-profit, “they pay property taxes everywhere else.”

Solicitor Gary Sweat questioned whether the organization really pays property taxes or makes voluntary payments in lieu of taxes.

“We’ll find that out,” Bove said.

The plans include 130 independent living units – some with more than one occupant – plus 24 memory care units and another 48 assisted living units.

“This is not an unusual type development,” said Bobby Jo Hadden, vice president of retirement services for Presbyterian. “Allegheny County has the second-highest populations of seniors (in Pennsylvania); Washington County’s right behind.”

Laurel Communities hasn’t yet closed on buying the former farmland, which county tax records list as being owned by a trust based in Colorado.

Following the November hearing, residents of nearby Sunset Pointe, Indian Ridge and Foxchase Drive presented a petition with some 190 signatures to supervisors to ask them to vote down the senior housing proposal, as presented.

The township spent more that $3.3 million over the past several months to demolish three houses and undertake hillside and street repairs at the landslide-stricken Majestic Hills housing plan, which is only a few miles away.

While Laurel Communities’ proposals are a separate matter from Majestic Hills’ problems, those slides were on the minds of many in the audience.

The residents’ petition said there “are very steep slopes on the property. If the proposed plan requires extensive cut and fill work, along with removal of existing vegetation, will adequate slope stabilization and stormwater management be guaranteed, given the existing topography?”

Officials discussed making their approval contingent on the developers following a new grading ordinance that supervisors approved only last month and wouldn’t apply automatically.

Bove told them the projects would comply with the main requirements of the ordinance – geotechnical reports, slope stability analysis and monitoring of the work – regardless.

He predicted someone would build on the site eventually.

“What the board would be considering is, that one big building – is that less of a footprint, or is that more of a footprint on the area. In some ways, environmentally, I think it’s less of a footprint.”

CUSTOMER LOGIN

If you have an account and are registered for online access, sign in with your email address and password below.

NEW CUSTOMERS/UNREGISTERED ACCOUNTS

Never been a subscriber and want to subscribe, click the Subscribe button below.

Starting at $3.75/week.

Subscribe Today