Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Land Use And Transportation topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Residents urge moratorium and transparency as development pressures mount along Highway 521

Lancaster County Council · January 13, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Multiple residents told Lancaster County Council they oppose new large housing developments and rezoning along Highway 521, citing traffic congestion, alleged permit irregularities at Barberville and Fort Mill Highway, and a request to extend the moratorium to the eastern side of 521 to protect infrastructure and property values.

Several residents used the public-comment period to press council on development and traffic along Highway 521.

Libby Sweat Lambert asked the council not to approve any new large housing developments until infrastructure is sufficient and requested the moratorium be extended to the eastern side of Highway 521 down to Shiloh Unity Road, saying she had not received a previously requested explanation about how moratorium boundaries were set.

Janine Clifton told council she believes building permits were improperly granted for a development at Barberville and Fort Mill Highway and urged county staff to revoke permits if they violate the Unified Development Ordinance (citing sections 6.2(e) and 9.4.0.8(h)). “We need answers,” she said, asking the council to prevent retroactive UDO changes that would accommodate developers who already started work.

Jean Doyle described lengthy travel and traffic delays on 521 and urged council not to approve rezoning for a CH Smith project between Aldi and Culver's, noting Planning Commission previously turned the request down. She said adding more development would compound existing traffic problems and suggested a broader moratorium on development.

Council members acknowledged the concerns and noted related items will move through planning and the Planning Commission; no formal action or votes on moratoria were taken during the meeting.