Agenda - Planning Commission - 03/01/2012

Home

Zoning Bulletin January 10, 2012 1 Volume 6 I No. 1 zoning ordinance that establishes a setback for mining activities from resi- dential structures. The Background/Facts: Hoffman Mining Company, Inc. ("Hoffman Min- ing") sought to engage in surface coal mining on a 182.1 -acre tract of land within the Adams Township Conservancy (S) District in Adams Township in Cambria County, Pennsylvania. Adams Township Zoning Ordinance .% 1413 (the "Ordinance ") permitted mining activities in that zoning district, but only by special exception. In addition, § 1413.5(a) of the Ordinance required "[a] 11 mining, excavating, and blasting activities" in the district to m aintain a set- back of at least 1,000 feet from all residential structures. In pursuit of its mining plan, Hoffman Mining filed an application with the Adams Township Zoning Hearing Board (the "Zoning Board "), re- questing a special exception to conduct surface mining. In addition, it re- quested a variance from the Ordinance's 1,000 -foot setback provision. In the alternative, Hoffman Mining asserted that the setback provision of the Ordinance was preempted by the Surface Mining Act. More specifically, Hoffman Mining argued that there was a conflict between the Ordinance's setback provision and the Surface Mining Act's setback clause, under which no "surface mining operations" were permitted within 300 feet of any "occupied dwelling." (52 P.S. SS 1396.4b(c) and 1396.4e(h)(5).) Hoff- man Mining also cited the Surface Mining Act's preemption clause, which provides that: "all local ordinances and enactments purporting to regulate surface mining are hereby superseded "; and that in enacting the Surface Mining Act, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania "hereby preempts the regulation of surface mining as herein defined." (52 P.S. § 1396.17a.) (The Surface Mining Act does not define "surface mining" but does define "sur- face mining activities" as including mining operations for coal.) The Zoning Board granted Hoffman Mining's request for a special ex- ception to permit mining on the tract of land, with conditions. However, the Zoning Board denied Hoffman Mining's request for a variance from the Ordinance's 1,000 -foot residential setback provision. The Zoning Board also concluded that the Ordinance's setback provision was not pre- empted by the Surface Mining Act based on a distinction between regula- tion of mining activities and traditional zoning prerogatives. Hoffman Mining appealed. The trial court affirmed. Hoffman Mining again appealed. The Commonwealth Court also affirmed. Hoffman Mining again . sought review, which the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania granted. DECISION: Affirmed. The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania held that the Ordinance requiring surface mining activities to be set back from residential structures was not expressly or impliedly preempted by the Surface Mining Act. In so holding, the court recognized a distinction between the regulation of the technical activities of mining/drilling and the traditional regulation of land use through zoning ordinances. © 2012 Thomson Reuters 5