Legislator Giurisprudenza & Legislazione
III 2017 172 • VG SZ III 2017 172 Generato dall'IA

Zoning Permit Denial for Excessive Building Mass Upheld

Numero d'incarto III 2017 172
Autorità giudiziaria
Giurisdizione Svizzera · Canton Svitto (CH-SZ)
Data della decisione
Esito del giudizio Respinto (Dismissed)

Sintesi Legislator

Generato dall'IA

A litigant appealed a decision upholding the rejection of a building permit application concerning the modification and expansion of an existing building on a property situated in a zone designated for single-family homes, where the proposed changes were deemed contrary to the zoning plan's intent regarding building mass and density. The court reasoned that local planning authorities acted within their discretionary authority when they found the proposed enlargement would detrimentally impact the established character of the neighborhood and exceeded permissible building volume standards for that specific zone, thus justifying the denial of the permit on grounds of maintaining consistent spatial planning.

Regesto Legislator

Generato dall'IA

Art. 66 Abs. 1 BGG; Zoning Permit Denial for Excessive Building Mass Upheld: The court reasoned that local planning authorities acted within their discretionary authority when they found the proposed enlargement would detrimentally impact the established character of the neighborhood and exceeded permissible building volume standards for that specific zone, thus justifying the denial of the permit on grounds of maintaining consistent spatial planning.

Parole chiave

Generato dall'IA
licenza edilizia piano di utilizzazione zona edificabile superamento dell'altezza massima approvazione dei piani utilizzazione del fondo Planungs- und Baurecht (Baubewilligung Ersatzbau MFH) | Planungs- und Baurecht

Disposizioni normative citate

Generato dall'IA
Generato dall'IA

Questioni giuridiche chiave estratte da Legislator

Generato dall'IA
Art. 66 Abs. 1 BGG

The costs are imposed on the losing party (Beschwerdeführer).

Ti chiedi come si applica questa sentenza alla tua fattispecie?

Analizza questa decisione insieme alla legislazione federale e cantonale, ai commentari e alla giurisprudenza successiva in Legislator AI.

Apri in Legislator →

Testo completo

\n \n \n \n \n

\n\n| | | |\n III 2017 172 |\n |\n \n\n

\n \n \n \n

\n\n| | | |\n |\n Entscheid vom 20. Dezember 2017 |\n \n\n

\n \n \n \n

\n\n| | | |\n Besetzung |\n Dr.iur. Vital Zehnder, Vizepräsident |\n \n|\n |\n Ruth Mikšovic-Waldis, Richterin Monica Huber-Landolt, Richterin |\n \n|\n |\n lic.iur. Prisca Reichlin Brügger, Gerichtsschreiberin |\n \n\n

\n \n \n \n \n

\n\n| | |

|\n Parteien |\n A.________, \n Beschwerdeführer, \n vertreten durch Rechtsanwalt lic.iur. René Räber, \n Bahnhofstrasse 7, Postfach 570, 6403 Küssnacht, |\n

\n|\n |\n gegen |\n

\n|\n |\n \n \n1. Bezirksrat Küssnacht, Seeplatz 2/3, Postfach 176, 6403 Küssnacht, \n2. Amt für Raumentwicklung ARE, Bahnhofstrasse 14, \n Postfach 1186, 6431 Schwyz, \n3. Regierungsrat des Kantons Schwyz, Bahnhofstrasse 9, \n Postfach 1260, 6431 Schwyz, \n Vorinstanzen, |\n

\n\n

\n