Mayfield Mansion Project Opposed

Posted: November 23, 1989

Residents concerned with overcrowding and storm-water management have filed a zoning appeal to fight West Chester's first cluster-housing project, which includes the renovation of the 140-year-old Mayfield mansion and the development of 14 townhouses on the surrounding 4.6 acres.

Earlier this month, Paoli lawyer Gerald F. McCormick filed zoning appeals with West Chester's Zoning Hearing Board and Chester County Court on behalf of his mother, Mary F. McCormick, whose back yard runs along the development. The development would lie between Brandywine and New Streets north of Marshall Street, in the northwestern section of the borough.

Mayfield is the first development proposed under the cluster-housing option, which was written into borough ordinances in October 1988. Proposed by Gerald and Kay Eby Moore of West Chester, Mayfield received approval from the Borough Council on Oct. 11.

Gerald McCormick said the plan did not qualify for the borough's cluster- housing option because the developers did not deduct the area for streets, which would have made their gross lot area insufficient for the number of housing units. The borough ordinance requires at least one acre for every 3.5 units.

Besides concerns about lot size, McCormick said, the development is illegal under the cluster-housing ordinance because:

* It does not have sufficient front-yard setbacks;

* Its design is not in harmony with neighboring buildings;

* It has no active recreational area, and

* It would increase storm-water runoff onto neighboring properties.

Mayfield is surrounded by 26 single-family homes built in 1958 as part of the Mayfield Gardens development.

The Moores have said the proposal is the only way to develop the property and restore the mansion economically. They called the proposal a "re-creation of an old estate in a contemporary fashion," and have estimated the cost of each townhouse at $210,000.

During hearings in August, McCormick asked to see the borough's engineering report and to question the borough's engineering firm about storm-water plans.

"I have a major problem with that," said James Tupitza, attorney for the Moores. "I don't think the borough should pay an engineer to help (McCormick) develop his case. You are paying for his expert witness."

|
|
|
|
|