In Hattenhofen the emotions are boiling: A citizens' initiative is mobilizing against a planned radio mast - and feels ignored by the community.
Hattenhofen - The citizens' initiative accuses Mayor Franz Robeller of not having provided sufficient information about the construction of the mast - in the run-up to and after a council meeting at which the green light was given for the project.
“We would have wanted to be interviewed,” explains Stefanie Bachl, spokeswoman for the initiative.
And that's what it's all about: Deutsche Funkturm GmbH would like to build a 30-meter-high mast south of Hattenhofen, in the direction of Loitershofen, along the railway line for better network coverage.
In January 2020, the municipal council rejected the request.
He then gave his consent on March 2, 2021.
Nobody knew about the meeting
Above all, the opponents criticize the fact that nobody actually knew about this meeting.
Because the announcement was not made as usual on the municipality's homepage.
In addition, the radio mast was only discussed around 10 p.m., says Bachl.
“The exit restriction was from 9 p.m.” So there was no way to attend the discussion.
The initiative distributed flyers to keep citizens informed.
As a result, Mayor Franz Robeller published a letter to citizens, "because there were rumors and half-truths in circulation," as he says
“We could have informed the citizens,” he admits.
“But we couldn't have changed anything.
The municipal possibilities to take action against the mast are almost zero. "
After the municipal council rejected the application, the municipality was informed by the district office that it was illegal, Robeller explains.
Because it is not the task of the community to assess the radiation load.
In addition, it is a privileged project in the outdoor area.
The authority had asked the municipality to establish the agreement, otherwise it would be replaced.
So the topic of the radio mast was put on the agenda of March 2nd.
A mistake
Robeller rejects the allegations of not having provided sufficient information about this date.
As stipulated in the municipal ordinance, the announcement had been in the municipal box seven days beforehand.
"I hung it myself." Publication on the Internet is otherwise common, but not an obligation.
The fact that this did not happen for the meeting on March 2nd was "a mistake" and he was sorry.
"There can be no question of bad intentions." In addition, every citizen who wants to find out more about a meeting can see the minutes in the town hall.
The public part of the meeting ended at 9 p.m., so citizens could have attended the discussion.
A crane is set up
The opponents of the mast, meanwhile, continue to mobilize.
Around 500 signatures have already been collected.
The activists are not against the mast, but against the location.
They fear a loss in value of their real estate, disfigurement of the townscape, health problems and noise from wind.
“We want a solution further away from the houses,” explains Bachl.
To make it clear how the mast would affect the townscape, a 30-meter-high crane is to be erected on Saturday, June 12th at 10 a.m.
Mayor Robeller is planning an information event in July to smooth things over.
comment
The flow of information around the planned radio mast on the railway line near Hattenhofen was really extremely unfortunate.
The meeting, in which the local council, which was not particularly enthusiastic about the project, had to talk about the topic again, took place in the middle of the lockdown, at the time of the curfew.
That the meeting would take place was only stated in the local information notice box, nowhere else.
Even the press, which is usually invited in an exemplary manner in Hattenhofen, did not know anything about the meeting - so it was not able to take part or at least find out what was decided on the day after.
The local council thus formally voted on the mast in a public session, but practically no one knew from the public that the public was established.
So the impression arose in the place that something is going wrong, what is understandable.
Now it's always easy to be smarter afterwards.
However, the municipal administration could have informed the public at least in retrospect.
The topic of radio masts is also regularly causing waves elsewhere.
In this way, some damage to the corridor and the impression of a mess could have been avoided.
The matter in itself is of course clear: the district office would have approved the radio mast anyway.
And the landowners, who fear for the value of their land, should perhaps consider that their land is only worth something because the area is accessible via the railway line.
(st)
Also interesting:
Trouble about the shooting range: "It's like in a war"
