Note that earlier posts on Bishop Bridge appear on our home page chronology.
.
March 21, 2026
After lengthy discussion and public comment Wednesday night, the Upper Allen Township Commissioners voted 3-2 against requesting Cumberland and York Counties to carefully disassemble Bishop Road Bridge for storage.
Township votes down plan to disassemble, restore historic bridge | ABC27
There were concerns about what other conditions or liability could be required by the counties or assumed regarding future vehicular use. Costs were again questioned. Some thought Upper Allen could eventually be responsible for the counties cost of careful disassembly if rehabilitation did not occur within a few years.
Mr. Kirk Stoner of Cumberland County and Mr. Frank Grumbine of PA SHPO attended the meeting and answered board and public questions about the process.
PDF summaries of written comments from those “in favor” and those “opposed” to the request to the counties can be found here:
.
.
Written comments were fairly balanced but the great majority of those present at the meeting were against making the request to the counties.
The bridge has become a divisive issue in Upper Allen and Mr. Fairchild, as Board President, thought it best to bring the issue to a head so the new Board can move on with other issues. Mr. Fairchild also wanted to give the Counties clarity on the township’s position as they proceed to avoid / minimize the adverse effect of demolition and seek a new permit.
Mr. Stoner mentioned the County is still looking at a causeway in the creek to remove the bridge. This will likely result in a lengthy permit review process including possible involvement by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
Other alternatives for the bridge suggested in the January 29, 2026 PA SHPO letter include “carefully disassembling the bridge and placing it in storage while continuing to market the bridge to a new owner or turning over ownership of the bridge at its current location to a new owner and providing the new owner with the cost of demolition funds”.
New ownership is possible. West Shore Historical Society will soon become the new owner of the 1887 Sheepford Road Bridge. The 1899 Craighead Bridge was transferred to Working Bridges and left standing. Peace Church is in process of being transferred by the PHMC to Friends of Peace Church. Other examples of non-profit ownership of historic assets are Friends of West Shore Theatre and the Mt. Tabor preservation project. See photos below.
It has become apparent that the bridge is better off in the hands of committed preservationists than an ever changing local municipal board. There appears to be consensus for a transfer of ownership; even amongst some opposed to the Upper Allen request to the counties. Please stay tuned while some further options are explored.
.
“The people have a right to clean air, pure water, and to the preservation of the natural, scenic, historic and esthetic values of the environment. Pennsylvania’s public natural resources are the common property of all the people, including generations yet to come. As trustee of these resources, the Commonwealth shall conserve and maintain them for the benefit of all the people.”
Article I, Section 27, Pennsylvania State Constitution 1776
.
Some nearby preservation projects:
.
March 16, 2026
The March 18, 2026 Upper Allen Township Board of Commissioners agenda includes (as item 4e):
“Request to Cumberland and York Counties for their careful disassembly of Bishop Road Bridge, for storage”
The historic bridge has been under discussion for an extended period of time and is specifically listed on page 3-4 of the December, 2013 Upper Allen Township Comprehensive Plan under Cultural Resources and Historic Preservation.
The County and Township have received guidance from the Pennsylvania State Historic Preservation Office (PA SHPO) and PennDOT. Here is a PDF of a key January 29, 2026 letter from PA SHPO:
Per this guidance, the request is for the counties to pay for careful disassembly of the bridge and for it to be stored by the township (most likely in used shipping containers) until funds (grants and donations) can be raised for reconstruction at the same location. Per rules governing the use of liquid fuel and $5 registration fees; the bridge must be reconstructed for vehicular use.
This is a good outcome for the bridge with minimal cost to local taxpayers. The Counties will also avoid a finding of adverse effect resulting from demolition / destruction of the resource.
There is a group of residents on a local community Facebook page who continue to complain about efforts to preserve the bridge. They are attempting to drown out voices for preservation. The timing of future actions on the bridge would be largely dependent on grants and donations and the current Board (through public input) is well aware of public sentiment to limit local tax dollars.
It will help for those who care about preserving the bridge to attend the Wednesday meeting or to email Alexis Minana, our recording Secretary, at aminana@uatwp.org to voice support for careful disassembly and storage. It will also help to copy the Cumberland County Commissioners at commissioners@cumberlandcountypa.gov
If you have it in your heart to say you will donate (no need to state an amount) toward rehabilitating the bridge; it will further show commitment to historic preservation by concerned Upper Allen residents.
Freinds of Sheepford Road Bridge recently posted these photos of the 1887 bridge disassembled and media blasted at the Kinsley warehouse in York, PA. Wrought iron is a remarkable material that cleans up nicely. Each piece has been carefully tagged. Sheepford is expected to be re-erected in June, 2026.
.
January 17, 2026
Eric’s comment on Judy Bailey’s post on Upper Allen Community Group Facebook page
You offer much needed perspective. It all comes back to the Comprehensive Plan which says what we are to be as a community. Preserving Bishop Bridge is in this plan – spending millions on fancy new parks is not.
In my presentation Monday night, I noted how UAT has spent over $11 million on 4 parks in recent years: Friendship, Generations, Grantham and Windings Hills. My presentation and further park details can be found at saveupperallen .com
I’m not sure how many people realize this, but Bishop Bridge provides a key link in an extended trail network whereby we can (re)connect to Simpson Park at the site of the old covered bridge (now at Messiah). We will also likely be able to connect Simpson to McCormick Rd. and (hopefully) the trail at Autumn Chase / Winding Hills.
With good planning and help from grant funding, it may be possible some day to take a peaceful walk (away from busy roads) all the way from Winding Hills to the historic Bishop Bridge. From there, assuming Messiah University cooperates, walkers would be able to access their beautiful campus from “the back 40” on Bishop Road.
That Bishop is a low traffic bridge is a feature – not a bug. It will provide for a more pleasant walking experience and allow UAT to access more funding streams.
More trails and better connectivity is a positive vision for the Township that I believe many residents and most of the new board embrace. We obviously need to be smart about all spending and seek grants wherever possible. FYI: UAT is on the verge of hiring a new Assistant Manager with grant writing experience.
Our Solicitor has confirmed that a donations toward the bridge can be made through the township via a dedicated fund. These donations can be made anonymously which is important to some donors.
Despite near daily efforts by some to confuse the bridge issue and bash the proposed contractor; the cost difference between carefully disassembling the bridge and demolishing it is very little. The County budget (at $275,000) excludes the cost of engineering whereas the WIBW proposal (at $400,000) includes engineering.
There are apparent issues with County demolition plan which may help explain why DEP intervened on December 9, 2025. County plans show a causeway in the creek to remove/demolish the bridge which could trigger an extended environmental review period including the U.S. Corp of Engineers and Section 106. See ATON plan posted at saveupperallen .com.
It is unlikely the County can duplicate the prior bid received by a demolition contractor following the specified environmental protocols. Meanwhile; WIBW offers a much less environmentally intrusive plan. See Bridge removal without a large crane at saveupperallen .com
Most of the pushback (and misinformation) on the bridge is coming from a close nit group of individuals who know the new board will likely axe other planned projects such as a multi-million dollar amphitheater at Generations Park and the recently proposed $1 million project at Trout Run park.
There is great irony in hearing those who ushered in massive UAT development and then spent millions on parks – now complain about our taxes being so high. Our taxes are high mainly because of over development. One only needs look at nearby townships such as Monaghan and Monroe to see the difference keeping things more rural makes. See finances page at save upper allen .com
There have been no tax increases during my term on the Board and this member intends to keep it that way.
.
January 13, 2026
Public Forum well attended
The Upper Allen Township Board of Commissioners held the public forum on Bishop Road Bridge last night and it was well attended.
Most folks present were against spending significant local funds on the bridge. There are ongoing discussions with the County, State and staff.
The new Board intends to act responsibly.
Here is a copy of Eric’s presentation for those who may be interested.
.
.
January 11, 2026
Public Forum on Bishop Bridge tomorrow night at 6:30 P.M at Township building
The purpose of the forum will be to gather information and receive comments for the newly reorganized Board Of Commissioners of which Eric is now President.
We have assembled a panel of experts to discuss and inform on various aspects of the bridge project. Special guests include:
a. Mr. Kirk Stoner – Cumberland County Planning
b. Mr. Logan Swartz – C.S. Davidson (Township Engineer)
c. Ms. Kara (Russell) Harris – PennDOT
d. Ms. Tyra Guyton – PA State Historic Preservation Office
e. Mr. Joe Botchie – Upper Allen Township HARB
f. Mr. Ross Brown – Wrought Iron Bridge Works
g. Ms. Janice Lynx – West Shore Historic Society / Sheepford Bridge
There will be time for Board member comments at the beginning of the meeting and Eric will use his time to summarize the project and current status.
All indications are the bridge can be carefully disassembled and stored for a similar amount to what the county may pay to demolish it. This would allow time for further options to be developed and considered.
Individuals have expressed interest in donating toward the bridge rehabilitation and it appears Upper Allen can establish an escrow fund to accept pledges or donations.
A public comment period follows the panel. Because of possible high turnout public comment needs to be limited to 3 minutes per person.
There is an anti-bridge campaign occurring on a local Facebook page and these individuals may come out for public comment. Many are against doing anything positive with the bridge and are trying to paint the new board as irresponsible.
Please come out in support of the bridge or email your comment to Alexis Minana at aminana@uatwp.org
.
January 6, 2026
Eric Fairchild was elected UAT Board President and Karen Overly Smith elected Vice President at the January 5, 2026 Reorganization Meeting.
The main item on the regular agenda that followed was to advertise and schedule a public forum regarding Bishop Road Bridge. This meeting is scheduled for Monday, January 12, 2026, at 6:30 PM, at the Township Building, 100 Gettysburg Pike, Mechanicsburg, PA 17055.
The purpose of the public forum is to receive public comment and discussion regarding the Bishop Road Bridge project. Residents and interested parties are encouraged to attend.
We will post a project summary and further information on the bridge in the next several days.
Thanks to all who have supported us and our continuing work to save upper allen from over development.
.
December 9, 2025
Bishop Road Bridge has been saved for an extended period of time
Per a letter received today from the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection; Cumberland County does not have a valid permit to proceed with its planned demolition.
There is apparently a separate process that will need to be followed for a site “identified in the latest published version of the Pennsylvania Inventory of Historical Places” and this could require an extended period of time.
This will allow the new Upper Allen Township Board of Commissioners and the Cumberland and York County Commissioners time to rationally re-evaluate their respective positions.
Our heartfelt thanks to the folks at the Pennsylvania Historic and Museum Commission (PHMC) and DEP for recognizing the significance of Bishop Road Bridge and helping to assure that the law is followed and the public interest protected.
.
December 8, 2025
Bishop Bridge Again Slated for Demolition – But its not Over !
The Cumberland County Commissioners voted 2-1 Thursday against authorizing their Solicitor to prepare documents necessary for Upper Allen Township to accept ownership of Bishop Bridge on January 5, 2026.
Instead, the County intends to award the bid to demolish the bridge at its next meeting on December 18, 2025.
The Carlisle Sentinel published a detailed story of the meeting this morning:
Eric Fairchild, Phil Walsh, and Karen Smith attended the Thursday meeting and affirmed their intent for Upper Allen to take ownership. Fairchild said “This is a treasured asset of many in our community. We are here today in good faith. Our intent is to follow through.”
What could have been a simple matter of instructing the County Solicitor – turned into many questions about what Upper Allen would do with the bridge, how it would be paid for, etc. This despite the County having received a full packet of information at our meeting with Mr. Stoner on November 21.
What should have been a variation of the old joke, “I have a bridge to sell you”, didn’t apply. We note Cumberland County transferred ownership of the Craighead Bridge several years ago for $1.00 using a simple 4 page agreement.
How did this happen? Basically, outgoing Upper Allen Commissioner Jim Cochran orchestrated a Facebook campaign to flood the County Commissioners with emails. His Cochran for Upper Allen page shows people opining about the bridge – some without even knowing where it is – and the County Commissioners responding.
.
Others in the Cochran network are celebrating the destruction of Bishop Bridge. Here is UAT Park & Rec. Board member and recent Commissioner candidate Jason Saposnek:
.
For those who like to read between the lines; we suggest there is more going on here than a few folks trying to save an old bridge vs. a few folks trying to save taxpayer money.
For all the talk about money; we suggest the real money at stake here is for the future development of the Bishop Road peninsula – and the historic Bishop Road Bridge stands in the way of this. Thus, the determined effort by some politically well connected folks to see it gone ASAP.
Those with long memories might remember “Grantham Woods”. Here is a clipping from the October 19, 1990 Patriot News:
.
Is it over? Was it over “when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?”
In the famous words of John Belushi, It Ain’t Over!
https://youtu.be/tG25f13s2JA?si=oDWVYz9sR8LspMOm
The Cumberland County Commissioners have stated their intent to award the demolition bid at their next meeting on December 18th. This gives thoughtful and informed people time to reach out to each Commissioner personally at:
Kelly Neiderer, Chairman kkneiderer@cumberlandcountypa.gov
Jean Foschi, Vice Chairman jmfoschi@cumberlandcountypa.gov
Gary Eichelberger,Secretary gleichelberger@cumberlandcountypa.gov
.
The York County Commissioners are an equal parties to this and their next meeting is on December 17th.
Julie Wheeler, President JLWheeler@yorkcountypa.gov
Scott Burford, Vice President sburford@yorkcountypa.gov
Doug Hoke, Commissioner DHoke@yorkcountypa.gov
.
Here are some possible questions that could be asked of each County Commissioner:
Have you personally walked the emergency access road / trail from Messiah University to Bishop Road and inspected the bridge?
Do you not see that Bishop Bridge provides a way for the public to continue accessing the (beautiful!) Bishop Road area vs. closing it off for the benefit of a few private property owners.
It is clear that only a few property owners on Bishop Road will benefit by demolishing the bridge and removing the roadway. Where is the public good in this?
Why hasn’t a Board of View been convened to determine the public good?
Why the hurry to demolish a beautiful National Register (NR) eligible bridge that has stood for 127 years and is in no danger of imminent collapse?
Why are you in favor of proceeding with demolition when a majority of Upper Allen Township Commissioners are now in favor of accepting ownership?
Why not give the new Upper Allen Board one last time to act and then re-bid the project if they fail to do so?
.
December 2, 2025
Upper Allen Township poised to save the historic 1898 Bishop Bridge.
Upper Allen Commissioners Eric Fairchild and Phil Walsh have been working with Commissioner-elect Karen Overly Smith since the November 4th election to further evaluate the historic Bishop Bridge and how best to rehabilitate and utilize it going forward.
Karen has toured the bridge several times and will vote with Eric and Phil at the January 5, 2026 Upper Allen Commissioners meeting to assume ownership of the bridge from Cumberland and York County.
In our opinion, the best course of action is to rehabilitate the bridge for limited vehicular use and to seek the cooperation of Messiah University in allowing the public to utilize the County built emergency access road as a walking trail connection to the stunningly beautiful Bishop Road area and bridge.
We believe the bridge can be fully rehabilitated using historic methods that will save time, money and lessen the environmental impact. It will also serve as a demonstration project for students and engineers interested in historic preservation of other metal truss bridges. There are only about 200 National Register eligible metal truss bridges still standing in Pennsylvania including Bishop.
The project is expected to cost $1.1 million and can be funded through County, State and Township funding streams. Taxpayers should realize they are already paying toward bridge projects when they renew their vehicle registration and/or put gas in their tank.
Special thanks to Cumberland and York County for their continued patience and understanding regarding changes in Upper Allen’s Board of Commissioners.
While the bridge has come perilously close to demolition through a recent bid solicitation; we believe the Cumberland County planning department, lead by Kirk Stoner, has developed a fair and appropriate timeline which allows Upper Allen one last opportunity to take prompt and definitive action.
Bishop Bridge will be on the Upper Allen Board of Commissioners Agenda for December 3, 2025 and on the Cumberland County Commissioners Agenda for December 4, 2025.
Those wishing to make written public comment may best do so through the Upper Allen Board Secretary, Alexis Minana, at aminana@uatwp.org
.
September 14, 2025
Seth Kaplan and ABC 27 News have done a story on Bishop Bridge which can be found here. There are beautiful views of the bridge and its setting. Many people care about this bridge:
.
Bishop Bridge is on the September 17, 2025 Commissioners meeting as Item 4a.
.
Cumberland and York County are apparently accelerating their plan to demolish Bishop Bridge per a meeting at the bridge on September 4th. Cumberland County had previously told the Carlisle Sentinel on July 11 that the “Bridge could be demolished in early spring, 2026”; however, it is now “planning to bid the demolition within the next month and award by the end of October 2025 with demolition in early 2026.”
There appears to be a push by some to get the bridge demolished before a new BOC could possibly revisit the issue in January, 2026. The bridge has stood for 127 years. One has to wonder: Why the rush?
There is a need for having a turnaround at the emergency access road; however, there was/is confusion about what is to occur at the bridge. The bridge is 900+ ft. from the access road. There was talk of a 2nd turnaround at the bridge, signage, removing UAT built roadway, and whether the public will have continued access to the Yellow Breeches.
UAT residents will no longer have access to the creek based on what was discussed. It also appears Monaghan Township will eliminate creek access from its side as well. This is contrary to a DCNR 10-Minute Walk Access to Trails Map which shows “High Need” (in Red) for access in the Bishop Road area.
There is also the issue of what right the public has to use the $360,000 County built emergency access road across Messiah University property? This road is gated and presently marked “No Trespassing” and “Notice, Authorized Personnel Only” at the Messiah parking lot side and “Private Property, Emergency Vehicle Access Only” at the Bishop Road side.
It is becoming clearer that there are additional costs and ramifications to demolishing the bridge. The County will spend $400,000+ to demolish and construct turnarounds. Should UAT take ownership; the County has offered $275,000 of its demolition funding plus another (possible) $200,000 through its small bridge program.
UAT has an RFP to rehabilitate the bridge (vehicular use) for $1,050,000 that is supported by a Penn DOT / McCormick Taylor (Engineers) memo. The $600,000+- Upper Allen would spend over the cost of demolition is already budgeted and funded. Maintaining bridges is part of what liquid fuel tax monies can be used for. Page 3 of the 2025 UAT budget shows the township receiving $670,000 per year through this source.
Those who don’t know what Bishop Road and Bishop Bridge offer should drive out and take a look for themselves. You will be not be disappointed. For purposes of GPS directions, 104 Bishop Road is last home on the Upper Allen side.
Demolishing the historic bridge will close off creek access and primarily benefit a 1/2 dozen private property owners on Bishop Rd.
Rehabilitating the bridge will benefit 24,000+ UAT residents by maintaining access to this stunningly beautiful area of the Township.
For more info., visit the saverupperallen.com homepage or the petition at:
https://www.change.org/p/save-the-1898-bishop-road-bridge
Residents would do well to make email / public comment to aminana@uatwp.org or come to BOC meeting on Wednesday as to whether continued road, creek or bridge access matters to you. When it’s gone, it’s gone.
.
Here is the above noted PennDOT / McCormick Taylor memo.
.
.
Saving Bishop Bridge is about more than just preservation
Guest Editorial (PennLive), Published July 6, 2025
By Martha Judy Bailey
I am speaking about what historic preservation truly means in our community-because right now, that value is being tested.
The Upper Allen Board of Commissioner voted not to accept ownership of the wrought iron Bishop Bridge. Cumberland County will retain ownership and they plan to demolish it.
The Bishop Bridge may sit at the edge of our township, shared with Monaghan, but it’s at the center of a much larger question: Do we value the historic, scenic, and functional infrastructure that helps define this place? Are we going to allow another structure to disappear?
Maintained by Cumberland County, the bridge was closed in 2019 due to safety concerns. Analysts tinkered with the numbers saying it was not used by many people, required patchy upgrades. The county offered it to the township— effectively offloading costs and responsibility. Since then, it has remained closed and neglected.
In the meantime, an emergency access road costing $360,000 was built across private property nearby on Messiah University to patch the gap. Another bridge nearby was replaced. But this bridge— the actual solution-was ignored.
Now we’re being told we can’t spend the $900,000 already budgeted to repair it. Yet we’re spending nearly that much on HVAC maintenance-and more than $500,000 on stormwater issues that have existed for half a century and could arguably wait one more year.
I’ll be honest-the current project proposal to rebuild the bridge had flaws. The presentation to the board was not stellar, and some uncertainties remain. The board did offer to delay a vote to allow the preservation plan to evolve and it did not.
The county allowed time, too. But with more effort-and perhaps an additional contractor and some public outcry and fundraisers-those concerns could be addressed.
The township is just not hearing from residents that they value historic preservation. Instead, it seemed as though all the work was placed on township Commissioner Fairchild, while township staff and some commissioners assumed the role of judge rather than collaborator.
It’s true, there was no public outcry for preservation; who knew? Yes there are other priorities but are there really? I heard the cry for open spaces and historic preservation during my campaign, now this access to the creek is being taken from citizens.
If we don’t act now, the bridge will not just remain closed —it will be lost forever, a missing structure on the horizon. If we ever do want to replace it? That will cost more than $2 million.
Take a drive out there. What you’ll see is confusing and illogical: two roads that used to connect … and now don’t. It’s like reaching the middle of a tunnel and finding a wall. The neighboring land owners won’t be bothered with traffic and laughter from the bridge, just the turning around of cars reaching the dead end.
“And then, quietly, the old bridge. Tired, steadfast, standing watch through the night. Her fate was debated by those angry at the cost of her new clothes. The view from her grated metal deck, the breeze, The murmur of cool water beneath-none of it mattered. They felt powerful, stomping out her worth, Declaring they didn’t need her. They had spoken. She was done. But when morning comes, and truth returns like a tide, They’ll realize they need her more than ever. For she holds no bitterness. No fear. Only grace, serenity, and a playful spirit.”
We are better planners than this. We are better stewards than this. The bridge offers us more than this. What will happen when the McCormick bridge needs replacement?
.
Here is link for Ms. Bailey’s facebook page:
https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=61575046711493
.
Note that earlier posts on Bishop Bridge can be found on our home page chronology
Save Upper Allen 