Harford County legislation that would have allowed blasting at mining operations to take place 1,000 feet closer to residential property lines was withdrawn Tuesday night after community members shared concerns.

The bill was introduced in December by County Council member James Reilly on behalf of Vulcan Materials Company — one of the largest mining companies in the United States. The company operates a quarry in Havre de Grace.

Harford’s code mandates that extraction activities maintain a minimum buffer of 1,000 feet from adjacent roads and a minimum buffer of 1,500 feet from adjacent residentially zoned parcels. For blasting, the code prohibits blasting within 2,000 feet of residentially zoned properties or historic landmarks.

Reilly’s bill would have eliminated local control and oversight of mining operations by replacing portions of the Harford County Code with provisions in the Code of Maryland Regulations that allow surface mining 25 feet from property lines and blasting operations 1,000 feet closer to homes.

Even with the current provisions, residents near the quarry reported their homes shake during large blasts at the quarry and silica dust coats their property. Upon hearing that the mining operations could be moved closer to his home in Havre de Grace, Al Peteraf said he was concerned the blasts would compromise the foundation and that the potentially toxic dust would affect his health.

Residents surrounding the Havre de Grace quarry rallied to urge Reilly to withdraw his bill through social media and public comments during council meetings.

Former Harford County Council member, state delegate and county resident Mary Ann Lisanti said even though Reilly’s bill was intended to benefit Vulcan Material Company, there are three other mining operations in the county that the legislation would involve — all of which could impact residential properties.

Havre de Grace residents met with Council President Patrick Vincenti and Reilly to express their concerns and the reality of living near the quarry, which resulted in the council tabling a vote on the bill weeks after it was introduced.

In an email to Lisanti on Jan. 24, an aide to Reilly said the councilman had reviewed messages from residents and taken their concerns into consideration — ultimately leading to his decision to withdraw the bill.

Reilly — who did not respond to a request for comment — withdrew the bill Tuesday night without explanation.

“I think that once Councilman Reilly became aware of the local impact, he really felt he was doing the right thing in pulling the bill,” Peteraf said. “The citizens appreciate being heard by the council.”

Have a news tip? Contact Matt Hubbard at mhubbard@baltsun.com, 443-651-0101 or @mthubb on X.