Board of Supervisors v. McClimans
Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania
1DissentByer, Judge
The prohibition by zoning ordinance of all surface mining in R-l Residential Zones in Shenango Township bears an obviously reasonable and substantial relationship to a compelling government interest in protecting the health, sáfety and welfare of citizens in the community and in preserving its environment. Therefore, the zoning ordinance was a reasonable exercise of Shenango’s police powers and not a compensable “taking” of private property under either the federal or the state constitutions.1 To the extent that our previous decision in this case, McClimans I,2 holds to the contrary, it was…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Penn Central Transportation Co. v. New York CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Pennsylvania Coal Co. v. MahonSupreme Court of the United States · 1922
- Mugler v. KansasSupreme Court of the United States · 1887
- Agins v. City of TiburonSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad v. ChicagoSupreme Court of the United States · 1897
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.