Opinion ID: 1855387
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Blasting and Crushing

Text: ¶ 16. We turn to the first issue in this case, which is whether the Town zoning ordinance authorizes blasting and crushing as part of a mineral extraction operation. The ordinance provides in relevant part: MINERAL EXTRACTION OPERATIONS Mineral extraction operations are conditional uses and may be permitted in accordance with the provisions in Sections 4.1 through 4.4 of this Ordinance, except as otherwise provided by this section. . . . Use Restricted. Mineral extraction operations shall include the removal of rock slate, gravel, sand, or any other minerals from earth by excavating, stripping or leveling. Zoning Ordinance § 4.10. ¶ 17. The court of appeals approached the issue by inquiring whether the terms `excavating,' `stripping' and `leveling' include blasting and crushing. Weber, 197 Wis. 2d at 837. According to the court of appeals, the common meaning of the three terms, excavating, stripping, and leveling, limit mineral deposit removal to extraction by mechanical means. Id. at 838. The court concluded that under the ordinance, blasting is not a permissible method of mineral extraction, because it involves explosives rather than machinery. Id. The ordinance also does not allow crushing, the court reasoned, because crushing is a distinct manufacturing process, and is not an inherent part of extraction; it takes place after the mineral is excavated. Id. at 839. ¶ 18. This court does not read § 4.10 so narrowly. We observe initially that conditional use standards often lack specificity, since their purpose is to confer a degree of flexibility in the land use regulations. Edward Kraemer & Sons v. Sauk County Adjustment Bd., 183 Wis. 2d 1, 14, 515 N.W.2d 256 (1994); see also State ex rel. Skelly Oil Co. v. Common Council, City of Delafield, 58 Wis. 2d 695, 700-01, 207 N.W.2d 585 (1973) (noting that conditional uses are flexibility devices). [I]f it were possible to find a legislative draftsman capable of performing such a taskof drafting standards to govern the likely as well as all possible contingencies relating to a conditional usethere would be no need to make the use a conditional one. In that case they could be made part of the zoning ordinance proper requiring no exercise of discretion on the part of anyone. . . . [I]f the purposes of zoning are to be accomplished, the master zoning restrictions or standards must be definite while the provisions pertaining to a conditional use. . .must of necessity be broad and permit an exercise of discretion. 3 Edward H. Ziegler, Jr., Rathkopf's The Law of Zoning and Planning § 41.11, at 49 (4th ed. 1996). ¶ 19. Turning to the ordinance provision at issue, the phrase shall include in § 4.10 denotes a non-exhaustive list of methods by which minerals may be removed from the earth. See Legislative Reference Bureau, Wisconsin Bill Drafting Manual 1997-1998 § 2.01(1)(i) (revised August 1996) (`Means' is complete and `includes' is partial. Using `includes' allows a court or administering agency to adopt additional meanings . . .). We find unpersuasive the plaintiffs' contention that include modifies the list of materials to be extracted, rather than the methods of extraction. The phrase rock slate, gravel, sand or any other minerals from earth is itself a non-exhaustive list. If we adopted the plaintiffs' view that the term include modifies this list of extracted minerals, the phrase or any other minerals would be rendered surplusage, a result to be avoided wherever possible. See Ann M.M. v. Rob S., 176 Wis. 2d 673, 680, 500 N.W.2d 649 (1993). ¶ 20. While the court of appeals correctly examined the permissible methods of mineral extraction, it erred in focusing solely on the terms excavating, stripping or leveling. Those activities comprise only a partial list of permissible mineral extraction operations. Instead, the inquiry centers on whether blasting and crushing also come within the definition of mineral extraction operations. ¶ 21. We conclude that resort to the technical meaning of mineral extraction operations is appropriate in this case. The ordinance does not use this term in the general descriptive sense, but instead to define processes peculiar to the mining industry. The technical meaning should govern in a technical context. See Lake City Corp. v. City of Mequon, 207 Wis. 2d 156, 163 n.8, 558 N.W.2d 100 (1997); Lang v. Lang, 161 Wis. 2d 210, 221, 467 N.W.2d 772 (1991); see also Wis. Stat. § 990.01(1) (1995-96). [7] Because § 4.10 addresses mining, we interpret the ordinance provision with the aid of industry, administrative, and legislative definitions of mining activities. ¶ 22. Blasting is an indispensable activity in the extraction of hard rock from the earth. See National Stone Association, The Aggregate Handbook, 5-16 (1991) (Every hard rock quarrying operation extracts stone from its geologic formation by the controlled use of explosives and/or blasting agents). The same reference manual states the following about extraction: The term extraction. . .includes the planning and design for removal of rock, sand, and gravel from the ground. The term extraction also includes the actual removal or mining process, and the reclamation of the land after mining is complete. Each different method employed for extraction is unique and contains numerous interrelated components. A simplified description of the extraction process consists of the removal of rock, sand, or gravel from its natural state and delivery of this material to the primary crushing or sizing facility in optimum physical dimensions for continued processing. Id. at 7-2. Although focusing on excavation of metals, the United States Department of the Interior's Dictionary of Mining, Mineral, and Related Terms (1968) provides that extraction is: [u]sed in relation to all processes that are used in obtaining metals from their ores. Broadly, these processes involve the breaking down of the ore both mechanically (crushing) and chemically (decomposition). Id. at 404. These technical definitions support the conclusion that within the industry, blasting and crushing are considered an integral part of mineral extraction operations. ¶ 23. In addition, the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources has recognized that blasting and crushing are activities inherent in quarrying operations. See Memorandum from George E. Meyer, Secretary, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, to the Natural Resources Board 1 (Jan. 24, 1995) (on file with the Department of Natural Resources) (stating that most of 1,903 nonmetallic mines identified in Wisconsin entail crushing, washing, sorting or blasting ) (emphasis added). Our legislature has also determined that crushing is an activity which comes within the meaning of nonmetallic mining: Nonmetallic mining means all of the following: . . . . (b) On-site processes that are related to the extraction of mineral aggregates or nonmetallic minerals, such as stockpiling of materials, blending mineral aggregates or nonmetallic minerals with other mineral aggregates or nonmetallic minerals, crushing, screening, scalping and dewatering. Wis. Stat. § 295.11(3)(b) (emphasis added). [5] ¶ 24. Nonmetallic mining, if not synonymous with mineral extraction operations, is certainly included within those operations. Because mineral extraction activities include nonmetallic mining, and nonmetallic mining includes crushing of stone, it follows that mineral extraction operations include the crushing of stone. We therefore conclude that blasting and crushing are authorized as part of a mineral extraction operation under § 4.10 of the Town's zoning ordinance.