Glück applies for further gravel mining

The social, political and legal dispute about the clearing and graveling of an area of ​​9.5 hectares in the forest box is far from over, as a new, larger gravel mining project is developing north of the Würmtalstraße in the Bannwald.

Graefelfing -

The Graefelfing company Glück Kies-Sand-Hartsteinsplitt GmbH wants to mine gravel on an area of ​​around 12 hectares in Lochhamer Schlag north of the Würmtalstrasse.

The rectangular area is partly wooded, partly meadow.

The application provides for four dismantling sections of roughly the same size that are to be tackled one after the other.

It is planned to gravel in dry mining up to 1.5 meters above the maximum groundwater level.

After the gravel has been removed, the pit should be backfilled in sections in the order in which the gravel was removed and then recultivated as a whole.

The company promises to take a maximum of seven years to dismantle and backfill.

The gravel pit is to be accessed from the south via an existing path.

It is around one kilometer via Würmtalstrasse to the Glück factory premises, where further processing takes place.

A few containers for employees and two truck scales are to be erected on the 12.6 hectare intervention area (gravel area: 11.4 hectares).

The application will be dealt with publicly for the first time in tomorrow's meeting of the Graefelfingen building committee (from 7.15 p.m., community center).

To this end, the municipal administration, which has already received legal advice on the project, has drawn up an eight-page draft resolution containing a detailed description of the facts and a legal assessment.

The bottom line is that the municipality comes to the conclusion that gravel extraction in this area cannot be ruled out in principle. However, the communal agreement fails in its resolution proposal with two arguments: Only the approval notice will stipulate the indispensable time limit for use, backfilling and recultivation. In addition, “a risk to water management” when using the filler values ​​applied for by Glück “cannot be ruled out from the outset”. The district office can of course replace this communal agreement. In any case, there is no liability risk for the community due to the rejection.