Facts
The case concerns two property owners whose properties were rezoned from the building zone to the reserved zone as part of the overall revision of the Building and Zoning Ordinance of the City of Zurich. The owners filed compensation claims for material expropriation. The DFC upheld the appeal of one of the owners and affirmed a material expropriation, while it dismissed the appeal of the other owner. The decisive factors were the special circumstances in the case of the first owner, who had a legitimate expectation of inclusion in the building zone based on the legally binding neighbourhood plan for his property. However, in the case of the properties of the second owner, there was no building gap within the meaning of the case law, so no material expropriation was assumed.Considerations
The DFC states that non-inclusion in building zones does not generally trigger a duty to pay compensation. Exceptionally, a material expropriation may exist if the property is located in a largely built-up area, is ready for construction and developed, or if special circumstances of legitimate expectations would justify inclusion in the building zone. In the case of the first appellant, the DFC affirmed a material expropriation due to the special circumstances. Although his property was not located in a largely built-up area and was also not ready for construction, he was entitled to expect a development with high probability based on the legally binding neighbourhood plan. The City of Zurich had initially approved the neighbourhood plan, but then designated a reserved zone on the property as…