The following materials relate to efforts to create a park at Pennhurst, near Spring City, PA.

The following comments were prepared in 1993 in response to question of Tom McDonald of Governor's Office as to whether Township would be willing to accept part of Pennhurst lands as a park.

COMMENTS OF

EAST VINCENT TOWNSHIP PARKS AND RECREATION BOARD

REGARDING NORTHERN CHESTER COUNTY FEDERATION

PENNHURST CENTER LAND USE FEASIBILITY STUDY

1. The Board accepts the general findings and recommendations of the Pennhurst Center Land Use Feasibility Study and expresses its gratitude to the Federation, Representative Gerlach & Governor's Assistant McDonald for their work.

2. The Board has the following suggestions relating to the Land Use Plan:

(A) Park and open space facilities at Pennhurst should be acquired, owned and managed by East Vincent Township as an independent Enclave Park within the regional Schuylkill River Greenway Park. Negotiations should proceed with the state and regional authority to ensure that Areas 3 + 4 and related areas are acquired by the Township, rather than retained by the authority. East Vincent, not regional entities, should control the Park because:

(1) This Board sees regional and local aspects to Pennhurst. From the perspective of recreation, the regional aspect is the Schuylkill River Greenway, including the river, the trail from Reading to Philadelphia, and the overall greenway concept. The local aspect is the township community park. This Board wants to let regional authorities pursue the regional goals while the Township develops an independent community park which will both benefit and receive benefits from the regional effort.

(2) East Vincent, unlike the other municipalities, has no public park land of its own within which to express its unique character. Control by the Township will allow greater experimentation and flexibility with leasing and use of the Park for recreational purposes than regional authorities could allow.

(3) While people are drawn to Phoenixville or Pottstown for the historical, industrial, & cultural heritage, Pennhurst offers itself as a spectacular viewshed, nature and recreational center. This Township is in a better position, due to the level of interest and understanding of Pennhurst's history among its residents, than regional, county, & state authorities to develop these opportunities.

(B) East Vincent Township should advocate for the development of the entire Schuylkill River Trail by the County and State, and should, if possible, avoid responsibility for that effort. The present hodge-podge system of municipal/private-controlled rivertrail parks is not adequate to meet the development needs of those parks, as is evident from the history and present use patterns of those parks. The Township should call for a meeting to be hosted by Chester County Parks and Recreation, inviting Commonwealth Parks and Fish and Game Representatives and the Northern Chester County Federation members, to explore the need for a regional park along the River to replace the present trail system. As stated in Open Space Plan p. 3-14, the Township should not pursue community goals which are likely to be achieved by broader political entities. A state or county-run Greenway Trail appears to this Board to be inevitable.

(C) The deteriorating condition of Pennhurst Area 3 requires a long-term reconstruction/maintenance plan. The Board proposes the following (which, if ownership of Area 3 is turned over to the Township in advance of attempts to develop the remaining areas will greatly improve the marketability of the remaining areas, whoever ultimately controls those areas):

(1) EVP&R volunteers remove scrub trees from steps, banks, field and overlook (documenting present and resulting condition).

(2) EVP&R volunteers and national guard recondition multiple use/activities fields (including Sewer Authority fields, under lease arrangement).

(3) EVP&R either arranges for League use and maintenance of fields or mows fields 1-2 times per year (to allow for infrequent use of fields as concert/festival areas).

(4) Park evolves into more active use over 20 year period as population pressure increases and Schuylkill River Greenway Park is developed.

(D) There are some critical issues relating to land use and control that should be resolved:

(1) All available Area 3 lands to the north of Commonwealth Drive should be dedicated to park use, including not only the playing fields, but the shoulder of the road, which we hope to see developed for parking for the park; the banks adjoining Commonwealth Drive, and the hillsides down to the river should be owned as part of Area 3.

(2) Development of any retirement community on the Pennhurst site should not proceed without the involvement of advocates for the rights of elderly who will insist that the Parks not be sealed off from access and use by the elderly and that community residents not be segregated from youth as Pennhurst residents were once segregated from "normal" people "for their own protection". No developer should be permitted to develop Pennhurst as a retirement community who does not fully support the integration of this retirement community into the life of the greater community. On the other hand, parks should be developed in a manner that considers the needs and vulnerabilities of all people.

(3) Allow for future development of access from the Schuylkill River Trail through the rectangular and triangular parcels north of Brown Drive and West of Pennhurst Road, across Brown Drive and up the hill through the outer boundaries of Area 1 to the scenic hilltop at Dunlop drive near the reservoir. This may involve conveyance to the County or Township of the triangular and rectangular parcels, and twenty-foot wide trail easements around the boundaries of Area 1 (possible including a negotiated easement across the CV Home Water dogleg in the north of area #1). Due protection should be included for the private users of Area 1 (e.g. driveways for school). Eventual use of excess aqua farm water for snowmaking on these 250" vertical north-facing slopes and on river trails for cross-country skiing is a wintertime option to be considered (downhill skiing not being practical due to Brown Drive) at times when golf course spray irrigation is not needed. We are concerned about the safety of Pennhurst Drive for pedestrians and bicyclists approaching the Pennhurst Park from Carrigan Village and present and future residential areas along the Spring City/East Vincent Boundary. The idea is to get these people onto the area above the wall adjoining Pennhurst Drive (cutting through the wall at Brown), and then onto an overlook trail north of Pennhurst Drive as it crosses Brown Drive and turns toward Commonwealth Drive.

(4) Directional signage rights at Oak Tree at Brown and Pennhurst will be critical for park use and other uses, as will signage rights along trails at the southeastern corner of Area 4 (entry point).

(5) Parking for parks is needed at the edge of Area 4, as well as in Area 1 and next to Commonwealth Drive. Shared use with other land users should be anticipated.

(6) Allow for future access to the river, not just for walking and fishing, but for boating. Access is possible at several points:

(a) easiest access is along north side of playing fields, thence over top of dump between sewer plant and playing fields, turn left onto County Railroad trail, under bridge, then cut back through bank angling northeast toward Hunt property. There is room for parking and ramp in that area.

(b) down southerly edge of triangle along utility easement, cut back to northeast onto County trail near water plant, thence northeast either to access set forth in (a) above, or to closer access near boundary of Pennhurst and CV Home Water Company along river.

(c) best access (and most expensive) involves restoration of bridge where Pennhurst crosses County Railroad trail, turn left off bridge, grade steeply parallel to County Trail, then cut back toward Hunt property as in (a).

7. The Township should reserve the right to construct a nature center, concession stand, utility/storage sheds, restrooms at Areas 3 and/or 4.

(E) The Township Parks and Recreation Board is not able to assume responsibility for structures such as Assembly Hall at this time, although the Hall certainly could be an asset to a fully developed Pennhurst community. What Scout Troop would not long for a troop room like the Assembly Hall basement? What artsy movie club, beginning church, or play group would not find in the assembly room a great opportunity? Nonetheless, it is too much for us, and we must let the opportunity pass. Perhaps the Parks and Recreation Board will participate in the life of this community by leasing space from the eventual owner to provide recreation services for a fee; more likely, an entrepreneur will provide these services. Again, the Township's philosophy is for the Township to pursue only those goals which are not likely to be achieved by private economic or cultural initiatives (Open Space Plan p. 3-14).

TO: The Editor of The Mercury

FROM: George Reitnour, 104 N. Main St., Spring City, PA 19475

RE: State's Responsibility for Pennhurst's Future

Approximately 10-20 acres (part of which used to be ballfields and playgrounds) at Pennhurst, the 125-acre state-owned property on the bluffs above the Schuylkill River just north of Spring City, was determined by the public, regional planners, and the Township in which it is located, to be an ideal place for public ballfields and recreation. All of us saw that fifty years from now, when the area around Pennhurst is fully developed, public access to this 10-20 acres would be a blessing. Now, many of the same people who were involved in this effort to preserve that small area for park use stand poised to establish a process which will likely result in the loss of this park unless our state officials take action to protect this land. Here's what happened and what can be done:

The state was going to sell Pennhurst quietly to the highest bidder. As a result of involvement by the Mercury, State Rep. Jim Gerlach and others, the effort to sell Pennhurst was postponed in order to see, first, whether the communities surrounding Pennhurst had any use for that land. Public meetings and land use studies made clear what the public wanted and what was workable--the best and most popular use of the former ballfields and playgrounds at Pennhurst being a public park.

In order to accomplish these and other goals, the state proposed to transfer Pennhurst to an Authority consisting of surrounding municipalities. That Authority, then, would try to bring in potential landusers. This is the point at which the park is likely to be lost. Unless the Park is preexisting--a "done deal"--before potential developers are solicited, there will be tremendous pressure on Authority members to dedicate the park land not to the public but to the control of prospective developers. The reaction of potential Authority members to this pressure can be gauged by the reaction of some involved parties to the news that a retirement community with which discussions have been held concerning Pennhurst is opposed to the park concept. The tendency of involved parties is to abandon the park if developers might not like it, or to shunt the park to the slopes near the water company reservoir.

The state should not surrender control of Pennhurst without first ensuring that the ballfields area is saved for public use, because no Authority or other developer is likely to consider public park access to be a priority. Open space and recreation lands, always the easiest target for development, can be removed from the market through the use of easements or other techniques before this land is turned over by the state. The state has the power to protect this 10-20 acres, and state officials bear the responsibility if they fail to protect the public interest relating to that part of Pennhurst.

*************************************************************************

TO: Royersford Borough Parks Board

Please be aware that East Vincent Township is seeking to establish a 46.4 acre park at Pennhurst and developers are being asked to develop retirement housing at the remainder of this site (well over 100 acres) just the other end of the railroad bridge from your proposed Park. I am aware of the tragic accidents that have occurred at the railroad bridge. However, I think that the railroad bridge can be made safe for reasonable use by pedestrians and bicyclists. A plank floor with supports may be all it would take.

Can we work together to arrange easy access by our new residents to Royersford, to the proposed passenger rail service, and access back and forth between the parks without having to submit to the noisy, ugly strip adjoining the Bridge Street bridge? Please consider working to stop the destruction of the bridge and instead tying the bridge into your park plans.

From the Schuylkill Canal to the passenger railroad to the farms, we have lost so much history, infrastructure and beauty in and around our towns.

I have heard that even the YMCA will not be building in the boroughs (where such a project really belongs and could do some good) and will instead be building a facility out in the Upper Providence suburbs.

Please think of the bridge, decisions relating to the site for the YMCA, the shopping center, the post office, and the school as pawns in a game of chess that time is playing against the Borough. Your best move may be to try to slow down the game as we have had to do in connection with the disposition of Pennhurst, until people can recognize our assets.

*************************************************************************

PLANNING PERSPECTIVES AND PENNHURST

1908. Teddy Roosevelt is President. The Progressive Republican era is in full swing, with efforts to get children out of the mines and mills and to bring women the vote. Pennsylvania takes on a monumental task: building the 23 large state-operated institutions that would come to house many of the state's citizens with mental retardation or mental illness. In 1913, Pennsylvania dedicates Pennhurst to the "segregation…of epileptic, idiotic, imbecile or feeble minded persons." By the early 1960's, Pennhurst has around 4000 patients (at that time, most of the Township's population lives there), and 1500 staff. By the 1970's, despite the best efforts and intentions of most institutional staffs, which was faced with overwhelming shortages of help and institutional inadequacies, the public begins to understand that institutions across the Commonwealth are failing. In 1974, the Pennhurst civil rights suit is filed. The court determined that Pennhurst provided "such a dangerous, miserable environment for its residents that many of them actually suffered physical deterioration and intellectual regression during their stay at the institution." The state eventually closes Pennhurst and 13 of the other remaining 22 institutions. Despite initial concerns, after the closings, families of Pennhurst residents have come to agree that it was the right decision (all quotes from Judge Broderick's opinion of 2/6/98. See http://www.paed.uscourts.gov/opinions/98D0144P.HTM).

May 18, 1971, the state amends its Constitution, including references to the Commonwealth's duty as trustee of natural resources, and the people's right to the preservation of the natural, scenic, aesthetic and historic values of the environment.

In 1978, the Commonwealth names the Schuylkill as its first scenic river, entitling lands along the river (such as part of Pennhurst which this Township has sought as a Park) to special protections.

The Commowealth passes the Bluffs Protection Act in 1980, to "encourage local administration and management of bluffs consistent with the Commonwealth's duty as trustee of natural resources, and the people's constitutional right to the preservation of the natural, scenic, aesthetic and historic values of the environment."

Chester County at some time prior to 1990 secures a trail easement from PECO along the former Pennsylvania Railroad Line.

The Schuylkill River is named a Heritage Corridor in the 1990's, and in 1995 Pennhurst is shown on the Heritage Corridor Management Action Plan Resources Map as a recreation/open space resource.

In October, 1991, East Vincent's Board of Supervisors agrees, at the request of the Township Parks Board, to write to DGS to express the Township's interest in acquiring park land at Pennhurst. This was done because DGS, in developing its "annual plans for disposition of all real property deemed surplus", is required to consider "whether the land should be retained …as open space for recreation or conservation", and is required to consider "the needs of local governments", under 71 PA CODE Section 651.3.

On October 21, 1992: Township Supervisors commit to Township Open Space Plan calling for a 145-acre Schuylkill River/Pennhurst Township Park, of which 10 acres was to be the ballfields at Pennhurst.

In July, 1993 the Pennhurst Land Use Feasibility Study determines how Pennhurst should be developed. Strongest support was for park use of ballfields area and riverfront. Other concern was to control the type of development on the non-park land.

1994: Township Comprehensive Plan incorporates Pennhurst Land Use Feasibility Study and Township Open Space Plan calling for Township Park at Pennhurst ballfields and riverfront.

1995: Pennhurst Regional Development Authority (PRA) formed. Includes representatives from area municipalities.

12/96: PRA Master Site Plan, paid for in part by Chester County tax dollars, calls for the Township to receive a 46.4-acre park at ballfields and riverfront at Pennhurst.

On June 19, 1996, one of our state's foremost planners, said:

"It was President Roosevelt who told us that the most important characteristic we can apply to the conservation of our parks and forests is foresight. The parks and forests and waters of Pennsylvania create jobs, attract tourism, and contribute to our cultural heritage. They play an important role in recreation and education. And they leverage investment by local communities… It is with that foresight that we will act as good stewards, for we truly do borrow this land from our children."

(Governor Tom Ridge, announcing PA's contribution of $250,000 to a nature center for Wildwood Park in Dauphin County)