Laserfiche WebLink
<br />April 10, 2009\ Volume 3 I No.7 <br /> <br />Zoning Bulletin <br /> <br />zones. In other words, municipalities could still control the location of oil ~) <br />and gas wells. <br />The court, however, rejected the Township's argument that provisions <br />in the Ordinance that controlled ancillary features of oil and gas (such as <br />restrictions on water treatment facilities and access roads) were not pre- <br />empted. The court said that even though those provisions pertained to items <br />that were not specifically addressed in the Act, since the Ordinance was spe- <br />cifically directed at oil and gas well operations, those provisions "plainly <br />constitute [ d] an impermissible form of regulation." The court found that <br />wholesale preemption was made clear by the last sentence of Section 602 of <br />the Act: "[The Act] preempts and supersedes the regulation of oil and gas <br />wells . . . ." . <br /> <br />See also: Huntley & Huntley, Inc. v. Borough Council of Borough of Oakmont, <br />964 A.2d 855 (Pa. 2009). . <br /> <br /> <br />12 <br /> <br />@ 2009 Thomson -Reuters <br /> <br />54 <br /> <br />(~ <br />'. J <br /> <br />('. <br />"~) <br />