Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
permitted the Village of Shiocton to enact a floodplain ordinance. with basements below the regional flood level after the Village received a FEMA exception in 1998. The Village of Shiocton is one-half mile south of the Warnings' home. ¶ 117. Thousands of buildings across the state were built in floodfringe areas before the enactment of floodplain regulations. The language in Wis. Admin. Code §NR 116.13(2) cannot be read literally without depriving counties and the DNR of the ability to deal reasonably with these "existing lawful" structures. Wis. Admin. Code § NR 116.03(34). If the law did not afford some reasonable means to address variances for nonconforming structures, it might not pass constitutional muster. Cf. Building Height Cases, 181 Wis. 519, 532, 195 N.W. 544 (1923) ; County of Sauk v. Trager, 113 Wis. 2d 48, 56,
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding rehabilitation act applicable
B. holding that in a redistricting case the legislature has the initial responsibility to act but in the event the legislature fails to act the responsibility shifts to the state judiciary
C. holding retroactive application of the act to prosecution that was pending before the effective date of the act was precluded because the act is prospective
D. holding the ada and the rehabilitation act applicable
E. holding that an act of the legislature limiting the height of buildings was not applicable where substantial rights of a party had vested before the act was enacted
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.