A Pennsylvania state appeals court ruled that a township in Allegheny County violated its own zoning law when it allowed a gas well to be built in a residential area.
A three-judge Commonwealth Court panel ruled last month that Elizabeth Township should not have allowed for the construction of a well pad and a related natural gas pipeline, gravel access road and interconnect pad.
The Heracles well was built in a part of the township zoned “rural residential.” The Commonwealth Court found that the well pad, owned by Canonsburg-based Olympus Energy LLC, constituted a “principal structure” and thus should not have been allowed.
The township’s zoning law “prohibits the [well pad and related infrastructure], as principal structures, from being located on the proposed lots as the lots contain existing single-family dwellings,” the judges found.
John Smith is the attorney for the environmental group Protect Elizabeth Township, which sued the township over the well. (Protect Elizabeth Township is funded by The Heinz Endowments, which also funds The Allegheny Front.) He said the basic principles of zoning were ignored by the township when it okayed the gas well.
“If there’s a residential structure or home on a lot, you can’t have another principal structure on that same lot,” Smith said. “If you have a sizable acreage and you want to have a Walmart on your property, what do you have to do? You have to subdivide it. You have to create a separate lot to accommodate a new use.”
What happened?
The well pad was approved by Elizabeth Township’s Board of Commissioners in 2023. State records indicate that several wells were drilled on the pad starting in September 2023. The pad has been controversial because it was built less than half a mile from a high school.
Both the township and Olympus Energy have appealed the decision to the full 11-member Commonwealth Court for review. Tammy Firda, the township manager, said in an email that the township does not discuss “pending legal matters.”
Blaine Lucas, the attorney for Olympus Energy, did not respond to requests for comment.
In a legal brief appealing the decision, the company and township argued that the well pad and related infrastructure were allowed because they are not buildings. The township’s zoning code forbids more than one “principle building or structure” on a lot, which it defines as a “building structure in which the principled use is conducted”.
What is the impact of this ruling?
Should the appeal fail, the company may be required to remove the gas well and any related equipment, Smith said.
According to Smith, this was a new legal approach that could be applied to other municipalities.
“This is applying basic municipal ordinances and principles to the oil and gas industry. They’re no different, and the court agreed,” he said.
Tom Daniels, professor of city and regional planning at the University of Pennsylvania, said if the ruling stands, it might not be as applicable in other townships with different zoning laws.
“From my reading, the ruling is rather specific to Elizabeth Township,” Daniels said. In other Pennsylvania towns, residential areas often allow other uses on residential lots, according to Daniels.
“You can have other uses rather than just houses. For example, often agriculture is a permitted use in a rural residential zone,” he said.
Ross Pifer, a law professor at Penn State and director of the university’s Center for Agricultural and Shale Law, said the ruling could lead to a closer reading of local ordinances in oil and gas-rich parts of the state.
“I think there are a lot of municipalities, as well as a lot of oil and gas operators, that are probably going to be looking at ordinance language a lot more closely,” Pifer said.
