Art. 27a Bundesgesetz vom 22. Juni 1979 über die Raumplanung (RPG) - Einschränkende Bestimmungen der Kantone zum Bauen ausserhalb der Bauzonen

VPB 2005.2460 (Art. 27a LAT)

Agricultural Construction Expansion Act

This provision allows cantonal legislation to impose restrictions on certain articles, including Art. 24b and 24d, which are relevant to the appeals mentioned in Art. 34 al. 2.

AN.2023.00007 · zh (Art. 27a RPG)

Provisional Zoning of Settlements Upheld

Mentioned as a relevant legal norm in the context of spatial planning, likely considered in the court's reasoning.

A-3909/2016 (Art. 27a LAT)

Transformer Station Denial: Agricultural Use vs. Land Use Planning Principles

This provision states that cantonal legislation can be more restrictive than federal exceptions for constructions outside the building zone.

Verwaltung ARGVP 2018 1558 · ar (Art. 27a RPG)

Building Permit Denial Over Foil-Coated Metal Door Upheld Against Landscape Integration Standards

The court found that the administrative authority wrongly prioritized the public interest in landscape protection over the private interest in designing the annex according to operational needs, referencing Art. 27a RPG.

RRB.Nr.2016.000933 · ag (Art. 27a RPG)

Agricultural Shed Extension Zoning Dispute

Cited to explain that cantonal legislation can impose restrictions on the federal provisions concerning existing buildings and facilities outside construction zones.

Verwaltung ARGVP 2016 1551 · ar (Art. 27a RPG)

Land Filling and Agricultural Shed Extension Appeals

Cited to establish that cantonal authorities must assess the balancing of interests on a case-by-case basis for zone-conforming buildings under Art. 16a para. 1 RPG.

AGVE.2016.77 · ag (Art. 27a RPG)

Property Owner vs. Cantonal Law on Fence Reconstruction

This provision allows for the enactment of restrictive regulations at the cantonal level concerning Article 24c RPG.

R 2009 100 · gr (Art. 27a RPG)

Appeal Against Refusal of Building Permit for Non-Conforming Residential Conversion

The court addressed this article to rule out the application of cantonal restrictions (like the planning zone) based on federal law competence.