801.110 KRVOOPTC

CH-GR

Art. 23 Ordinanza sulla pianificazione territoriale del Cantone dei Grigioni (OPTC) - 2. Opposizione, decreto

Pianificazione locale - Procedura contributiva

Apri la fonte ufficiale Atto completo (85 Articoli) Versione Markdown leggibile dalle macchine (.md)

Art. 23 OPTC · 2. Opposizione, decreto

1. Durante l'esposizione pubblica può essere presentata opposizione alla Sovrastanza comunale contro l'avvio previsto della procedura, contro il comprensorio contributivo previsto, nonché contro la quota parte dell'interessenza pubblica e privata.

2. L'esposizione pubblica va ripetuta qualora il comprensorio contributivo previsto venga modificato in seguito a opposizioni. Qualora le modifiche concernano soltanto singoli interessati, al posto di una nuova esposizione pubblica, deve essere loro data facoltà di presentare opposizione entro 30 giorni.

3. Una volta conclusa la procedura d'esposizione, la Sovrastanza comunale emana il decreto d'avvio di procedura e lo notifica agli interessati e ad eventuali opponenti. Nel corso dell'ulteriore procedura non possono più essere sollevate obiezioni contro la procedura contributiva in sé, il comprensorio contributivo e la quota parte dell'interessenza pubblica e privata.

← Art. 22 OPTC Ordinanza sulla pianificazione territoriale del Cantone dei Grigioni (OPTC) - Dipartimento competente, Servizio Art. 24 OPTC →

Decisioni giudiziarie che applicano questa disposizione (9)

A 2008 75 · gr (Art. 23 KRVO)

Property Owners Appeal Road Improvement Cost Apportionment Due to Power Line Relocation

Cited in the reasoning (Erwägung 3) to explain the mandatory nature of filing objections against the initiation of the contribution procedure during the public display.

A 2008 17 · gr (Art. 23 KRVO)

Consolidated Appeals on Municipal Road Renovation Fee Allocation

Cited in the reasoning as the procedural rule allowing objections against the contribution area definition during the public display period.

A 2007 37 · gr (Art. 23 KRVO)

Municipal Road Renovation Contribution Procedure Challenge

The court found that the municipality's decision to approve the definitive cost distribution was premature, as this step belongs to the second phase regulated by Art. 24-26 KRVO, not the first phase where the municipality had already acted.

A 2007 37 · gr (Art. 23 KRVO)

Property Owners Challenge Road Renovation Contribution Procedure and Cost Allocation

The court found that the municipality improperly merged the initiation and cost distribution phases, which contradicts the procedure set out in Art. 23 KRVO regarding the first phase of the contribution procedure.

A 2007 49 · gr (Art. 22 und 23 KRVO)

Property Owners Appeal Road Assessment Perimeter and Cost Share Percentage

Cited as the legal basis for the decision regarding the initiation of the procedure (Einleitungsbeschluss).

A 2007 49 · gr (Art. 23 KRVO)

Property Owners Appeal Road Assessment Perimeter and Cost Share Percentage

Used to establish that objections against the scope of the contribution area and public interest share must be raised in the first phase (Einleitungsverfahren) through objection proceedings.

PVG 2007 20 · gr (Art. 23 KRVO)

Financing Infrastructure Contributions: Initiation vs. Cost Apportionment

Cited to confirm the procedural step where objections against the determination of public and private interest must be raised during the public display phase.

A 2007 27 · gr (Art. 23 Abs. 2 KRVO)

Property Owners' Challenge to Infrastructure Assessment Area Expansion Barred by Procedural Grounds

Cited as the basis for making the administrative decision appealable to the administrative court after the objection procedure.

A 2007 7 · gr (Art. 23 KRVO)

Appeal Against Municipal Determination of Public Interest Share in Cul-de-Sac Renovation Costs

Cited in the reasoning to explain the procedural limits on which objections could be raised against the initial decision (though not explicitly in the final orders, the outcome rests on the procedural distinction it establishes, which dictates that the cost distribution is not yet challengeable).