The Limited Times

Now you can see non-English news...

Hikers' parking lot in Hausham: Everyone has to pay

2020-10-13T19:42:52.586Z


Despite requests to the contrary and a corresponding committee recommendation, the Hausham municipal council has decided: The first 90 minutes of the Huberspitz hiking car park are chargeable.


Despite requests to the contrary and a corresponding committee recommendation, the Hausham municipal council has decided: The first 90 minutes of the Huberspitz hiking car park are chargeable.

Miesbach -

90 minutes of free parking at the Huberspitz car park - this was the proposal of the Main Administrative Committee of the Hausham community.

The local council, which discussed the committee's decision in its most recent meeting, rejected the recommendation.

The decision was narrow with seven to seven votes.

Citizens' wish: short-term parking should be free

Mayor Jens Zangenfeind (FWG) pleaded for free parking time at the council meeting.

“Several citizens wanted an exception for short-term parking.” Since a council decision in November 2019, all users of the parking lot at Huberspitz / Moosrain have to pay three euros for 24 hours.

"For families with children who come to go sledding, local walkers or for dog owners who only park briefly, 90 free minutes would be a great deal," said Zangenfeind, explaining the HVA's request.

With this, the mayor met with incomprehension from some council members.

Hubert Lacrouts (CSU) objected: "Who guarantees the locals that they will get a parking space at all if they drive up the Alpine road?" Most of the spaces are already occupied in the morning by the paying all-day parkers. "In addition, a reduction in traffic is desirable - with a free short-term parking period, you create false incentives.

Hubert Lacrouts (CSU): "A deterrent effect was never planned"

There was disagreement between Lacrouts and Zangenfeind about what purpose the community had originally pursued with the fee.

Pincer enemy: "A deterrent effect was never planned." Rather, it is about generating income for road maintenance.

From this point of view, too, Lacrouts saw no advantage in free parking: "If short-term parkers occupy the spaces that other drivers would pay for, we have missed the point." In addition, those familiar with the area could park for free at the Alpengasthof Glück Auf and cover the last stretch on foot.

Johann Harraßer (FWG) added from his point of view as a direct resident: "The parking lot and the street are already overloaded - dangerous situations often arise." He therefore suggested that the 90 minutes should only apply during the week.

Lacrouts found this suggestion “too colorful.

Now we are complicating it even more. ”In his opinion, three euros are bearable and a change is unnecessary.

Voting ends with the closest possible result

The HVA faced further headwinds from among the ranks of the Greens.

"The 90 minutes are not even enough to walk to the Gindelalm, let alone have a drink there," said Harda von Poser (Greens).

The number of inquiries received - Zangenfeind reported a handful of citizens who had contacted him directly - had Elisabeth Leidgschwendner (CSU) cut back.

"That doesn't seem like that much to me." Zangenfeind denied: "Six direct inquiries are an unusually high number for such a topic."

Regardless of this, seven members spoke out against free parking time - just as many voted in favor.

In the event of a tie, the application is deemed rejected.

In future, a parking fee of three euros per day will continue to apply.

Why not?

Mayor simply reads the proposed resolution out again

Zangenfeind made the committee smile despite the disagreement: when deciding on the next item on the agenda, he inadvertently read the parking fee proposal again.

"We'll try that until it works," said the 48-year-old jokingly.

Source: merkur

All news articles on 2020-10-13

You may like

Trends 24h

Latest

© Communities 2019 - Privacy

The information on this site is from external sources that are not under our control.
The inclusion of any links does not necessarily imply a recommendation or endorse the views expressed within them.