PA Housing Regulations

Unpacking PA House Bill 1275: A Controversial Shift in Riparian Buffer Regulations

In the heart of Pennsylvania, a proposed legislative change is stirring up conversations and concerns among residents, property owners, and builders. PA House Bill 1275, if enacted, will significantly alter the regulations surrounding riparian buffers along waterways in Pennsylvania. While the intention is to enhance environmental conservation, critics argue that the bill may be a heavy-handed approach that infringes on private property rights.

To provide some background, PA House Bill 1275 seeks to impose riparian buffers along waterways in Pennsylvania, expanding the existing legislation that already mandates buffers for projects with earth disturbances over one acre. The key change lies in the enlargement of buffer sizes and their application to projects of any size requiring any level of permit or municipal approval.

The most prominent impact of this regulatory expansion would be felt by existing homeowners residing within 100 feet of a creek or stream. Those looking to make additions, build decks, patios, or sheds on their properties would now have to navigate not only setback requirements but also the recording of a conservation easement. This means that the newly restricted area would need to be adorned with trees and other landscaping, adding a layer of complexity and cost to property improvements.

Last month, I testified to a House Committee in regards to this exact House Bill. I advised them that when considering the potential impact on property values, it's likely that the new regulations would not be favorable. The bill essentially amounts to a taking of private property rights, imposing additional costs and restrictions on homeowners. When asked if I thought there was an expectation of high quality waterways in Pennsylvania, I responded that while a small percentage of buyers might be attracted to the idea of this type of environmental restriction, most home buyers are more focused on other factors such as location, amenities, utilization potential of the land and overall property condition.

I concluded my testimony with my perspective that the current regulations for projects of one acre and above already serve the purpose of promoting responsible development and enhanced water quality. Introducing further restrictions may be viewed as unnecessary, especially when considering the financial challenges it poses for small projects and the overall affordability of housing in the region.

In conclusion, I feel as though PA House Bill 1275 raises significant concerns about private property rights and the potential impact on homeowners. While environmental conservation is undoubtedly important, it's crucial to strike a balance that achieves the intended goals without unduly burdening property owners. The proposed bill appears to be a case of regulation for regulation's sake, potentially disrupting the established use and enjoyment of properties without delivering substantial improvements in water quality. As the debate continues, finding a middle ground that addresses environmental concerns without compromising property rights should be the primary focus.