801.100
KRGLPTC
CH-GR
CH-GR
Art. 89 Raumplanungsgesetz für den Kanton Graubünden (KRG) - Bewilligungsvoraussetzungen
Formelles Baurecht - Bewilligungen
Art. 89 KRG · Bewilligungsvoraussetzungen
1. Bauvorhaben und Zweckänderungen werden bewilligt, wenn alle Vorschriften des kommunalen, kantonalen und eidgenössischen Rechts eingehalten sind.
2. Baugesuche werden nach dem Recht beurteilt, das zur Zeit des Entscheids gilt.
3. Ist die Bauherrschaft nicht Eigentümerin des Baugrundstücks, ist das Baugesuch durch den Eigentümer oder die Eigentümerin mit zu unterzeichnen. Ist sie nicht Eigentümerin des für die Erschliessung benötigten Bodens, wird die Baubewilligung nur erteilt, wenn die erforderlichen Rechte für die Erschliessung des Bauvorhabens im Baugesuch nachgewiesen werden.
Gerichtsentscheide zu dieser Bestimmung (33)
VR3 2024 89 · gr (Art. 89 Abs. 1 KRG)
Appeal Against Dismissal of Objection to Building Permit for Garden Shed
Cited as the provision requiring compliance with forest setback rules (Art. 29 f. KWaG i.V.m. Art. 78 Abs. 3 KRG) as a condition for issuing a building permit, justifying the remand.
VR3 2024 89 · gr (Art. 89 Abs. 1 KRG)
Appeal Against Dismissal of Objection to Building Permit for Garden Shed
This provision is cited as the basis for requiring compliance with forest setback regulations, a prerequisite for issuing a building permit, which necessitates the remand for an ordinary procedure.
R 2024 7 · gr (Art. 89 Abs. 1 KRG)
Appeal Dismissed for Retroactive Building Permit for Basement Bathroom
Cited as the requirement for granting building permits, which was not met by the appellant's project.
R 2024 31 · gr (Art. 89 Abs. 1 KRG)
Municipal Denial of Retroactive Building Permit for Basement Habitation Upheld
Cited in the reasoning (E.4.1, E.4.4) as the requirement for granting building permits, establishing compliance with all legal provisions.
R 2021 74 · gr (Art. 89 Abs. 1 KRG)
Appeal Against Barn Rebuilding Permit Upheld Due to Expired Heritage Rights and Aesthetic Non-Compliance
The provision is the main ground for annulling the building permit because the building project was found not to be compliant with KRG requirements.
R 2022 47 · gr (art. 89 cpv. 3 LPTC)
Appeal Against Municipal Decree for Retrospective Building Application and Setback Violations
Cited to explain why the submission of May 2021 did not constitute a correct subsequent building application, as it lacked the co-signature of the property owner.
V 2022 3 · gr (Art. 89 KRG)
Citizen Initiative on 5G Rejected as Preempted by Federal and Cantonal Law
Cited in the reasoning regarding the authority granting the building permit.
R 2022 1 · gr (Art. 89 Abs. 1 KRG)
Solar Installation Permit Denial Upheld Despite Procedural Defect
Cited to state the condition under which building projects must be approved (compliance with communal, cantonal, and federal law).
R 2019 87 · gr (Art. 89 Abs. 1 KRG)
Appeal Against Mobile Communication Antenna Permit Due to Flawed Environmental Assessment of Radiation Impact
Basis for the refusal of the building permit, requiring compliance with all federal, cantonal, and communal laws.
PVG 2021 14 · gr (Art. 89 Abs. 2 KRG)
Construction Permit Extension Deadline Dispute
Cited as an analogy to determine which version of Art. 91 KRG was applicable, but not explicitly in the dispositive.
R 2021 9 · gr (Art. 89 Abs. 2 KRG)
Appeal Against Building Permit: Jurisdiction Over Parking vs. Water/Sewage Fees
Used to determine that the law applicable to the appeal (especially regarding fees) was the law in force at the time the contested decision was issued (i.e., law of the former municipality B._____).
R 2020 3 · gr (Art. 89 Abs. 1 KRG)
Municipality v. Property Owner: Unauthorized Patio Roof Setback Violation
Cited to dismiss the argument that a structure violating setback rules could be legalized by hiding it behind a fence, as all legal provisions must be respected for a permit to be granted.
R 2020 83 · gr (Art. 89 Abs. 3 KRG)
Municipality Denies Building Permit for Access Road Renovation Subject to Existing Right-of-Way Servitude
The court referenced this provision in its reasoning regarding the requirement to prove necessary rights for development over third-party land, which justifies annulling the denial of the building permit part.
R 2019 22 · gr (Art. 89 Abs. 3 Satz 2 KRG)
Objectors v. Municipality (Building Permit Demolition and Construction)
This provision requiring proof of necessary rights for access was cited in the context of the sufficient access ruling.
R 2018 57 · gr (art. 89 cpv. 2 LPTC)
Appeal Against Building Permit for Three Single-Family Homes Dismissed
Cited in the reasoning regarding the applicable law (at the time of the first instance decision) for judging building applications.