With its own statutes, the city wants to closely control construction in Itzling. However, building wishes are to be fulfilled. © Hans Moritz
City and country - hand in hand?! This is not always the case for Erding. Now the focus is on two Erding villages - Indorf and Itzling. In one case, there is a dispute.
Erding – The large district town consists not only of the districts of Erding, Altenerding and Langengeisling, but also of more than a dozen districts. Most of them are still very rural – in their use, but also in terms of development. But they also want to develop, the locals want to build for their children or convert agricultural buildings. In the town hall, however, the primary aim is to preserve the village character. Conflicts are inevitable. Two of them were now occupied by the city council's planning and building committee. Indorf, located in the east of Erding, and Itzling in the far southwest of the city are examples of the struggle between preservation and development. In one case, this now seems to be succeeding, in the other, the dispute continues to ferment.
Already 13 years ago, in April 2010, the city council decided to draw up a development plan for Indorf – for the area along St.-Martin-Straße, which winds through the entire village. But the plan was and is a long time coming.
In Indorf, the city and residents are in dispute over the extent of the future development. For the time being, however, a cheese bell remains over the village. © Hans Moritz
In Indorf there were and are a number of building requests, some of which were also implemented. However, due to individual applications, the city building authority saw its goal of a major solution in jeopardy. In 2020, the city council then issued a change ban. This means that until the development plan comes into force, no one is allowed to build to the left and right of the local thoroughfare. However, the Building Code limits a change ban to two years. They will be over at the end of this month, city lawyer Andreas Erhard warned the committee members. He asked for a further extension of one year. The law does not allow more. And: It requires "special circumstances".
Erhard is convinced that these are clearly present. The table bill already denounces the "unwillingness of the owners to cooperate in order to achieve the aforementioned planning objective" unusually clearly. Furthermore, coordination with the owners is still necessary, especially with regard to the development. Without a renewed ban on changes, "an orderly urban development in Indorf could no longer be ensured," the meeting document continues.
What that means, explained Mayor Max Götz (CSU). "What some people want to build here goes far beyond detached and semi-detached houses. We are also talking about multi-storey residential construction, a total of about 120 residential units." At present, the social infrastructure cannot keep up with this, i.e. kindergarten and school places are becoming scarce.
Among others, Leon Kozica (SPD), Thomas Schmidbauer (EDJ) and 2nd Mayor Petra Bauernfeind (FW) pointed out the long planning time. The latter said: "We have to get the cow off the ice." Götz said sarcastically: "It's more like a herd of cows." The decision, followed by many Indorfers, was unanimous.
Next is the town in Itzling. For this hamlet, the committee issues a rounding off statute. Michael Backes from the urban development department explained that here, too, there were building wishes that the city wanted to fulfill. Before that, however, "urban development and landscape planning guidelines" are required, also in order to preserve and strengthen the farmsteads that are still in use and to preserve the village character. Götz said: "We hope to find an amicable solution."
0
Also Read
Devilishly good, the "Faust in Dorfen"
READ
If the cockpit remains empty
READ
Too dangerous: suspension bridge remains closed
READ
28th Erdinger Stadttriathlon: Talentebecken Kronthaler Weiher
READ
Frightening moment on Lufthansa flight from Munich – photo shows machine after impact
READMone area
The draft statute, which is now being put on public display, provides for two village areas. In one sub-area, a maximum of one residential unit per semi-detached house is permitted, in individual houses a maximum of two. In village area II, a maximum of one apartment is permitted per residential and commercial building up to a floor area of 800 square meters for replacements, new buildings or conversions, and a maximum of two units for more space. Greening and fencing must be customary in the area, gravel gardens are explicitly prohibited. New buildings are not allowed to change the townscape: symmetrical gable roofs are prescribed, the ridge directions are defined by the statutes. Ham