Isen - The wheels of the judiciary grind slowly, in this case that of the European Court of Justice (ECJ).
The municipality of Isen is currently feeling the effects of this and wants to take five hectares out of the landscape protection area (LSG) “Isental and southern spring brooks” in order to enable a local company to expand and thus keep it in Isen.
It's about the Niederbachleiten II industrial estate.
The district council had already approved this removal. Then the ECJ came into play. He basically wants to decide whether a (extensive) special environmental assessment (SEA) should be carried out when landscape protection areas are cut. The Luxembourg judges had already announced a verdict for May, now, according to the government of Upper Bavaria, there is talk of “the end of this year at the earliest”.
Nevertheless, after an appeal by Mayor Irmgard Hibler (FW) against the votes of Wolfgang Fritz and Monika Wenger (Greens), the district council's environmental committee decided to approve the removal from the LSG.
After all, in anticipation of the ECJ ruling, Isen submitted an environmental report in July this year, which is considered an important part of the SUP.
However, the community is taking full risk.
Because if the European judges consider a SUP to be necessary, the procedure would start all over again.
Katharina Leisten from the Lower Nature Conservation Authority reported that the higher authorities had advised to wait for the verdict or, in urgent cases, to carry out a voluntary SUP.
In Isen there is only a hurry in this area.
Leisten emphasized that due to the environmental report, the removal procedure itself would have to be formally carried out again - with consideration in the committee and in the district council as well as a hearing of public concerns.
That would take until around March 2022.
According to Leisten, an examination of the legal situation has shown that a preliminary examination should be carried out in the event of an SUP obligation.
The lower nature conservation authority has to weigh up whether the removal has significant environmental effects.
In Isen it is a small area at the local level.
According to Leisten, if the effects are within a small scope, the SUP obligation would no longer apply.
The withdrawal procedure for the industrial park sub-area could be completed quickly.
After that, the zoning plan would have to be changed and a development plan drawn up.
The good news for Isen: The district office comes to the conclusion that the five hectares do not have any significant effects on the environment.
This is also the conclusion reached by the said environmental report, which the planning association for the outer economic area of Munich had prepared for the Isen market as a precautionary measure.
However, Leisten also pointed out that in the event of a ECJ ruling in favor of the SUP, there is a risk that the preliminary examination will not be recognized.
The Isener procedure would then be flawed.
How to "cure" this error is still unclear.
Thomas Gneißl (FW) said: "Isen is aware of this risk and is under pressure to implement it." Because this is only a small area, the district council should go along with it.
Max Gotz (CSU) also advised a decision.
"We have done our job and shouldn't obstruct Isen." However, a reference case could be created because several further decisions in this direction are pending in the district, for example in Ottenhofen.
District Administrator Martin Bayerstorfer (CSU) replied.
“We could do this anywhere.
The question is whether the communities go along with it. "
Wolfgang Fritz (Greens) asked about the liability issue because of the pending ECJ ruling.
“The risk is too high for me.” One should wait for the judge's verdict.
Bayerstorfer explained that the risk lies with the municipality or the owners.
(ham)