Facts
Parties and procedural history: The complainants [A.] and [B.] , owners of parcels nos. 383 and 390 in the municipality of Bever, filed an appeal with the Administrative Court of the Canton of Graubünden on 20 May 2020 against a traffic restriction imposed by the municipality of Samedan on Via Sur Punt. The Administrative Court dismissed the appeal with a judgment dated 17 May 2022. The complainants filed an appeal against this decision with the Federal Supreme Court on 21 June 2022.
Facts: Via Sur Punt is a path branching off from the cantonal connecting road Via Nouva/Via Maistra and running through the agricultural and forestry zone of the municipality of Samedan before reaching the municipality of Bever. Via Sur Punt is divided into various parcels owned by the citizen municipality of Samedan and the political municipality of Bever. According to the General Development Plan (GEP) of the municipalities of Samedan and Bever, Via Sur Punt is classified as an agricultural and forestry path from the branching point and as a footpath and hiking trail/agricultural and forestry path from the Surpunt Dadains area to parcel no. 566. From parcel no. 566 onwards, Via Sur Punt is a footpath and (winter) hiking trail. In 2006, the municipality of Samedan entered into an agreement with the owners of parcel no. 566 under which it upgraded and asphalted Via Sur Punt up to the owners' property at their expense. In 2017, the municipality of Bever asked the owners of parcel no. 566 whether they objected to the use of Via Sur Punt by the owners of parcels nos. 383 and 390 in Bever. The owners of parcel no. 566 objected to such joint use. In September 2019, the municipality of Samedan supplemented the existing ban on motor vehicles, motorcycles and mopeds with the note that access for residents was permitted up to Via Sur Punt 43. By order dated 14 February 2020, the Graubünden cantonal police approved the traffic restriction. The municipality of Samedan imposed the traffic restriction and published it in the Cantonal Official Gazette on 20 April 2020.
Considerations
Admissibility of the appeal: The Federal Supreme Court examines the appeal in public-law matters and will hear it subject to sufficiently substantiated objections. The complainants, as owners of the affected parcels, are particularly affected and have a legitimate interest in the annulment of the contested decision. The appeal, which was filed in due form and within the deadline, is therefore admissible in principle.
Applicable law and review standard: The Federal Supreme Court examines violations of federal law ex officio, while the application of cantonal law is reviewed only under the aspect of arbitrariness. The facts established by the lower court are binding on the Federal Supreme Court unless they are obviously incorrect or arbitrary. The complainants raise several violations of the law, including violations of the federal development provisions (Art. 19 SPA and Art. 5 HCHOA), legitimate expectations, the principle of proportionality, the guarantee of property, as well as the principle of equality before the law and the prohibition of arbitrariness.
Development provisions and separation principle: The complainants argue that the contested traffic order removes the previous development of their parcels. The Federal Supreme Court examines whether the development of parcels nos. 383 and 390 via Via Sur Punt complies with federal law. According to Art. 19 SPA and Art. 4 HCHOA, there must be adequate access to the plots. The lower court could assume that the complainants' parcels are adequately developed via Via Maistra. Development via Via Sur Punt would only be permissible if the requirements of Art. 24 SPA were met, in particular the principle of location binding. This is not the case, however, since development within the building zone would be possible. Moreover, an exception permit under Art. 24a SPA would not have been granted, as the use of Via Sur Punt as a development route would have new impacts on space and development. The contested traffic restriction serves to enforce the spatial planning separation principle and is proportionate.
Legitimate expectations and guarantee of…