Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Ordinance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planners back draft Ordinance 25-05 to fix coding errors and clarify township '10% rule'
Summary
The Lynn Township Planning Commission voted to recommend draft Ordinance 25-05, which corrects codification errors and narrows the calculation of the zoning "10% rule" to acreage inside Lynn Township; commissioners debated calculation methods and requested wording edits before the Board of Supervisors reviews it.
The Lynn Township Planning Commission on Oct. 21 voted to recommend that the township solicitor and the Board of Supervisors review draft Ordinance 25-05, a package of corrections and clarifications to the township zoning code that includes a new definition of how the township’s longstanding "10% rule" will be calculated.
The ordinance draft, explained by Solicitor Marc Fisher, restores a site-plan section omitted from prior codifications, corrects renumbering and reference errors, replaces references to a "Board of Commissioners" with the correct "Board of Supervisors," removes an acoustic-shielding requirement for animal rescues (now treated as a conditional use), updates accessory-use references, and adds a definition for "Game Farm." The most contested item was Provision 11, which limits the area counted under the 10% cap to acreage within Lynn Township.
"What is the purpose of the Rule?" Solicitor Marc Fisher asked during the discussion, prompting commissioners to debate whether the rule should limit non‑agricultural development to 10% of a parcel as described in a recorded deed (with one additional lot allowed up to ten acres) or whether a different measurement or delineation method should be required for large parcels. Jimmy Bachman, speaking from the audience, said the 10% rule originated between 1976 and 1982.
Commissioners focused on practical questions, including whether the township should require a recorded site plan to show the boundaries of non‑agricultural development on larger parcels, whether the term "lot" or "development" should be used in the ordinance text, and how county-preserved farmland status affects the calculation and required deed language. Township Engineer Karl Scherzberg flagged that tracking remaining acreage and distinguishing net versus gross lot area are technical issues that need clearer language.
Commissioner Willard Dellicker moved to suggest approval of the draft ordinance incorporating the meeting's suggested edits; Amanda Dietrich seconded the motion and it carried unanimously. The commission’s action was a recommendation: final adoption would be decided by the Board of Supervisors after legal review and any additional edits.
The Board of Supervisors will next receive the draft with the commission’s suggested wording changes and the township solicitor’s review. The commission noted that additional clarifying language on calculation method and recording requirements would aid consistent administration of the 10% rule.
