Upper Allen Township currently has four historic districts that date back to the 1970s: Shepherdstown, Trout Run, Yellow Breeches, and Rosegarden. Public records show that a 2022 consultant reassessment recommended changes, including keeping Shepherdstown while removing or revising other districts. However, later Township records clarify that Trout Run and Rosegarden had not been officially dissolved, Shepherdstown boundaries had not changed, and the four districts still remained as they did from the 1970s.
This page organizes the public records so residents can understand what is official today, what has only been recommended, and what public process would be needed before maps or ordinance language are changed.
Shepherdstown - 32
Trout Run - 37
Yellow Breeches - 26
Rosegarden - 1
Total - 96
Township staff estimated that about 215 people, or 0.9% of the Township population, live in a historic district.
Upper Allen’s historic district discussion can be confusing because it involves old maps, written boundary descriptions, modern parcel lines, consultant recommendations, HARB review, Board of Commissioners action, and PHMC certification.
The public-record question is not simply whether historic preservation is good or bad. The more important question is:
What is legally in place today, what has been recommended, and what public process must occur before any change becomes official?
Public records show that district boundaries have been described as unclear, and that the Township has been working through how to update maps, ordinance language, and review procedures. PHMC-related correspondence noted that current district boundaries were “less than clear,” that recertification may depend on how new boundaries compare to old boundaries, and that the ordinance should include clearer procedures, economic hardship provisions, administrative approval for in-kind repair/replacement, and design guidelines.
The 2022 reassessment explains that the districts were created in 1975. It also describes the local context: Upper Allen grew from 1,594 residents in 1950 to 7,325 residents by 1970, and preservationists were responding to development pressure and the loss of rural setting.
Shepherdstown is the district that the 2022 reassessment found most likely to retain enough historic integrity and significance to remain a historic district. The report’s summary stated that, of the four districts reviewed, only Shepherdstown appeared to retain enough historical integrity and significance to remain a historic district.
Public records also show ongoing questions about Shepherdstown’s boundaries and whether updated maps should include the full property boundaries of parcels crossed by a historic district line. Staff later clarified that the entire property boundaries for lots crossed by historic district boundary lines were already within the historic districts under Chapter 155, regardless of any map, and that formally updating the map would require an ordinance.
Shepherdstown appears to still function as a recognizable historic village/crossroads area along Gettysburg Pike. The district has a stronger concentration of historic buildings that relate to each other visually and historically. The reassessment treated Shepherdstown as the one district that still had enough historic integrity and significance to justify district status.
In plain language: Shepherdstown still looks and functions more like a historic district, not just a collection of scattered historic resources.
That is the key reason it was recommended to remain.
Trout Run is important because public records show a difference between policy direction and completed official action. Township staff stated in April 2025 that action had been taken in 2022 to move forward with removing Trout Run, but also later clarified that Trout Run had not been officially dissolved.
Trout Run’s issue is loss of agricultural setting and continuity.
The report says the district once had eighteenth- and nineteenth-century farm properties surrounded by agricultural fields. But over time, subdivisions, modern houses, loss of outbuildings, and changed access patterns disrupted that historic agricultural setting. The report specifically notes modern intrusions such as the Eppley house, the Tudor Revival house at 2300 Stumpstown Road, and surrounding subdivisions. It also states that the original agricultural context of one property was “completely destroyed.”
So the argument is:
Trout Run still has historic buildings, but the connected agricultural landscape that made it a district has largely been lost.
That distinction matters. The buildings may still be significant, but the district no longer reads as a unified historic agricultural area.
Yellow Breeches is especially important because it includes the McCormick Road / Arcona Road area and raises questions about landscapes, historic character, modern development, and whether other preservation tools may be needed.
PHMC-related correspondence noted that all properties within a district should be treated equally through the review process, while also recognizing that different building types, construction methods, materials, and context may require different treatment. The same correspondence raised the McCormick bridge across the creek and suggested that if the goal is preserving the forested landscape along the creek, tools such as conservation zoning or SALDO cultural-resource requirements may also be relevant.
Yellow Breeches is the most complicated and probably the most sensitive.
The report acknowledges that Yellow Breeches has real historic resources: eighteenth-and nineteenth-century farms, mills, older homes, Nauman’s Bridge, McCormick Road, and the Yellow Breeches Creek setting. But the consultant concluded that modern development inside the district weakened the district’s historic feeling and setting.
The report says that modern houses, especially large newer homes built from the 1990s to 2020, occupied former agricultural fields, interrupted the flow of the district, and were not architecturally sympathetic to the original eighteenth- and nineteenth-century agricultural character. The report also says that the modern infill caused a loss of the historic agricultural nature of the area and disrupted the feeling that existed when the district was created.
So the argument is:
Yellow Breeches still has important historic resources, but the consultant believed modern infill broke up the historic agricultural landscape enough that it no longer worked as one unified historic district.
This does not mean McCormick Road, Lantz’s Mill, Nauman’s Bridge, or the older homes lack value. It means the district boundary may be too broad, too altered, or no longer consistent enough to function as a certified historic district under the consultant’s approach.
Rosegarden is listed in Township records as having one property within the historic district. Staff records show that the 2022 direction was to move toward removing Rosegarden, but later records clarified that Rosegarden had not been officially dissolved.
Rosegarden’s issue is that the main reason for the district is gone.
The report says Rosegarden originally consisted of three buildings, but only two remain. The missing building was the Rosegarden Mill, described as the focal point of the district and the oldest mill in the Township. The dwelling and summer kitchen remain and may still have historic value as individual resources, but the report concluded that the area lacks the unity and variety of resources needed for a district.
So the argument is: Rosegarden may still have historic value, but without the mill, it no longer works as a historic district.
Navarro & Wright reassessed the four historic districts: Rosegarden, Trout Run, Yellow Breeches, and Shepherdstown. The report stated that the districts lacked clear historical context and clear mapping for some areas, and that modern development had affected original feeling and setting.
The report concluded that only Shepherdstown appeared to retain enough historical integrity and significance to remain a historic district, while the other three districts had suffered loss of integrity, feeling, and setting.
An April 2025 HARB meeting was set to discuss whether HARB wanted to recommend moving forward with amendments, reinstating districts, amending boundaries, or updating ordinance policies such as exemptions, economic hardship, demolition by neglect, and how historic value is reviewed.
Township staff clarified that Trout Run and Rosegarden had not been officially dissolved, Shepherdstown’s boundaries had not changed, and the four districts remained as they did from the 1970s.
A consultant report, draft map, HARB discussion, or Board policy direction does not automatically change the official status of a historic district.
Public records show that action was taken in 2022 to move forward with removing Trout Run and Rosegarden, amending Shepherdstown, and making no changes to Yellow Breeches. But staff later clarified that the formal changes had not been completed and that official map updates would require ordinance action.
Josh Brown 04.29.26 RTK Materials_3.pdfThe historic district maps are central to this issue because property owners need to know whether they are inside a district and what review process applies.
Chapter 155 states that Upper Allen Historic Districts are shown on the Township Historic Districts Map, which is part of the chapter. It also includes rules for interpreting uncertain or conflicting boundaries, including boundaries following center lines of streets, plotted lot lines, parallel extensions, and interpretation by the governing body when physical or cultural features differ from the map.
HARB reviews historic district applications and provides recommendations regarding Certificates of Appropriateness.
The Board is the governing body that acts on ordinance changes and Certificates of Appropriateness.
PHMC certification matters under the Historic District Act. The legal guidance in the records explains that Act 167 authorizes municipalities to regulate new construction, reconstruction, alteration, restoration, demolition, or razing of buildings within PHMC-certified districts, and that HARB counsels the governing body regarding applications.
Records also note that preservation can occur through zoning under the Municipalities Planning Code, which is different from Act 167 historic district regulation. This matters because some historic resources may be scattered in rural or suburban settings and may not fit neatly inside a certified historic district.
Will the Township formally amend Chapter 155?
Will Trout Run and Rosegarden remain, be removed, or be reconsidered?
Will Shepherdstown be redrawn or reduced?
Will Yellow Breeches remain unchanged?
Will updated maps include entire parcel boundaries?
Will PHMC recertification be required?
Will the Township adopt design guidelines?
Will the ordinance address economic hardship, demolition by neglect, exemptions, or administrative approvals?
Will SALDO or zoning tools be considered for cultural resources outside certified districts?
Josh Brown 04.29.26 RTK Materials 2-15-23.pdfJosh Brown 04.29.26 RTK Materials 8-16-23.pdfJosh Brown 04.29.26 RTK Materials 11-16-22.pdf