There is widespread resistance in the neighborhood to new residential buildings on Hubertusstrasse.
What the city is planning in the area does not only affect the residents.
Fürstenfeldbruck
- It didn't take long, says Reinhold Schmidl.
"In a few hours" he had the 117 signatures from neighbors for his open letter to Mayor Erich Raff and the city council.
The letter speaks of a lot of displeasure about a building project on Hubertusstrasse.
Too big, too much additional traffic, according to local residents.
+
Residential construction was once planned for the whole area except for the green strip.
© mm
Across from the confluence with Falkenstrasse, 51 apartments are to be built on a wasteland in three residential buildings with up to five floors (we reported).
The property between Hubertusstraße and Rothschwaiger Feldweg is part of an area that has been discussed again and again.
In the zoning plan, the undeveloped area north of Rothschwaiger Straße between Cerveteri- and Hubertusstraße has been earmarked for living since 1983.
However, a binding development plan was never drawn up.
Over the years, a forest grew over large parts of the area.
A narrow strip along Cerveteristraße has long been mapped as a biotope and the forest is described in the Free State's forest function plan as worthy of preservation.
In order to preserve it, one now wants to draw up a development plan to determine where construction is not allowed.
But Schmidl is angry that the triangular property should not be part of the development plan.
“The aim here is to give a developer maximum building rights,” he says.
If there is no development plan for a property, it can usually be built in the same way as in the immediate vicinity.
But what is in the immediate vicinity is, as in so many cases (see below), unclear.
Only smaller houses border directly on the building site.
But in the next row there are five-story houses.
The city administration assumes that they should be the benchmark in a legal dispute.
The city could make specifications via a development plan, but that would mean more work for the administration.
Defining specific building law is more time-consuming than just stating where no construction will take place.
In addition, this would mean a time delay, which one does not want to expect of the client.
Schmidl assumes that the ownership structure plays a role.
The triangular property, which has not been forested to this day, belonged to the Hans Kiener Foundation, which is socially committed in the city.
The foundation sold the property some time ago.
The business is linked to the fact that the new owner can also build.
"We benefit when there is construction there," says Alexander Fink, managing director of the foundation.
"But we did not feel any special kindness." They also sold because the city had disregarded plans that the foundation had there.
"People are calling for new apartments, but nobody wants them to come to them," says Green City Councilor and Mayor of Construction Christian Stangl.
There is no preference.
The builder had been asked for commitments such as a share of social housing.
“The project is justifiable in terms of urban development, especially in combination with forest conservation.” City Councilor Christian Götz (BBV) agrees, but is aware that “some are not amused”.
+
That is planned: There should be a development plan for the majority of the area (blue).
But not for the part (red) to be built on.
© mm
The owners are also meant.
Part of the area belongs to private individuals, but a large area belongs to the "Oberbayerische Heimstätte", a non-profit housing association in the Upper Bavaria district.
Jan Halbauer, Green City Councilor, member of the district assembly and supervisory board of the Heimstätte, says: “You should meet the Heimstätte, perhaps with an exchange of land.” The only functioning public housing company that is active in Bruck should not be frightened off.
He is not against the current construction project and the preservation of the forest.
The mayor has not yet responded to the objections of the residents.
His CSU parliamentary group has proposed that a resident representative be brought to the design advisory board to oversee the construction project.
Schmidl's reaction: "This is just an attempt to rip us off."
Resistance to further construction projects - city councils want more far-sighted planning
On a plot of land between Wernher-von-Braun-Strasse and Landsberger Strasse, there will soon be major construction.
13 terraced houses will be built where there are currently only two single-family houses.
There are also seven carports and 19 parking spaces.
The project caused horror among the members of the Planning and Construction Committee (PBA).
But there is nothing they can do about it.
For the building application, which meets the requirements of the development plan from the 1970s, the administration has already issued the preliminary decision.
The city councils can only approach the builder with suggestions and wishes and hope that he will take them into account.
"There is not much we can do except learn from it for the future," said Christian Götz (BBV).
It is not the first time in recent months that a large building and the resulting densification has led to protests.
Resistance from residents and some city councils has also risen in the case of projects in Aich and Hubertusstrasse.
In the PBA, therefore, two questions were discussed: How should building work in Fürstenfeldbruck in the future?
And what legal tools are to be used to enforce the rules?
"We are all aware that we need living space," said Andreas Lohde (CSU).
But: "Redensification has to be compatible." He pleaded - like all other parliamentary groups - that the city councils should go to a joint retreat as soon as possible in order to discuss exactly this topic and to tighten the framework for further growth in Fürstenfeldbruck.
"Because it turns out that we are not meeting the new requirements with the old development plans."
Opinions differ widely as to what the appropriate tool is.
Georg Stockinger (FW)
called for the city's zoning plan to be revised at last.
Christian Götz disagreed.
A zoning plan would only provide rough guidelines and hardly help with the subject of redensification.
Rather, it would need an urban development concept.
That is more delicate and could contain more precise specifications.
The third suggestion: an open space design statute.
This was brought into play by Alexa Zierl as well as by Andreas Lohde and Christian Götz.
"That would at least allow us some manipulation," explained Götz.
Hans Schilling (CSU) emphasized that time is of the essence.
"Every free spot will be built on in the future," said the CSU man.
"That's why we have to be clear about what we want."