Maine Revised Statutes

Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 38, § 435 (2026)

Shoreland areas

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ME-LEGlegislature.maine.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
To aid in the fulfillment of the State's role as trustee of its waters and to promote public health, safety and the general welfare, it is declared to be in the public interest that shoreland areas be subject to zoning and land use controls. Shoreland areas include those areas within 250 feet of the normal high-water line of any great pond, river or saltwater body, within 250 feet of the upland edge of a coastal wetland, within 250 feet of the upland edge of a freshwater wetland except as otherwise provided in section 438‑A, subsection 2, or within 75 feet of the high-water line of a stream. The purposes of these controls are to further the maintenance of safe and healthful conditions; to prevent and control water pollution; to protect fish spawning grounds, aquatic life, bird and other wildlife habitat; to protect buildings and lands from flooding and accelerated erosion; to protect archaeological and historic resources; to protect commercial fishing and maritime industries; to protect freshwater and coastal wetlands; to control building sites, placement of structures and land uses; to conserve shore cover, and visual as well as actual points of access to inland and coastal waters; to conserve natural beauty and open space; and to anticipate and respond to the impacts of development in shoreland areas.   [PL 1995, c. 625, Pt. B, §15 (AMD).]
It is further declared that, in accordance with Title 12, section 402, certain river and stream segments, as identified in the former Department of Conservation's 1982 Maine Rivers Study and as specifically delineated in section 437, are significant river segments and deserve special shoreland zoning controls designed to protect their natural and recreational features.   [PL 2013, c. 405, Pt. D, §15 (AMD).]
Zoning ordinances adopted pursuant to this article need not depend upon the existence of a zoning ordinance for all of the land and water areas within a municipality, notwithstanding Title 30‑A, section 4352, as it is the intention of the Legislature to recognize that it is reasonable for municipalities to treat shoreland areas specially and immediately to zone around water bodies rather than to wait until such time as zoning ordinances may be enacted for all of the land within municipal boundaries.   [PL 2011, c. 691, Pt. C, §6 (AMD).]
All existing municipal ordinances dealing with subjects of this section currently in effect and operational on April 18, 1986, are declared to be valid and shall continue in effect until rescinded, amended or changed according to municipal ordinance, charter or state law.   [PL 1987, c. 815, §§1,11 (RPR).]
SECTION HISTORY
PL 1985, c. 481, §A89 (NEW). PL 1985, c. 737, §A110 (AMD). PL 1987, c. 94, §§1,2 (AMD). PL 1987, c. 815, §§1,11 (RPR). PL 1989, c. 403, §3 (AMD). PL 1993, c. 196, §1 (AMD). PL 1995, c. 625, §B15 (AMD). PL 2011, c. 691, Pt. C, §6 (AMD). PL 2013, c. 405, Pt. D, §15 (AMD).
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 12 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1990–2024 · leading case: Dep't of Env't Prot. v. Town of Otis, 1998 ME 214 (Me. 1998).
Dep't of Env't Prot. v. Town of Otis, 1998 ME 214 (Me. 1998). · cites it 4× “" 38 M.R.S.A. § 435 (Pamph.1997). [¶ 10] The Attorney General's role in protecting this public interest in this area is explicitly delineated by several statutes.”
Bog Lake Co. v. Town of Northfield, 2008 ME 37 (Me. 2008). “38 M.R.S. §§ 435, 438-A (2007). That enactment and the Town’s ordinance are each presumed to be constitutional.”
Turbat Creek Pres., LLC v. Town of Kennebunkport, 2000 ME 109 (Me. 2000). “See 38 M.R.S.A. §§ 435 & 438-A (1989 & Supp. 1999).”
Freeman v. Town of Southport, 568 A.2d 826 (Me. 1990). “Moreover, under 38 M.R.S.A. § 435 (1989), all shoreland “within 250 feet of the normal high water line of any great pond, river or saltwater body” is subject to zoning and land-use controls.”
Kevin J. Hill v. Town of Wells, 2021 ME 38 (Me. 2021). “[¶13] Another piece of legislation that affects this area and Hill’s property by mandating shoreland zoning is 38 M.R.S. § 435 (2021), in which the Legislature stated: To aid in the fulfillment of the State’s role as trustee of its waters and to promote public health, safety and…”
Enos v. Town of Stetson, 665 A.2d 678 (Me. 1995). “38 M.R.S.A. § 435 (Supp.1994) (emphasis added).”
21 Seabran, LLC v. Town of Naples (Me. Super. Ct 2016). “" 38 M.R.S. § 435 (2014). 1 On September 25, 2014, Mills Whitaker Architects submitted on behalf of petitioner applications for a building permit and a subsurface wastewater disposal system permit.”
Furey v. Inhabitants of the Town of Scarborough (Me. Super. Ct 2017). “The property is not located, in whole or in part, within a shoreland area, as defined in 38 M.R.S.A. § 435, or flood hazard zone, as defined in the Town of Scarborough Floodplain Management Ordinance.”
Blanchard v. Town of Bar Harbor (Me. Super. Ct 2018). “1000 with respect to all shoreland areas, an express limitation on the Legislature's general grant of municipal home rule authority.”
MacKay v. Town of Raymond (Me. Super. Ct 2021). “Compare, SZO, §16 with 38 MRS§ 435. Both the ordinance and the statute, read as a whole, protect both private and public interests.”
Michael Dahlem v. City of Saco, 2024 ME 32 (Me. 2024). “38 M.R.S. §§ 435, 438-A(1)-(2) (2024). Under the BEP guidelines, residential lots adjacent to tidal areas may be no less than 30,000 square feet per dwelling unit and have no less than 150 feet of shore frontage per dwelling unit.”
Inh. of the Town of Mount Vernon Through its Bd. of Selectmen v. Town of Mt. Vernon Plan. Bd. of Appeals (Me. Super. Ct 2014). “~ 17l On July 16, 2013, the DEP issued a letter with written comments to the Board of Appeals concluding that the variance requested by Landherr and Center should not be granted because their lot is located in the shore land area as described in 38 M.R.S. § 435 and because there…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.