At Ottenhofen Castle, there is still a standstill.
There are certainly potential buyers, but they are still hesitant because it is still not clear what can and cannot be built there.
Ottenhofen
- There is still a standstill at Ottenhofen Castle.
After the insolvency of the Vivono housing cooperative, lawyer Birgitt Breiter is still trying to get a prospective buyer to buy the building so that she can at least somewhat satisfy Vivono's creditors.
But it is doing hard because it is still not clear what can and cannot be built there.
The insolvency administrator has not remained idle over the past few months.
When asked, she was able to report to the local newspaper that she had even found interested parties.
But they would still hesitate.
The lawyer sees the community as responsible, which in turn has commissioned a law firm to protect its interests.
Breiter maintains her accusation that the community no longer wants to play along, although there are promises in the room.
However, the attachment options that ultimately triggered the dispute are not part of the sales contract.
Mayor Nicole Schley (SPD), on the other hand, had already decidedly rejected responsibility for this messy situation to the local newspaper in May.
Because of the wishes of Vivono, the municipality had entered into an amendment procedure for the development plan, she had emphasized.
In fact, on November 9, 2018, the municipal council unanimously passed the resolution to amend the development plan.
Even more: According to her report at the meeting at the time, the mayor had an urban development contract in hand, according to which Vivono would bear the planning costs.
The lawyer’s allegation from May that the community “completely unexpectedly made a development plan” (we reported) does not apply.
Why the lawyer was not aware of this contract is one of the unanswered questions in this difficult situation.
Breiter, on the other hand, is trying to clarify the overall situation, because the structural condition of the entire castle is not getting any better.
"The State Office for the Preservation of Monuments is just sad, because that would have supported the solution," said the lawyer, who would like the issue off the table, because of the creditors she represents.
“I rely on everyone involved to talk to each other for something like that,” she emphasizes in an interview with our newspaper.
The State Office for Monument Preservation, the District Office, the municipality and you as the representative of the current owner would simply have to find an appointment together, because the municipality also has something to do there.
As reported, Ottenhofen is not making any headway either, because we do not yet know whether there are archaeological monuments here.
A specific preliminary construction inquiry should clarify whether digging can and may be done here.
Practically all further planning for the community depends on this topic.
The insolvency administrator in turn reminded that the plans of the community also had to be coordinated with the new owner.
When asked by the local newspaper, Schley said that the matter was clear from the community's point of view: the limit distance had to be observed, what Vivono had wanted there could not be approved.
Everything now depends on this excavation permit, and an appointment will indeed take place with the authorities involved and the community.
Klaus Kuhn