Laserfiche WebLink
<br />to provide "compensatory storage" for use in this area. <br /> <br />Because of legislation passed by the rural-dominated New <br /> <br />York State Legislature limiting the ability of New York City to <br /> <br />take land in upstate counties for its water system unless full <br /> <br />compensation is paid, the city enacted a provision governing its <br /> <br />approach in such matters.49 According to Sax: <br /> <br />In New York the cost of diversion is made <br />even greater by a statutory provision which, <br />in addition to allowing compensation to the <br />owners of riparian land, requires that the <br />owner of any real esta te ta ken by the c i t Y <br />which has been directly or indirectly <br />decreased in value by the execution of any <br />plans for additional water supply by the city <br />shall have the right to recover damages for <br />such decrease in value. This provision <br />guarantees compensation to nonr ipar ians who <br />have made use of the river, as well as to <br />business and property owners whose values are <br />diminished simply by the fact that the use of <br />the river is affected.50 <br /> <br />The courts have taken a broad view of the interests that may be <br /> <br />compensable under this provision. <br /> <br />Compensation recognizes that the diversion of water from an <br /> <br />area entails real costs and that offsetting payments may ~e <br /> <br />devised that will benefit the exporting area and leave it at <br /> <br />least as well off as a result of the diversion. <br /> <br />Inclusion of <br /> <br />these payments in the cost of the diversion better reflects the <br /> <br />true cost of the project. Water is not artificially reserved for <br /> <br />49Administrative Code of the City of New York, K51-44.0. <br /> <br />50Joseph L. Sax, Water Law, Planning and Policy (Bobbs- <br />Merrill, 1968) at 200. <br /> <br />20 <br />