Huntington Township considers broad rewrite of subdivision and zoning definitions

Huntington Township supervisors and planning staff reviewed a draft overhaul of the township’s subdivision and zoning definitions, focusing on terms that determine when land-development reviews and design standards are triggered.

Township planning staff said the project is intended to make terminology consistent across the subdivision ordinance, the zoning ordinance and the stormwater rules so developers, engineers and staff interpret triggers and requirements the same way.

Staff recommended replacing the township’s condominium definition with a model definition the consultant said came from recent municipal code updates. The group discussed a proposed change to the definition of density — whether density should be calculated using the entire parcel or only buildable area after excluding public rights-of-way and streets. One presenter summarized the policy trade-off: “It doesn’t seem quite right to give density based on stuff that can’t be built on,” and staff asked supervisors for direction on whether to exclude nonbuildable areas when calculating units per acre.

Other proposed changes cited by staff included adopting a “design professional” definition drawn from the state planning code for consistency; retaining recent dwelling‑unit and dwelling definitions already carried over from the current zoning ordinance; and adding definitions for “fill” and “clean fill.” Floodplain and floodway language was rewritten to mirror stormwater regulations, and a clarifying sentence was added to the lakes and ponds definition to exclude stormwater basins designed solely for stormwater retention.

Staff also proposed streamlining the land-development definition by removing a lengthy list of improvements that had been described elsewhere in the code. Supervisors questioned a clause copied from the township zoning ordinance that treated a lessee with a remaining term of 40 years as a landowner; staff said that time frame is uncommon locally and recommended dropping it.

On lot-area measurements, staff recommended using survey‑based language for “lot area, gross” and a second definition for “lot area, net” that subtracts rights-of-way, easements and floodplain from gross area. The recommendation is intended to avoid ownership and deed ambiguities that a survey can resolve.

Mobile‑home definitions and the separate mobile‑home park design language are proposed to be removed from the subdivision ordinance and handled instead through zoning and general design standards that apply to all housing types. Staff said the change reflects a shift away from mobile‑home–specific design rules toward uniform design requirements across housing types.

Other drafting items flagged for further work included adding an “as‑built plan” definition, splitting open space into common/active/passive categories with short definitions, and cleaning up more than a dozen inconsistent uses of “sewer,” “sewage” and related terms so the ordinance uses those terms consistently. Staff said traffic‑study triggers were reworked to reference PennDOT when a state road is involved and to be more inclusive of study areas than the prior “within a half‑mile” reference.

Staff said a general watercourse definition will be kept deliberately broad rather than adopting the state’s more detailed wetland/stream classifications. The presenter warned that state and federal definitions change and that a plain, locally usable definition is preferable for the township code.

Next steps: staff will incorporate the edits discussed, assemble a consolidated draft of the full document and circulate it to supervisors and the township solicitor for review. The presenter said the full draft will be delivered “in February or March,” and supervisors agreed they want the solicitor to review the draft before adoption.