ELR Citation: ELR 20221
No(s). -7684 (Mass. Jun 26, 1972)

Although a town zoning amendment which severely restricts building on lands subject to periodic flooding cannot be upheld solely because it retains the land in its natural condition, it is upheld because it promotes the public safety. The 88% reduction in the market value of plaintiff's land is not conclusive evidence of an unconstitutional taking of property. An exercise of police power, which regulates the use of land in order to protect the public from harm, must be distinguished from eminent domain, which takes property for public use. This zoning amendment is a constitutional exercise of the police power because plaintiff is not deprived of all beneficial use of his land, and, on balance, the value of protecting the community from potential harm outweighs the burden of affected individuals.

Counsel for Plaintiff
Antonio F. Iovino
I Court Street
Boston, MA 02108

Counsel for Defendant
Acheson H. Callaghan Jr.
Palmer & Dodge
28 State Street
Boston, MA 02109