Upphävande av strandskydd inom detaljplan : En granskning av vilka skäl som kommuner åberopar vid upphävande av strandskydd samt vad domstolarna anser vara giltiga och ogiltiga skäl

Detta är en Kandidat-uppsats från Högskolan i Gävle/Samhällsbyggnad; Högskolan i Gävle/Samhällsbyggnad

Sammanfattning: Due to the popularity of settlement in coastal areas, measures need to be taken in the form of rules and guidelines for construction close to beaches in order to achieve a more ecologically sustainable construction and contribute to sustainable social development.In Sweden, shore protection is used, which aims to protect the public's access to shores, which the right public advocates according to Chapter 2. Section 15, The form of government. Today, shore protection is regulated in the Environmental Code (MB), and a general rule is that it must not be built within 100 meters from the shoreline on land and in water according to MB.A municipality can revoke shore protection if one of the particular reasons in chap-ter 7. Section 18c of the MB is fulfilled. Municipalities' decision on cancellation can be appealed to the County Administrative Board, then to the Land and Environment Court (MMD) and then to the Land and Environment Court of Appeal (MOD).The purpose of the study is to investigate what is considered valid and invalid rea-sons for cancelling shore protection in a detailed development plan, this through a legal case study. The goal is that this study will lead to more equitable and fair man-agement when repealing shore protection within the detailed development plan.A quantitative and qualitative analysis forms the basis of the results presented in this study. The quantitative method consists of categorization of detailed plans that are examined. Through this categorization, it can be deduced which reasons municipali-ties with different population conditions demand when cancelling shore protection within the detailed development plan. The detailed development plan study was de-limited to Ostergotland County at the beginning, after which the study was supple-mented with Kalmar County. It's because Ostergotland did not fill up the quota for the requested number of detailed plans. The qualitative method of the case study makes it possible for a report to clarify which reasons are legally sustainable based on the judgments that are being studied.The results highlighted by the study have shown that there are differences between the interval sizes, that is, that the municipalities interpret and handle the shore pro-tection legislation differently in connection with the shore protection being repealed within the detailed development plan. Thus, the County Administrative Board should check the municipalities more closely, as their task is to monitor the objec-tives of the shore protection.

  HÄR KAN DU HÄMTA UPPSATSEN I FULLTEXT. (följ länken till nästa sida)