As of: April 4, 2024, 12:20 a.m
By: Bert Brosch
Comments
Press
Split
A year ago, the local council imposed a change ban on the area to the left of Aschheimer Strasse. Unlawful and as negative planning to prevent development on the property to the left, as we now had to admit. © Bert Brosch
The local council has now had to withdraw the change ban for a residential area on Aschheimer Straße in Feldkirchen. The new building authority manager strongly advised this.
Feldkirchen
– A year ago, investor Reinhold Schneider submitted an application to build two new apartment buildings with 22 apartments on Aschheimer Straße in Feldkirchen. There was a great outcry among the local councilors because of the “far too narrow development and the dangerous exit”. The change ban imposed now had to be withdrawn as “negative planning”.
A good 60 people from Feldkirchen came to the local council meeting and expressed their clear rejection of the project in speeches: Maren Schmidbauer, daughter of the couple on the neighboring property, said that her family is the fourth generation and enjoys living in Feldkirchen. “This is about an investor who wants to use brute force to build to the absolute pain threshold in order to make maximum profit.”
Investor sharply rejects allegations
Her parents were almost forced to sell their property. “The investor said that once he had built, the property would no longer be worth anything.” Investor Schneider sharply rejected this: “I never said that! The older people and their children made far too high and unrealistic demands for the sale.” Christoph Rupp, Schmidbauer’s brother, did not want to understand why the ban on changes should be lifted. “The community would have four years to flesh out its ideas.” Citizen Karin Feiler is not directly affected by the construction project, “but as a cyclist and pedestrian. The exit to Aschheimer Straße via the footpath and cycle path is already dangerous today, but now only a few people live there - but after the new building there will be 40 or 50 more. Then the eye of the needle is even more dangerous.”
Norbert Steinmeier, chairman of the Federation for Nature Conservation, criticized the planned felling of a 100-year-old oak tree on the neighboring property. “The oak has a circumference of two meters and is home to 300 species of insects. In terms of oxygen production, it is worth as much as 100 to 400 young trees.” This tree, like the shade trees on the school sports field, should under no circumstances be felled. Wolfgang Schmidbauer completely questioned the traffic report from the state building authority on the exit to the B471. “Here it is assumed that the cyclists ride at walking speed. “That is absolutely unrealistic, everyone is driving very fast.”
Greens distributed leaflets
The citizens were made emotionally aware by a leaflet from the Green Party. Local leader Ragna Sturm demanded “Don’t roll backwards!” The Greens are suspicious that the investor has built up pressure to push through his plan. “The development is far too narrow, the houses are too high, the sealing is enormous, trees and hedges are being felled. “That shouldn’t be allowed to happen,” demanded Sturm. They want to create living space, but it’s a matter of “how”. Green councilor Silvia Pahl-Leclerque said there was “no cause for concern. We must not allow ourselves to be intimidated.” From their point of view, a lawsuit against the construction project is on the cards.
Building authority manager Martin Schmidt-Roschow found very clear words about this. “If I had been in office a year ago, the block on change would not have existed.” The reasons for a block would have to be sufficiently specified. “It must be clear how the municipality’s planning goals differ from those of the construction project. Neither the local council nor the administration did that.” So the applicant had no opportunity to adapt his plan because he didn’t know what the community specifically wanted. “The buildings there today are as narrow and as high as planned in the construction project. Cyclists are only allowed to walk on the sidewalk and cycle path - if they don't, the applicant can't do anything about it." What is of course not acceptable under any circumstances is the felling of trees on neighboring properties, said Schmidt-Roschow. From his point of view, the change ban is negative planning to prevent development. “That’s why we have to remove them immediately.”
Everyone agrees: planned development is not nice
Herbert Vanvolsem and Stefan Seifert (CSU) agreed that they did not like the planned development. “But we have to adhere to the applicable law. The houses around are just as tall and narrow,” Vanvolsem said. Hendrik Feuerstein (SPD) said that previous local councils had made the mistakes of building too close together. “Unfortunately, we haven’t received good advice from the building authorities in recent years.” Only Pahl-Leclerque didn’t want to see the mistake from a year ago. “We don’t want this development there and expect new proposals from the administration.”
My news
1,500 euros per month – Citizen’s benefit recipient emphasizes: “It’s just too much money for my standards” read
Contribution service sends letters to thousands of households - if you don't respond, you risk being fined
2 hours ago
WhatsApp disruption: Tens of thousands of people cannot use Messenger
“Accumulation of vehicles” spotted: Russia’s army is moving new tanks to Crimea
“That touched a nerve”: Breakfast café has to close shortly after opening – due to too many guests reading
Natural spectacle in Bavaria: pond shimmers purple - phenomenon only happens every few years
The ban on change was lifted with one vote against. There were five dissenting votes from the SPD and Pahl-Leclerque against the new building application with 21 residential units in two houses, 36 underground parking spaces and six above-ground parking spaces.