700.1
RPVOATOPT
CH
CH
Art. 30 Raumplanungsverordnung (RPV) - Sicherung der Fruchtfolgeflächen
RPV; 4. Kapitel: Fruchtfolgeflächen
Art. 30 RPV · Sicherung der Fruchtfolgeflächen
Die Kantone sorgen dafür, dass die Fruchtfolgeflächen den Landwirtschaftszonen zugeteilt werden; sie zeigen in ihren Richtplänen die dazu erforderlichen Massnahmen.
Fruchtfolgeflächen dürfen nur eingezont werden, wenn: a. ein auch aus der Sicht des Kantons wichtiges Ziel ohne die Beanspruchung von Fruchtfolgeflächen nicht sinnvoll erreicht werden kann; und b. sichergestellt wird, dass die beanspruchten Flächen nach dem Stand der Erkenntnisse optimal genutzt werden.
Die Kantone stellen sicher, dass ihr Anteil am Mindestumfang der Fruchtfolgeflächen (Art. 29) dauernd erhalten bleibt. Soweit dieser Anteil nicht ausserhalb der Bauzonen gesichert werden kann, bestimmen sie Planungszonen (Art. 27 RPG) für unerschlossene Gebiete in Bauzonen.
Der Bundesrat kann zur Sicherung von Fruchtfolgeflächen in Bauzonen vorübergehende Nutzungszonen bestimmen (Art. 37 RPG).
Die Kantone verfolgen die Veränderungen bei Lage, Umfang und Qualität der Fruchtfolgeflächen; sie teilen die Veränderungen dem ARE mindestens alle vier Jahre mit (Art. 9 Abs. 1).
Gerichtsentscheide zu dieser Bestimmung (44)
VB.2006.00133 · zh (Art. 30 RPV)
Judicial Review of Municipal Zoning for Golf Course Development
Used to address the consequences of changes in the regional zoning plan during the appeal process.
VPB 04-2475-6277 (art. 30, al. 2, OAT)
Federal Council Approves Fribourg Master Plan with Modifications
Cited in relation to federal law requirements for the sustainable guarantee of the cantonal share of the minimum total area for cultivation.
VB.2006.00133 · zh (Art. 30 RPV)
Zoning Appeal Regarding Golf Course Construction Upheld
This provision is cited in the list of legal norms reviewed, concerning the scope of spatial planning.
ADM 2024 106 · ju (Art. 30 al. 1bis OAT)
Zoning Appeal: Football Field and Camping Site Reclassified, Residential Zones Upheld
This provision was directly applied to determine whether surfaces d'assolement could be classified as building zones, based on specific conditions and the importance of the objective.
ADM 2024 106 · ju (Art. 30 al. 1bis let. a OAT)
Zoning Appeal: Football Field and Camping Site Reclassified, Residential Zones Upheld
This was a key criterion for allowing surfaces d'assolement to be classified as building zones if an important objective could not be achieved otherwise.
ADM 2024 106 · ju (Art. 30 al. 1bis let. b OAT)
Zoning Appeal: Football Field and Camping Site Reclassified, Residential Zones Upheld
This was a key criterion for allowing surfaces d'assolement to be classified as building zones, requiring optimal use of the land.
BRGE.IV.Nr.0134.202 · zh (Art. 30 Abs. 2 RPV)
Rezoning for Sports Facility Overturned Due to Scope and Location Violations
Cited as requiring cantons to ensure the permanent maintenance of their share of cultivable land.
AC.2024.0098 · vd (Art. 30 al. 1 OAT)
Property Owner v. Municipality Zoning Revision
Used by the court to justify confirming the classification of the eastern part of the parcel in protected agricultural zone 16 LAT, in application of this provision concerning the classification of SDA in agricultural zones.
AC.2024.0321 · vd (art. 30 al. 1bis OAT)
Administrative Court Annuls Development Plan Approval Pending Municipal Reassessment of Arable Land Status
Cited in the reasoning as the legal basis for the required interest balancing test the lower authority must perform upon remand.
7H 22 165 · lu (Art. 30 RPV)
Cantonal Rezoning of Building Land to Agricultural Use Upheld Against Owner Appeal
Mentioned in the context of protecting agricultural land.
AC.2020.0227 · vd (art. 30 OAT)
Appeal Against Neighborhood Development Plan Approval Based on Cultivable Land Status
The decision was annulled because the prerequisite interest balancing test under this article, required for classifying an SDA as building land, was not performed by the lower authorities.
TVR.2020.Nr.23 · tg (Art. 30 Abs. 2 RPV)
Appeal Against Cycle Path Approval on Agricultural Land
Cited in relation to the requirement that the canton's share of the minimum extent of FFF must be permanently maintained, a key factor in the interest balancing exercise.
AC.2018.0318 · vd (article 30 OAT)
Municipality v. Cantonal Department: Zoning Plan Approval, Land Availability, and Arable Land Rezoning
The court stated that the examination of the conditions under Art. 30 OAT regarding surfaces d'assolement (SDA) was unnecessary because the parcels in question were determined not to be SDA.
810.18.153 · bl (Art. 30 Abs. 1bis RPV)
Municipality Zoning Plan for Landscape Area: Residential Use and Protection Zones Litigation
Used to reject the proposed residential use in a special zone outside of building zones because it would improperly utilize agricultural land and was not essential for the canton's important objectives.
AC.2016.0354 · vd (art. 30 al. 1bis let. a OAT)
Property Owners v. Land Use Plan Approval (Agricultural Land Use)
The court found that the cumulative conditions of this article regarding the importance of the project were not met, contributing to the appeal's admission.