First the municipality of Oberding said no to a building complex with around 70 apartments in Schwaig.
After several discussions, a yes followed.
And now everything is different again.
However, the municipality has no legal authority.
Schwaig – The Oberdinger municipal council mutated into a building committee in its first meeting of the new year on Tuesday: the committee received 13 applications, and the green light was not always given (see also the info box below).
The situation is now particularly piquant once again around the large construction project with around 70 apartments on Freisinger Straße in Schwaig opposite the entrance to the sports grounds.
The council did not give the municipal consent once again.
The reason is a significantly changed plan by the investor, MUC Apart GmbH.
In terms of building law, however, everything is in order, the municipality has no legal recourse.
The bickering about the residential complex has been going on for a long time and is now surprisingly getting a continuation.
As reported, the municipality initially did not give its consent.
The original version seemed bulky to the councilors and was at least slimmed down a bit.
Two neighbors had expressed serious concerns about the exit from the underground car park, which should initially lead to the district road.
In her opinion, this could have led to confusion on the busy road.
After coordination talks between the client, community and neighbors, the second attempt in March last year gave the unanimous green light from the council.
+
This is what the building complex should look like: The upper graphic in the picture shows the new alignment of the now U-shaped building.
To the right: the "H"-shaped plan approved by the Council but now discarded.
© mas/MUC Apart GmbH
But now the reversal.
According to the town hall, the builder has submitted an amendment because, due to the determined groundwater situation, the production of the approved two-storey underground car park is very complex and no longer economically viable.
The GmbH is now planning a one-storey underground car park with 88 parking spaces and 15 above-ground parking spaces.
The number of residential units is reduced from 74 to 70. Their size is uniform at 39 to 40 square meters.
Overall, the living space is now around 2800 square meters instead of the initially planned 3100 square meters.
In addition, the building, which now resembles a U rather than an H in shape, moves closer to the northern boundary of the property and its orientation is rotated.
At least: the entrance to the underground car park will remain on the south-west corner of the building complex.
According to the municipal administration, the neighbors had two weeks to get in touch about the new planning.
Nobody signed.
The northern neighbor has now reported by phone.
that the now much more massive building is moving closer to their property.
This makes a change in the building code possible, which Mayor Bernhard Mücke (CSU) criticized not for the first time in the committee.
"I can't hide my disappointment that we now have a completely new plan," said Mücke.
"But they don't do it for the fun of it," remarked Georg Ascher (WG Niederding), referring to the groundwater situation.
However, the mayor suspects that this is only an advanced aspect against the background of price developments in the construction industry.
Perhaps the old plan was simply no longer financially viable, he suspected.
Fee for parking spaces? Municipality of Oberding says no
Transfer payments for playgrounds are currently a hot topic in the district, but there is also the possibility of replacing parking spaces.
However, not in the municipality of Oberding, as Mayor Bernhard Mücke made clear on Tuesday in the municipal council when it came to two building applications.
Mücke explained that the municipality does not want to encourage on-street parking.
One case involved an application for the construction of a new semi-detached house with four parking spaces on Mühlenweg in Notzing.
The council unanimously approved the application for a preliminary decision, but rejected the requested replacement of parking spaces - according to Mücke, the client would have liked to build larger.
In another case - an attic conversion in a four-party house to create two more apartments on Schulstraße in Schwaig - there was not even a municipal agreement because, in the opinion of the municipality, there was simply no proof of the five additional parking spaces required.
This client had also proposed a replacement – in vain.
Meanwhile, two building applications for the construction of a new three-part terraced house on Freisinger Strasse in Schwaig received the green light unanimously.
A plan to build a new house with ten residential units on Aufkirchener Dorfstraße was also approved.
There is now no underground car park.
Although a large area will continue to be sealed, "optically it is now better for Aufkirchen" than the initially planned "bar", as Mayor Mücke put it.
(mas)
"The apartment mix was given up," regretted Vice Mayor Anton Nußrainer (WG Oberding).
In his opinion, the apartment sizes should be different.
"We're back where we were the first time," he said.
Finally, Mücke had to state: "According to the Bavarian building regulations, everything is in order." However, one could refuse the municipal agreement and at least "send a political signal".
That's how it happened with 15:2 votes.
Only Ascher and Mücke ultimately voted differently.
Couldn't the municipality simply prevent the unwanted construction with a new development plan?
"This is a legally difficult area with a lot of case law," explains VG Managing Director Josef Steinkirchner when asked.
Roughly summarizing the complex topic, he says that development plans in the interior are a very good means of organizing planned developments and developments, even if building rights already exist.
But: "It is important that a development plan is not drawn up as a pure 'prevention plan' and that existing building rights are withdrawn in this way," explains Steinkirchner.
This in turn would mean that the development plan would be legally contestable and would possibly be overturned in court.
