Plans to build on Parkhouse open space roils Upper Providence residents

UPPER PROVIDENCE — Ten years after Montgomery County sold the Parkhouse nursing home, plans to develop the surrounding open space into hundreds of housing units have raised concerns among neighbors and officials alike.

When Montgomery County sold the property for $41 million in 2014, it permanently preserved 70 acres of land, Potter’s Field Park, across Black Rock Road, and placed a five-year building moratorium on the remaining acres, which expired in 2019.

In 2016, the Parkhouse facility property was subdivided from the remaining open space, which is 176.4 acres and is one of the largest undeveloped parcels in the township and the county. It is bounded by Old State Road, Second Avenue, Black Rock Road and Yeager Road.

The owner, a corporate entity known as Royersford Holdings LLC, wants to develop that property and there are currently two options on the table, and an explanation of the second one, which emerged in November, is on the agenda for the Jan. 16 meeting, Upper Providence Township Manager Timothy Tieperman confirmed on Friday.

The township has posted a page on its website — https://www.uprov-montco.org/446/Parkhouse-Meeting-Notices-and-Documents — with links to the relevant documents regarding this property.

The first option is what he called a “by right” proposal for a continuing care facility with 1,200 units that would presumably be a companion for the Parkhouse Nursing and Rehabilitation Center facility already there.

The current zoning, “open space conservation district,” would allow that project to move forward by receiving a “conditional use” permit from the supervisors. A public conditional use hearing before the supervisors’ board would have to be scheduled and the developer would need to demonstrate the project would meet the conditions laid out in the zoning code to get approval.

First aired about 10 months ago, there has been little movement on this proposal and it has not yet been officially filed as a plan, which would start a 90-day clock running by which time the township would need to decide whether to grant the permit or not.

In the meantime, the township commissioned a study of the property in April from the nonprofit Natural Lands agency, which specializes in preserving open space and was asked to prioritize what parts of the property were most in need of environmental protection.

“The property is walking distance to the Upper Providence Township Trail and across the river from the Phoenixville boat launch, Black Rock Dam, and the Black Rock Sanctuary. The property provides access to the riparian area along the Schuylkill River, creating a strong connection for both water quality and wildlife habitat protection, and serves as a keystone in the conservation matrix of this landscape,” Natural Lands wrote, adding “this parcel is by far the largest potential open space opportunity available for the township to increase conservation lands.”

Although Natural Lands prioritized the environmental areas on the property in most need of protection as requested, the report also notes: “It is critical to remember that the entire property as a whole works to provide ecological benefits, protect public health, and provide recreational access. Conservation of the entire property should be considered. The lack of impervious surfaces on this property means that all areas function, to varying extents, to slow and infiltrate stormwater.”

However, as Supervisors’ Chairwoman Helen Calci noted in November, “People keep saying it’s open space, and God I wish it was, but it’s privately owned and the person who owns it paid a lot of money for it and he’s going to want to get his money out of it.”

And purchasing the property outright would not be cheap.

Last April, the township received an appraisal of the property undertaken by the William Wood Co. of West Chester, which appraised the value at $49 million. The entire township budget for 2024 calls for spending $39.38 million.

At the Nov. 20, 2023 supervisors’ meeting, the second proposal made its first public appearance.

As submitted, it would alter the current zoning and allow for 679 mixed-use homes, including townhouses, on the property. A review and analysis of that second proposal by Township Solicitor Joseph Bresnan will be on the agenda at the Jan. 16 meeting, Tieperman said.

The supervisors held off publicly discussing the new proposal in November both because it had just arrived and none of the officials had had adequate time to digest it; and because the former board wanted to give the two newly elected supervisors the benefit of starting with the new proposal from the beginning after taking office in January, Tieperman said.

But that has not stopped opponents from speaking out.

Rumors about the proposal and opposition have only grown said lifelong resident Kim Wolfram, who is part of a core group of about one dozen residents organizing opposition to the site’s development, the opposition which has now grown to about 1,000 followers. Their efforts, she said are aimed at “minimizing the impact of this. The township has been built out so far and once those fields are built on, they’re gone forever. High-density housing there will stick out like a big sore thumb smack in the middle of the R-1 zoning.”

Several speakers at the Nov. 20 meeting expressed frustration with the township’s relative silence regarding plans for the property, fueling suspicion that things were being discussed out of the public eye, as well as a desire to see as much of the land preserved as possible.

“It’s unfortunate we have not had an opportunity for an open-to-the-public discussion with the community before making any changes,” said Ray Rocchio, a member of the recently-formed Save Parkhouse Farm organization who sponsored an online petition taking issue with parts of the first plan and which now has more than 2,300 signatures.

“We do realize you aren’t going to stop development, we do realize something will be built,” Rocchio told the supervisors.

“Make no mistake, we will fight R-2 zoning for the Parkhouse property,” Bennington Road resident Blake Welling, who is also affiliated with the group opposing both plans, told the supervisors.

“This area along the Schuylkill River is beautiful,” Welling and his wife, Susan Denby, wrote in a statement submitted to MediaNews Group on behalf of Parkhouse Friends. “We want to preserve as much of the open space as reasonably possible and preserve the character that’s here, including the sensitive environmental habitat. There’s a wonderful quality of life with the 176 acres of open land that is priceless. Land developers shouldn’t be able to come in and dictate how our township grows.”

At the November meeting, Welling also said “I feel a great sense of distrust. I also feel left in the dark about the 600-plus-unit high-density development proposed that the board has discussed in executive sessions with the solicitor but has not shared at all.”

But Township Supervisor Tom Yeager told the crowd that did not happen.

“I was as surprised at this agenda item as all of you were,” Yeager said. “I saw this plan 45 minutes before we walked in here. There haven’t been any negotiating behind the scenes and our purpose in putting this on the agenda tonight is to be transparent.”

“We did the Natural Lands study because we wanted to know about conservation,” he continued. “We had the appraisal done because we wanted to know how much it would cost to buy the property. When the original plan was put forward nobody liked it. We heard you loud and clear. Now, this has come forward and we need to digest it just as you do. We’re not trying to just push this through.”

The supervisors, Tieperman said, are in the position of trying to decide which of these plans, or what other action they could take, is “in the best interests of the township and which plan maximizes the greatest amount of open space preserved. The supervisors are trying to find that sweet spot.”

Bresnan promised the November audience that many of the speakers’ questions will be answered at the Jan. 16 meeting. He explained that when the only proposal potentially before the board was the first plan that would require a conditional use hearing, legally, the supervisors had to be careful not to offer public opinions on it since they would have to make a ruling and would not want to seem prejudiced about the proposal beforehand.

This new second proposal will most likely be referred to the planning commission for review and, if pursued, will follow the usual planning process, something “which allows for a lot more candor,” Bresnan said.

“All these questions will be answered at the January meeting,” Bresnan told the crowd at the November meeting. “You’ll understand when we have that discussion in January.”