Repeal of the zoning plan provision for a gravel extraction area due to violation of municipal autonomy and lack of participation

Facts

The political municipality of Lindau lodged a complaint against the decision of the Cantonal Council of the Canton of Zurich of 24 November 2009, with which it decided on a partial revision of the cantonal zoning plan for the areas of water, hazards, and supply and disposal. In Chapter 5.3, Material extraction, the Cantonal Council, among other things, newly designated a gravel pit in Tagelswangen in the municipality of Lindau. The municipality of Lindau claimed that the Cantonal Council had violated its autonomy and had not sufficiently taken into account its participation rights in the zoning plan procedure.

The municipality of Lindau argued that the Cantonal Council had assumed an extraction period of 20 years, whereas in reality an extraction period of 50 years should be assumed. Furthermore, the rail connection for the gravel pit was only legally secured until 2016, and the required approval of the disputed provision in the partial plan for supply and disposal with the partial plan for transport was missing.

Considerations

The Federal Court examined the admissibility of the complaint and came to the conclusion that the municipality of Lindau was entitled to lodge a complaint, as it was affected in its sovereign powers and tasks by the contested decision. The Court found that municipal autonomy exists in a subject area if the cantonal law does not regulate it conclusively, but leaves it entirely or partially to the municipality to regulate and grants it relatively significant decision-making freedom.

The Court found that the municipality of Lindau was restricted in its planning freedom by the disputed zoning plan provision and that the cantonal constitution granted the municipalities a wide range of scope for action. It found that the municipality of Lindau was affected in its planning decision-making freedom and development opportunities by the designation of the gravel extraction area.

The Court came to the conclusion that the Cantonal Council had not sufficiently taken into account the participation rights of the municipality in the zoning plan…