Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Zoning topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Staff proposes zoning and SALDO cleanups, recommends removing coordinated commercial and open‑space subdivision options

Lower Macungie Township Board of Commissioners · July 29, 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

Planner Nate presented a package of zoning and subdivision (SALDO) amendments that are largely technical cleanups and clarifications; staff recommended removing coordinated commercial development and open‑space subdivision provisions and tightening street design and sketch‑plan review standards.

Planner Nate walked the board through proposed zoning and SALDO ordinance revisions intended primarily as clerical and technical improvements to align definitions and standards with planning documents and recent practice. He said staff has worked with the engineering and zoning teams to address recurring interpretation issues and to give inspectors and reviewers clearer tools.

Among the items staff highlighted were aligning definitions (for example, architectural design guidelines and sidewalks), clarifying accessory structure height limits, formalizing the preferred side of sidewalks for street trees, and ensuring mobile and manufactured homes are regulated consistently in zoning and SALDO. On two policy items, staff recommended removing the coordinated commercial development provision (which allows two primary commercial uses on one lot) and shelving the open‑space subdivision development standard because required open‑space/net‑out calculations are now required elsewhere and the minimum lot sizes needed for such developments are increasingly rare because of active land preservation.

Nate said the draft will be circulated to the planning commission for comment and then returned to the board; the board discussed how the changes would affect existing mixed‑use developments and where applicants seeking similar configurations would instead seek relief through the zoning hearing board.