Now they met directly, the two sides of the referendum on Schlierseer Hof. With three representatives each, the client and the citizens' initiative sat on the stage in the farmer's theater, which was packed with around 400 listeners, and exchanged their arguments.
Schliersee – It remains to be seen whether many people could be changed. Mayor Franz Schnitzenbaumer, who only gave the welcome, thought that when he looked into the rows he could clearly identify the camps.
Marcel de Alwis, junior boss of the Schlierseer Hof, began his short lecture with a little surprise. The planning was reduced a little, from 116 to 112 rooms, and the gaps between the three parts of the building were made clearer, which should reduce the impression of a block. Building length: 89 meters, ridge height unchanged 24 meters. BI spokesman Alexander von Schoeler found the previously uncommunicated change “strange”. But also irrelevant. The wording of the decision remains unchanged: no development of the parking lot, nothing higher than the existing building.
De Alwis described with numbers what a yes to the referendum would mean from his point of view. Based on the municipal parking regulations, the existing parking spaces allow for fewer than 39 rooms - uneconomical. Even with an underground car park under the Seventeen Rübl there would only be 54 rooms, but the investment costs would hardly be lower due to the necessary spa, fitness and the like. The end result would be a room price of 700 euros per night - unrealistic and not what the de Alwis family wants for Schliersee. So far there has been talk of a price of 340 euros.
Definitely for clients who are able to pay, and the majority of the local council is also hoping for a lot for the place. Florian Zeindl (CSU) said that according to relevant statistics, hotel guests spend 131.50 a day. “8.6 million euros a year that flow into the economic cycle.” An impulse from which the proponents of the big solution hope to have a positive effect on the town center with its obvious vacancies. Robert Salzl, former chairman of the Upper Bavaria Munich Tourism Association, added that Schliersee has far too few hotel beds. The high number of overnight stays that the BI cites as an argument against a lack of tourism would come from the disproportionate share of youth hostels. That is “great” per se, but local restaurants or retailers would not benefit from it.
The BI doesn't really want to believe in the effects presented. Green councilor Babette Wehrmann said the vacancies in retail were more due to unattractive space sizes and people's general consumer behavior - keyword: the Internet. As was the case a week ago at the BI information evening (we reported), she doubted rising trade and income tax revenues, since, on the one hand, the high investments would not allow profits for a long time and hotel employees are not exactly among the higher earners.
This earned her a question from CSU local councilor Wolfgang Mundel in the audience as to why she voted for the vitality resort in Neuhaus. Wehrmann replied that she wanted to refute incorrect arguments. In addition, the projects are difficult to compare.
De Alwis had previously addressed two topics that had recently been brought into the discussion by the BI. The registered trademark Uwama Bay, which is made up of the first names of the hotelier family - Ute, Walter and Marcel as well as Bayern and was actually planned for a restaurant. Further use unclear. The same applies to the question of what a new hotel would be called. Point two was the noise level of over 100 decibels. The information comes from the noise protection report and is not the level that the neighbors have to endure, but - on the contrary - the highest possible value from which they must be protected.
“We build here in Germany,” said de Alwis, referring to the diverse regulations. The protection against half-truths like these prompted the family not to publish the plans in full. However, they can still be viewed at the Sunday information breakfasts in the Schlierseer Hof (11 a.m.).
De Alwis was still met with some mistrust from the audience. He therefore emphasized that there is no investor behind the 55 million euro project, but the family itself. The financing is provided by the Kreissparkasse Miesbach-Tegernsee, the Volksbank Rosenheim and the BTV Bank Vorarlberg. Today, financial institutions would not even take “a small percentage of risk.” In this context, Zeindl reiterated that the community is securing itself with an implementation agreement, which also includes secured financing.
Ultimately, the question of size remained the sticking point once again, and that is also the content of the referendum. The slightly reduced planning probably doesn't change the initial situation.
As Schnitzenbaumer said upon request, a few hundred of the 5,000 or so eligible voters have already cast their votes. The vote, until which the discussion will probably continue, will take place on Sunday, May 5th.