In Lich, a resident has been complaining about the new logistics center for years. She does not take the next step to the Hessian Administrative Court – it would be too expensive.
Lich – For almost three years, a resident complained against the Lich logistics center. Despite two urgent requests being rejected, she continued to pursue her goals until the oral hearing. In the end, the judge didn’t have to decide. The woman withdrew her lawsuit at the last second.
This woman stands up for her opinion with vehemence. When the protest against the planned logistics center at »Langsdorfer Höhe« picked up speed in the summer of 2019, she fought in the front row. And she was persistent. Although the hall has been in operation for a long time, she persisted in her lawsuit against the building permit issued by the district. Until Wednesday. The woman from Licher, whose house is 660 meters from the exit of the logistics center as the crow flies, backed down before the Gießen administrative court. “It’s the money,” she said resignedly at the end of the hour-and-a-half hearing.
Previously judge Dr. Marvin Waldvogel pointed out to the woman that he intends to dismiss the lawsuit for lack of authority. Exactly as his colleagues had already done in April 2020 and May 2021 as part of two urgent decisions. He noted that he did not see much prospect of an appeal to the Hessian Administrative Court. “I doubt that the judges at court will see things differently,” said Waldvogel, pointing out to the plaintiff the costs she would have to face if she went to Kassel.
Lawsuits against the logistics center in Lich have so far failed
The Licherin, who was accompanied by lawyer Jürgen Schellenberg as legal counsel, had justified her complaint against the building permit primarily with the lack of an environmental impact assessment (EIA). Other arguments were the obstruction of fresh air supply, negative effects on wildlife in the adjacent Natura 2000 areas and the increasing risk of flooding. In addition, the woman is exposed to noise and light emissions on her property. Her verdict on the construction of the logistics center: »A disaster from an economic and ecological point of view.«
She is not the only one who has taken legal action against the construction project. As early as September 2020, a resident of the Platanenring, who lives even closer to the “Langsdorfer Höhe”, failed before the Administrative Court in Kassel. In this case, too, the justification was: no authority to apply.
Little room for negotiation for an amicable agreement
Judge Waldvogel informed himself about the situation in Lich before the hearing. From his point of view, the development on the eastern outskirts of the city, where numerous residential buildings have been approved in close proximity to trade and industry, is not happy. But the decision to build a large logistics hall in this area was made by politicians. Right or wrong? That is not a question for a court to answer. “We’re not discussing that here.”
For this reason, Waldvogel suggested that the parties to the conflict reach an amicable agreement at the beginning of the oral hearing. The plaintiff answered this request with a categorical “No”. Sascha Loubal, representing the district, and Joachim Krumb, the lawyer from Dietz Logistik 44 GmbH, who was also summoned and owns the property, saw little room for negotiation. “The possibilities of an amicable agreement are being explored without success,” the judge stated on record.
»No one wants logistics centers, but everyone wants logistics«
In the following, the hearing mainly revolved around two questions: Are the plaintiff’s own substantive rights violated by the noise and light emissions from the logistics center? And as part of the “affected public” can they invoke the Environmental Appeal Act and sue for the lack of an environmental impact assessment?
The environmental assessment as part of the development plan was completely inadequate, emphasized the woman, who is not a lawyer herself. “I read that,” she said in the course of her eloquent argument.
Attorney Krumb was not impressed at all. ‘I don’t even know where to start with all this nonsense you’re spouting. As a private prosecutor, you cannot invoke an alleged violation of the EIA Act.« And Krumb also had a clear position on the impairments caused by the logistics center: »Of course you can see the light bell. But you live in an industrial area. They have to accept more.« Basically, he considers the protests against this and many other logistics centers to be a typical case of »not in my backyard«: »No one wants logistics centers, but everyone wants logistics.« (us)