FLOOD05954

• County: Eagle
• Community: Beaver Creek
• Basin: Colorado Mainstem
• Title: FloodPlain Management Workshop Beaver Creek September 21-23, 1983
• Date: 9/21/1983
• Prepared For: Beaver Creek
• Prepared By: CWCB
• Floodplain - Doc Type: Educational/Technical/Reference Information

September 1983
Page 2

2.

Pue Process.

-

The due process protections of the Fifth and
Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution require that a
zoning ordinance bear a substantial relationship to the
public health, safety, morals, or welfare. Additionally, the
restriction on the use of property cannot be unreasonable,
arbi tr~ry, ,or capricious. Board 2! County Commissioners ~
Mounta~n A~r Ranch, supra; Mosgrave v. Town of Federal
Heights, i9'O' Colo. 1, 543 P. 2d 715 (197'5). --po determine if a
zoning ordinance is reasonable and promotes the public
welfare, the court will examine .the facts, circumstances, and
10cali ty in the particular case. PiSalle v. Giggal, 128
Colo. 208, 261 P. 2d 499 (1953). A floodplain zoning or-
dinance enacted to reduce damage to life and property is
obviously related to promotion of the public welfare. A
problem may arise, however, where other purposes such as the
maintenance of open spaces and wildlife or the retention of
land in its natural state as a water detention basin are
invo~ved. . Turnpike Realty f2.:,. ~ Town of pedham, sup;ta;
M<;1rns county. ~ Improvement .Co. v. Township 2! ~-
s~ppany-Troy H~lls, 40 N.J. 539, 193 A.2d 232 (1963).

It is important to note that courts often look to
the purposes enumerated in the floodplain ordinance to
determine if it is related to the public health, safety, and ~
wel~are. ~,Turnpike Realtyf2.:,. ~ Town $! Pedham, s~pra; ~
Usd~l?- .~ state 2! New Jersey Pept.. of E:nvuonmental 1'ro-
tect~on, 173 N.J. Super. Ct. Law P~v. 311, 414 A.2d 280
(1980) aff'd. 179 N.J. Super. App. :biv. 113, 430 A.2d 949
(1981); Morris County Land Impl;'Ovement Co., v . Township of
parsippany-TrOy Hills, suPra. . , - - .-

Another problem may arise in the application of the
ordinance to a specific piece of property. Local government
must act reasonably in creating the boundaries of a flood-
plain district. In determining whether or not it was reason-
able to include certain property in a flood district, courts
have considered whether or not the property has been subject
to flooding il?- the past (Sturdy Homes, Inc. ~ Townshii? of
Redford, 30 M~ch. App. 53, 186 N.W.2d 43 (1971); techn~cal
data regarding elevation, topography, dams, flood control,
and flood gates; engineering data regarding the flow of a
river, and testimony that wpen the property was observed it
was covered with four to five feet of water. (Turnpike
Realty f2.:,. ~ ~ of Dedham, supra).

e.