801.100 KRGLPTC

CH-GR

Art. 89 Loi sur l'aménagement du territoire du canton des Grisons (KRG) - Conditions d'octroi

Droit formel de la construction - Autorisations

Ouvrir la source officielle Texte complet (137 Articles) Version Markdown lisible par machine (.md)

Art. 89 KRG - Conditions d'octroi · Conditions d'octroi

1. **Projets de construction et changements de destination :** Les projets de construction et les changements de destination sont autorisés si toutes les prescriptions du droit communal, cantonal et fédéral sont respectées.

2. **Évaluation des demandes de construction :** Les demandes de construction sont évaluées conformément au droit en vigueur au moment de la décision.

3. **Signature des demandes de construction :** Si le maître d'ouvrage n'est pas propriétaire du terrain de construction, la demande de construction doit également être signée par le propriétaire. Si le maître d'ouvrage n'est pas propriétaire du terrain nécessaire à l'accès, le permis de construire ne sera délivré que si les droits nécessaires pour l'accès au projet de construction sont prouvés dans la demande de construction.

← Art. 88 KRG Loi sur l'aménagement du territoire du canton des Grisons (KRG) - Objet Art. 90 KRG - Conditions accessoires →

Décisions judiciaires appliquant cette disposition (33)

VR3 2024 89 · gr (Art. 89 Abs. 1 KRG)

Appeal Against Dismissal of Objection to Building Permit for Garden Shed

Cited as the provision requiring compliance with forest setback rules (Art. 29 f. KWaG i.V.m. Art. 78 Abs. 3 KRG) as a condition for issuing a building permit, justifying the remand.

VR3 2024 89 · gr (Art. 89 Abs. 1 KRG)

Appeal Against Dismissal of Objection to Building Permit for Garden Shed

This provision is cited as the basis for requiring compliance with forest setback regulations, a prerequisite for issuing a building permit, which necessitates the remand for an ordinary procedure.

R 2024 7 · gr (Art. 89 Abs. 1 KRG)

Appeal Dismissed for Retroactive Building Permit for Basement Bathroom

Cited as the requirement for granting building permits, which was not met by the appellant's project.

R 2024 31 · gr (Art. 89 Abs. 1 KRG)

Municipal Denial of Retroactive Building Permit for Basement Habitation Upheld

Cited in the reasoning (E.4.1, E.4.4) as the requirement for granting building permits, establishing compliance with all legal provisions.

R 2021 74 · gr (Art. 89 Abs. 1 KRG)

Appeal Against Barn Rebuilding Permit Upheld Due to Expired Heritage Rights and Aesthetic Non-Compliance

The provision is the main ground for annulling the building permit because the building project was found not to be compliant with KRG requirements.

R 2022 47 · gr (art. 89 cpv. 3 LPTC)

Appeal Against Municipal Decree for Retrospective Building Application and Setback Violations

Cited to explain why the submission of May 2021 did not constitute a correct subsequent building application, as it lacked the co-signature of the property owner.

V 2022 3 · gr (Art. 89 KRG)

Citizen Initiative on 5G Rejected as Preempted by Federal and Cantonal Law

Cited in the reasoning regarding the authority granting the building permit.

R 2022 1 · gr (Art. 89 Abs. 1 KRG)

Solar Installation Permit Denial Upheld Despite Procedural Defect

Cited to state the condition under which building projects must be approved (compliance with communal, cantonal, and federal law).

R 2019 87 · gr (Art. 89 Abs. 1 KRG)

Appeal Against Mobile Communication Antenna Permit Due to Flawed Environmental Assessment of Radiation Impact

Basis for the refusal of the building permit, requiring compliance with all federal, cantonal, and communal laws.

PVG 2021 14 · gr (Art. 89 Abs. 2 KRG)

Construction Permit Extension Deadline Dispute

Cited as an analogy to determine which version of Art. 91 KRG was applicable, but not explicitly in the dispositive.

R 2021 9 · gr (Art. 89 Abs. 2 KRG)

Appeal Against Building Permit: Jurisdiction Over Parking vs. Water/Sewage Fees

Used to determine that the law applicable to the appeal (especially regarding fees) was the law in force at the time the contested decision was issued (i.e., law of the former municipality B._____).

R 2020 3 · gr (Art. 89 Abs. 1 KRG)

Municipality v. Property Owner: Unauthorized Patio Roof Setback Violation

Cited to dismiss the argument that a structure violating setback rules could be legalized by hiding it behind a fence, as all legal provisions must be respected for a permit to be granted.

R 2020 83 · gr (Art. 89 Abs. 3 KRG)

Municipality Denies Building Permit for Access Road Renovation Subject to Existing Right-of-Way Servitude

The court referenced this provision in its reasoning regarding the requirement to prove necessary rights for development over third-party land, which justifies annulling the denial of the building permit part.

R 2019 22 · gr (Art. 89 Abs. 3 Satz 2 KRG)

Objectors v. Municipality (Building Permit Demolition and Construction)

This provision requiring proof of necessary rights for access was cited in the context of the sufficient access ruling.

R 2018 57 · gr (art. 89 cpv. 2 LPTC)

Appeal Against Building Permit for Three Single-Family Homes Dismissed

Cited in the reasoning regarding the applicable law (at the time of the first instance decision) for judging building applications.