Laserfiche WebLink
<br />00243'7 <br /> <br />COASTAL FLOOD PROBLEMS <br /> <br />5 <br /> <br />6-120. <br /> <br />Chapter III discusses judicial reaction to coastal <br /> <br />regulations,. While the number of cases :interpreting <br />coastal regulati'ons for flood loss control is small, many <br /> <br />f~i~; <br /> <br />cases have sustained federal, state and local regulation of <br /> <br />structures, dredging and fills in navigable waters, harbor <br /> <br />lines, and bulkhead lines, Courts have also quite widely <br />sanctioned regulations for the objective of protecting dunes <br /> <br />and natural protective barriers, A small but significant <br /> <br />nt~ber of cases have sanctioned coastal regulations for <br /> <br />flood loss control where threats to health and safety are <br /> <br />involved, Qualified support has been given to coastal <br /> <br />wetland controls designed to protect wildlife and salt <br /> <br />marshes, <br /> <br />The cases supporting regulations to control water <br />and land uses to protect navigation, reduce flood loss,es, <br /> <br />protect wildlife and protect scenic beauty have usually <br /> <br />involved regulations which permit some economic uses for <br /> <br />private lands. . Some cases have invalidated regulations <br /> <br />as preventing ,all reasonable use of lands and therefore <br /> <br />"taking" of private property without payment of just com- <br /> <br /> <br />pensation, Stringent regulation of all uses in low <br /> <br />hazard zones are likely to encounter such attacks. <br /> <br />However, several important cases have upheld coastal <br /> <br />regulations for high hazard areas subject to storm <br />damage although few if any economic uses were.permitted. <br /> <br />--{-:-::, <br />'~<>;f <br />