The Gettysburg Station Project explained

Driving or walking around Gettysburg in 2025, one does not have to go far before they will see a yard sign that reads “STOP THE STATION,” or “SAVE HISTORIC GETTYSBURG.” If you were new to town, you might find these signs alarming. So, what is it all about? This has to do with a proposed development on private property here in downtown Gettysburg, called the Gettysburg Station.

Put very simply, the Gettysburg Station site is 2.4 acres of undeveloped, blighted real estate in the core of a built downtown environment. It has been the home of a gas station, the local Housing Authority, and numerous other uses. For most Gettysburg residents, however, your recent memory is that it is a gravel and concrete lot, choked with weeds, straddling a set of parcels that relatively few people could afford to purchase and remediate the contamination in the ground. This site has remained in a varying state of decay for almost 30 years.

A decade ago, a partnership was formed between the county, the borough, the Gettysburg Area School District, the state, and the economic development arms of our local community to begin to create an incentive plan to facilitate the development and revitalization of this site. As part of the comprehensive plan, the needs that were specifically identified in cooperation with these interested parties were housing, commercial space, and tax revenue generation. While some would assert that our housing levels are adequate, this is not the reality or the experience for many who live here, particularly the working-class folks who staff our many businesses in town. County-level organizations have consistently identified the lack of housing in Gettysburg as being an ongoing problem, and this is in spite of the fact that between the 2010 and 2020 decennial censuses, we saw our population drop in the borough by almost 20%. The current owner of the parcels produced a market research feasibility study confirming the need for additional housing units in the area and that more commercial spaces would be supported by a mixed-use development. The goals that were specifically set by locals were increased population density and tax base growth. More residents and commercial enterprises produce an increased tax base. The economics here is simple; when there are more taxpayers, the burden on each decreases.

We have one industry here the borough: tourism. While we saw a bump in visitation post-pandemic, we do not see a correlating increase in overnight and multi-day stays. In general, over the span of fifty years, we have seen not just a steady decline in tourism here since our peak in 1971 and 1972, but the same decline nationally in historic tourism. Planning for our future and keeping Gettysburg a vibrant, living community means actively working towards the growth of population, and ceasing the trend of pushing housing out into the surrounding townships, where property taxes do not benefit the borough that so many travel to daily for work and commerce. Additionally, traffic congestion that is often cited as a reason to oppose this development is contradictory to reality. Residents in town have less incentive to drive as they can walk and/or bike locally, while the residents in surrounding townships must drive into town to access work or commerce.

The group that began this process of redeveloping the Station site talked with developers and quickly came to the realization that the economic imperatives of development are such that for any developer to incur the expenses of purchasing and redeveloping a parcel of this size, they needed to be able to build higher than the ordinance allowed at that time. In 2017, the borough council 2017 began an exhaustive eighteen-month deliberation on the merits of increasing allowed building heights in a new proposed redevelopment district. Ultimately, height allowances were made that parallel the height of the Hotel Gettysburg. Initially, the recommendations the borough received were to increase height allowances to 110 feet plus mechanical, but eventually the compromised height arrived at was 72 feet plus mechanical – the same as the Hotel Gettysburg.

At this point, our partners started the process of seeking developers interested in working with the borough to handle the revitalization. Even with the height incentives, this proved difficult. It is worth noting here that the ask the borough and its other governmental partners made was to develop this land and create a finished project with $30-$50 million in new assessed value. This is not about greed; this is about the fact that many services we offer residents and visitors are expensive. Public safety is expensive. Paving roads is expensive. Replacing water and sewer systems is expensive.

That potential $30-$50 million assessment is desirable to add to the tax revenues of the borough, the county, and the school district. The successful candidate would do this while creating housing, commercial spaces, and would include the relocation of the transit center. Criteria were set to achieve not only height increases but also tax abatement for a period of ten years. Here, the local governments were hedging the value of a ten-year tax reprieve against the potential long-term revenues of such an assessed asset.

Over the last two years, as this development has come closer to being realized, people have become understandably concerned as to what the end of this project will look like. In that time, there have been public meetings, hearings, and now an organized resistance to the development, and we have continued to lose parcels from the tax rolls, like General Lee’s Headquarters and Pickett’s Buffet. There has also been some misinformation. Current designs have a central building that maxes out at 63 feet plus mechanical. Our partner Rabbit Transit has requested that the relocated transit center not include an office building, as the maintenance is an expense to the agency that could better be spent meeting the needs of their ridership. At every turn, when the borough has asked this developer to make a change or a consideration, those interests have been incorporated. A brief list of the considerations that are being considered that will benefit the borough and its residents includes, possible “Quiet Crossings” at all railway crossings in the borough, investment in the Inner Loop project, an elevator in the Racehorse Alley Parking Structure, the permanent leasing of under-utilized rooftop parking for residents of the Station in that garage, underground parking, environmental cleanup, new storefronts and yes – housing. All of this while doing what it was intended to do: generating tax revenue for the borough, the county, and the school district. Further, because the plans do not include the commercial square footage required for the tax abatement, the finished development would begin generating these revenues upon construction and assessment.

Some have suggested that instead of housing and commercial space that generate revenues for the borough, we should instead build a park. While I understand the compulsion to create these types of outdoor spaces, this does not address these core issues of the revitalization – the housing, commerce, and revenue generation – and rather creates added expense for an already highly taxed population. Parks are a tax-exempt and expensive to maintain.

Over the next several months, different aspects of the proposed development will be reviewed by various governing agencies like the Planning Commission, GMA, PENNDOT, and others. Each of these agencies will be tasked with examining whether the aspects of the proposal that they each oversee are consistent with the ordinance and state law. Some have been upset that the new structures would look contemporary, and not closely enough mimic the older historical structures in the area. While this development would be in the historic district, we cannot preserve what isn’t there. Our Historic Preservation ordinance in fact states quite plainly that new construction cannot mimic historic buildings. This applicant has submitted his plans to the Historic Architectural Review Board (HARB), which made extensive suggestions for cosmetics, materials, colors, and textures, and these HARB-approved recommendations are being incorporated by the developer.

What this really comes down to is personal property rights. The developer bought this site in good faith, set to accomplish the goals we asked him to. The rules that existed at the time of the purchase are the rules his development will be held to. The borough does not have a legal or constitutional ability to change the rules and stop this owner, or any property owner, from doing as they wish with their private property, so long as it is consistent with the ordinance. The questions in front of Planning and the other agencies that will review this proposal between now and the time the first shovel hits the dirt is not “do you like this?” Instead, they are being asked to ensure that the ordinance is observed and that the applicant’s rights are upheld.

Matthew Moon is a 14-year resident of Gettysburg, raising a family here and working in the arts at Gettysburg College’s Majestic Theater. He is in his second term on the borough council and has served as president for the past 18 months.