Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Vaasan LO 31.1.1989 1564 AI generated

Administrative court dismissed municipality's planning decision as illegal due to area inappropriateness for building plan.

Case Number Vaasan LO 31.1.1989 1564
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Finland (FI)
Decision Date
Outcome Dismissed
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Administrative Court of Vaasa annulled the municipality's decision to create a building plan for a swimming beach and boat ramp area. The County Administrative Court found the proposed area too narrow and distant from other planned zones to be suitable for regulation under the building plan system. Consequently, the court ruled the municipality's decision violated the law because the specific land use could not be organized through a building plan.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Rakennuslaki 95 §; Kunnallislaki 139 §: A building plan cannot be used to regulate land use if the area is too small or isolated to be practically organized within the plan system.

Keywords

AI generated
building plan regulation area suitability administrative annulment municipal planning land use organization

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Rakennuslaki 95 §
Kunnallislaki 139 §
AI generated
kho-precedent_2016_201
Supreme Court dismisses appeal; village zone plan invalid for high-pressure urban growth areas requiring detailed planning.
kho-other_2015_915
Supreme Administrative Court dismisses appeal against coastal zoning plan amendment based on general zoning plan guidelines.
kho-other_2016_5083
Supreme Administrative Court dismissed appeal against administrative court decision rejecting planning change to coastal zone. The court upheld the lower court's decision to reject the appeal. The court found no legal grounds to overturn the administrative court's decision. The court ruled that the planning change was lawful and did not violate equality principles. The court determined the lower court correctly applied relevant planning laws. The court concluded the appeal lacked sufficient merit for intervention.
kho-precedent_2012_41
Supreme Administrative Court dismisses appeal; general plan's broad rules do not require content review for each site.
admin_2003_hameenlinna__583
Planning court quashes lakefront zoning plan for failing to assess landscape and environmental content requirements.

Need to analyze how this precedent applies to your matter?

Cross-reference this judgment against statutes, commentaries, and subsequent citing case law inside Legislator AI.

Open in Legislator →

Full text

Kunnanvaltuusto oli päättänyt laadittavaksi uimarannan, venevalkaman

ja tiealueen käsittävän rakennuskaavan. Keskustaajaman

rakennuskaava-alueen rajasta kyseiselle uimarannalle oli

matkaa noin 3 kilometriä ja eräältä toiselta rakennuskaava-alueelta

noin 500 metriä.

Lääninoikeus katsoi, kun otettiin huomioon rakennuskaavalla

kaavoitettavaksi aiotun alueen suppeus ja sijainti sekä kunnan

ja lähialueen kaavalliset olosuhteet muutoin, että puheena

olevaa maankäyttöä ei voitu järjestää rakennuskaavalla.

Kunnanvaltuuston päätös oli näin ollen lainvastainen.

RakennusL 95 §

KunL 139 §

KHO:ssa