Facts
In 1966, X. acquired a parcel in the municipality of Stäfa, which was located in the residential zone according to the zoning plan at the time. In the late 1960s, X. participated in the construction of a sewage system to develop the properties located north of Rütihofstrasse. In 1985, the municipal assembly decided to revise the zoning plan, as a result of which X.'s property was allocated to the reserve zone and later to the agricultural zone. X. then asserted claims for compensation based on material expropriation.Considerations
The Federal Court concluded that the non-zoning of X.'s property did not have an expropriatory effect. Although X. had incurred costs for the development of his parcel, and it could be considered developed, the mere fact that a property is developed is not decisive for an obligation to pay compensation. Rather, it depends on whether the owner could have realized a development of the property on his own with a high probability at the relevant cut-off date.
In the present case, the possibility of such a development was precluded by the requirement for a neighborhood plan. The location of the property as a "gateway property" at the transition to the undeveloped plateau "Torlen" required a systematic development of the entire area, which could only…