700.1
PBGLATC
CH-ZH
CH-ZH
Art. 284 : Planungs und Baugesetz (PBG)
Art. 284
1 Hochhäuser müssen verglichen mit einer gewöhnlichen
Überbauung ortsbaulich einen Gewinn bringen oder durch die Art
und Zweckbestimmung des Gebäudes bedingt sein.
2 Hochhäuser sind architektonisch besonders sorgfältig zu gestalten.
3 Die Ausnützung darf nicht grösser als bei einer gewöhnlichen Über-
bauung sein; eine Ausnahme ist ausgeschlossen. Vorbehalten bleiben
die Bestimmungen über Arealüberbauungen, Sonderbauvorschriften
und Gestaltungspläne.
4 Die Nachbarschaft darf nicht wesentlich beeinträchtigt werden,
insbesondere nicht durch Schattenwurf in Wohnzonen oder gegenüber
bewohnten Gebäuden.
Gerichtsentscheide zu dieser Bestimmung (16)
VB.2006.00496 · zh (§ 284 Abs. IV PBG)
Cantonal Building Directorate Deference to Municipal Autonomy in Development Plan Approval
This provision was cited in relation to the legal norms examined in the case.
VB.2006.00354 · zh (§ 284 Abs. IV PBG)
Appeal Against Sports Stadium Building Permit and Environmental Assessment
The court addressed the impairment due to shadow casting under this provision.
VB.2006.00496 · zh (§ 284 Abs. IV PBG)
Municipal Planning Autonomy Versus Cantonal Building Restrictions Appeal Dismissal
This provision is cited among the legal norms applicable to the case, which was ultimately dismissed.
VB.2024.00548 · zh (§ 284 Abs. 1 PBG)
Neighbor's Appeal of Skyscraper Permit Dismissed
Cited as a provision concerning design requirements for high-rise buildings, which the court reviewed.
VB.2024.00548 · zh (§ 284 Abs. 2 PBG)
Neighbor's Appeal of Skyscraper Permit Dismissed
Cited as a provision concerning design requirements for high-rise buildings, which the court reviewed.
BRGE.I.Nr.0093.2022 · zh (§ 284 Abs. 3 PBG)
Neighbors v. City: Building Permit Annulled Over Exploitable Area Calculation
This provision states that the utilization in high-rise buildings may not be greater than in ordinary development, and its interpretation by the building department was found to be incorrect.
BRGE.III.Nr.0208.20 · zh (§ 284 Abs. 2 PBG)
Neighboring Owner Appeal Regarding Municipal Zoning Approval for High-Rise Development Dismissed
Cited regarding elevated requirements for the architectural design of high-rise buildings.
BRGE.III.Nr.0208.20 · zh (§ 284 Abs. 4 PBG)
Neighboring Owner Appeal Regarding Municipal Zoning Approval for High-Rise Development Dismissed
Cited regarding the requirement that neighboring properties not be significantly impaired by shadow casting, especially in residential zones.
BRGE.III.Nr.0208.20 · zh (§ 284 PBG)
Neighboring Owner Appeal Regarding Municipal Zoning Approval for High-Rise Development Dismissed
Cited in the context of challenging shadow casting and the requirement for an 'urban design gain' in the context of high-rise buildings.
VB.2006.00354 · zh (§ 284 Abs. IV PBG)
Football Stadium Permit Dispute
Used to determine whether the shadow casting constitutes a significant impairment of neighboring properties or buildings.
VB.2005.00321 · zh (§ 284 Abs. IV PBG)
Residential Development Shadowing Dispute
This provision prohibits significant impairment by shadow casting, but it applies exclusively to high-rise buildings and was considered not applicable to the present case.
VB.2004.00234 · zh (Art. 284 PBG)
Stadium Development Plan and Environmental Review Challenged
Allows for regulations in a development plan that may differ from general municipal parking regulations if justified.
VB.2004.00193 · zh (§ 284 PBG)
Stadium Development Plan Shadow Casting Height Measurement Dispute
This provision is cited in the section detailing the applicable legal norms, indicating its relevance to the final decision regarding the Gestaltungsplan.
VB.2004.00193 · zh (§ 284 PBG)
Zoning Amendment Challenge Regarding Stadium Shadow Casting Analysis and Height Measurement Standards
This provision of the cantonal planning law (PBG) was likely the basis for evaluating the validity of the specific height definitions in the Gestaltungsplan.
VB.2005.00321 · zh (§ 284 Abs. 4 PBG)
Building Permit Readmission and Shading Regulations
The court explicitly ruled that this provision concerning significant impairment by shadow casting applies exclusively to high-rise buildings and not to the present case based on topography.