Dispute over gravel mining in Höhenkirchen: "We can take legal action against it"

Created: 06/28/2022, 09:30 am

By: Stefan Weinzierl

Sees the development of the community in danger as a result of the decision of the district office: CSU parliamentary group leader and lawyer Roland Spingler.

© private

This Thursday, the municipal councils will again decide on the planned gravel pit on the Muna site.

The district office has described the rejection of the project by the municipal council as unlawful and is threatening to approve the gravel quarrying.

Roland Spingler, CSU parliamentary group leader and lawyer, explains what room for maneuver there is still.

Mr. Spingler, how do you rate the district office's decision on the application for a gravel pit?

I take a negative view of the decision, as it will have significant negative consequences.

The gravel pit operation will lead to a significant increase in the number of trucks in our community and the neighboring community of Hohenbrunn.

In addition, the neighboring commercial establishments are significantly affected by its emissions such as noise and dust.

Ultimately, the implementation of municipal planning from the land use plan is hampered by the gravel quarrying or at least delayed for a longer period of time.

Can you understand the authority's reasoning?

No, especially since the authority had expressed the opposite legal opinion in a written statement in May 2021.

These explanations and especially the reference to a decision of the Bavarian Administrative Court in Munich from 2015, which was based on a comparable case, are understandable for me.

Can you explain that in more detail?

The judgment of the Federal Administrative Court quoted in the current decision justifies the priority of the privilege over temporary impairments, such as the landscape.

These impairments are certainly also given here;

in addition, however, there is a hindrance to communal planning, which not only temporarily affects the community.

The argument that the zoning plan is 20 years old is also illogical.

Such a view would penalize communities that plan ahead.

The district office repeatedly emphasizes that the extraction of mineral resources such as gravel is in the public interest.

Why do you still resist the gravel pit at this point?

On the one hand, the gravel pit is too close to the neighboring buildings.

On the other hand, the municipality is prevented from developing the commercial area planned there, which impairs the creation of jobs and the strengthening of the municipality's financial strength.

This interferes directly with municipal self-government law.

also read

22 tons of beer land on the A 99: articulated lorry gets into an inclined position and tips over

Help against the long suffering: New day clinic for long-term corona effects

From your point of view, has the municipal administration done everything to prevent the gravel mining?

In my opinion, since the reasons for the decision were available, they should have dealt more with invalidating them.

In addition, the planning for the commercial area designated in the land use plan should have started in the meantime.

This would have strengthened the community's position in relation to the privileged project.

In the opinion of the town hall administration, there are now only two options for the municipality: come to terms with the entrepreneur or draw up a partial land use plan in order to delay the project and identify concentration areas for gravel extraction.

Do you see any other options for action?

The municipality can take legal action against a permit for gravel extraction.

However, this involves the risk of litigation and the lawsuit would probably not have a suspensive effect.

This would not prevent the start of the excavation.

A legal success would, however, lead to the termination of the dismantling.

The municipality invites you to the citizen information event today.

What do you expect from it?

I expect an open discussion in which the administration will provide detailed information and give the citizens the opportunity to put forward their arguments.

I am also curious to see whether representatives of the district office will explain the reasons for their decision in detail.