Pennhurst: Truth or Consequences?

OPINION

On Wednesday, Dec. 7, the East Vincent Board of Supervisors met with Richard Chakejian, CEO of Pennhurst Associates, to begin an open dialogue regarding his requested zoning changes.   A recap of the high points of that meeting can be found here:

As written, Mr. Chakejian's petition creates a multitude of issues that must be carefully and critically examined to ensure that the Pennhurst property is provided with every opportunity for intelligent, planned and sustainable development, while also warranting that the best interests of the Township are primary. The many by right uses contained in Mr. Chakejian's petition, if legislatively adopted, would put the township in a position of ceding control. Unlike special exception or conditional use, by right use establishes the acceptability of a use without constraint. Thus, the BoS and the Planning Commission must diligently consider any use by right and its impact on the bordering area along with the Township as a whole.

The unalterable fact of infrastructure inadequacy was amply expressed by Supervisors Funk and Dunphy. Mr. Funk specifically stated that road access is the key to any zoning change and the development such zoning would permit. Therefore, it is inescapable that new roads must be engineered and built, relieving existing streets from the impact and intensity of any uses by right.  It is time to cease the avoidance of this essential requirement and to actively and openly address it.

There are at least two strategies that have been floated answering this reality. One is the building of a bridge over the Schuylkill River connecting Pennhurst Road in Limerick Township to Commonwealth Drive. This would cross the Schuylkill River Trail and likely be the most expensive method of providing access.  It also entails negotiations with Limerick and the County, challenging propositions at best.

The second proposal is cutting a road from Old Schuylkill Road running parallel to a Spring Hollow fairway, ultimately connecting to Dunlap Road. In this case, Pennhurst Road north of that intersection would likely need to be widened and a traffic light installed. The downside to this is affecting two private residences that back up to the golf course and the impact to the golf course.

A third idea I have heard is a road from Bridge Street running along the extreme eastern edge of the Simon property and terminating at either Dunlap or Independence Drive.  Here the negatives are the splitting of the Township’s parkland in half and interference with homes on Meredith Drive.

All of these methods can be easily visualized by looking at a Google Earth satellite view of the area.

It is inevitable that Church Street beginning at the intersection of Bridge Street in Spring City Borough leading into the property will need extensive repair and resurfacing as well as the need to work with Spring City government relative to that impact.  This fact was supported by the attendance of Spring City officials at the workshop demonstrating their concern for protecting their constituency.

Likewise, Brown Drive has to be inspected and decisions reached about any required improvements.

It seems to me that the only conclusion to be reached answering this vitally important aspect of any zoning change is for Pennhurst Associates to have a traffic impact study and road building analysis performed based upon a proposed development plan presuming possible uses consistent with Township planning and desires.  Projecting some number of employees and support traffic considering a likely example of use should drive those analyses and yield the information needed by the BoS for its final determinations.

Mr. Chakejian, however, has advised the BoS that there are no funds available for such studies or plan development.  His desire is for the Township to provide zoning that he contends will attract investors and developers.  This explains his pastiche of uses by right that would include any and every conceivable utilization ever imagined by humankind.  By his own admission, he began his interest in this property in 1998 causing one to ask why no vision has emerged over this 13 year period.

In stark contrast, East Vincent determined that a need for green space in the Southern part of the Township was vital to the Township's future and has to date spent over $7 million acquiring property or development rights, ensuring a rural character and competent environmental stewardship for generations to come.  Thus, to allow Mr. Chakejian to "cheap it out" on the North side of the Township not only seems imprudent but is an affront to the commitment East Vincent government has made to its citizens and to the landscape.

Essentially, if Mr. Chakejian truly wishes to develop his property profitably, contribute to the Township’s tax base, minimize the impact on the school system, maintain the character and integrity of the neighborhood surrounding his property and bring dignity to land that has a checkered past, then he must spend the money needed to examine and solve the road access problem.

Planning Commissioner Bruce Weinsteiger said it succinctly.  Any zoning change will significantly increase the value of the Pennhurst property.  It is reasonable and proper for Mr. Chakejian to pay for and provide a plan and analysis to the Township that allows informed decision making.

SPECIFIC USE

The use specific issue to be examined is the Pennhurst Asylum haunted house attraction.  Within the proposed zoning is the use by right of amusement attractions including any and all ancillary uses.  Technically, by using the Mayflower building as part of the amusement this year, Mr. Chakejian has, according to the Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture, created an amusement park.  The combination of more patrons than last year and an increase in ticket fees leads one to consider that, presuming 50,000 patrons at an average spend of $60 per patron covering ticket fees and the purchase of food or memorabilia products, yields an estimated $3 million of gross revenue compared to Mr. Chakejian’s ZHB appeal testimony of $985,000 of gross revenue in 2010.

If this is reasonably accurate, the incentive becomes the continuous expansion of the amusement year after year, until it rivals the established amusement parks that provide similar entertainment.  As an example, Knott’s Berry Farm has its Knott’s Scary Farm which provides in the month of October, 50% of Knott’s gross revenue for its entire fiscal year, amounting to many millions of dollars.

One immediately sees that usage creep for this amusement provides the potential for a full blown amusement park in our Township, becoming a yearlong series of haunt and paranormal related events with as many as 300,000 to 500,000 visitors annually.

East Vincent must ask the question: Is this our future?  Is this something that in any sense is acceptable?

The national haunted and paranormal attraction industry is a $2 Billion annual enterprise and grows every year.  Pennhurst Asylum, by virtue of its attendance ranks in the top 5% of such amusements, perhaps even higher.  Randy Bates, Mr. Chakejian’s partner in the haunted house business is quoted saying that his Bates Motel with an average of 65,000 visitors each October is in the top 1% of such ventures.

If this type of use is granted by right, regardless of any and all other uses permitted, will the owner pursue real development or will he strive to become the biggest and baddest haunted attraction in the country?  Will he devote most if not all of his property to Chakjianland?

This is not hysterical hyperbole.  It is a rational examination of an extremely profitable large-scale commercial business venture.  This goes beyond intermittent traffic jams on Bridge Street, Church Street, Pennhurst Road and Brown Drive.  It would cement the fate of the Pennhurst property and our Township.

Like the noxious weed kudzu, if the amusements at Pennhurst are permitted to grow uncontrolled, the flower of East Vincent will be strangled and die.

END NOTE

One last item:  During the meeting Mr. Chakejian told the assemblage that without his proposed zoning his property will not be on the government’s radar screen for potential investors or developers.  It is difficult to accept his claim since his former attorney and current County Commissioner Ryan Costello is an ex-officio board director of the Chester County Economic Development Council.  I’m certain Mr. Costello would ensure that Mr. Chakejian’s property receives appropriate exposure to potential investors or developers.