Application for gravel refused for the time being

• ofMartin Schullerus

  –

  shut down

–

The Graefelfinger building committee has refused to agree to the application of the Glück company for gravel in Lochhamer Schlag – for the time being. Because the community’s lawyer himself made it clear: In principle, there is a right to approval.

Gräfelfing – “It’s actually more about the ‘how’ than the ‘whether’”: Frank Sommer, lawyer from the law firm Meidert and colleagues and himself a former Green councilor in Graefelfing, poured pure wine for the building committee on Thursday. Gravel mining is a privileged use in the outdoor area. Sommer: “Where should you mine gravel, if not where it can be found?” Concerns such as the protected forest and the recreational function “only have a weakened effect due to the time limit; the impairment has to be accepted ”.

It was precisely here that one of the two arguments with which Sommer advised the municipality to refuse the agreement “at this point in time” began. “This time limit of seven years does not really emerge from the application.” Mayor Peter Köstler emphasized: “That is not enough for us as a project of the company, it must be a binding obligation.”

Protection of groundwater

The second reason for rejection by the municipality was the protection of the groundwater. As reported, only 1.5 meters above the groundwater is to be graveled dry on the area of ​​11.4 hectares. Only clean materials should then be used for backfilling. A certain degree of contamination, such as that of track ballast and how Glück applied for it to be backfilled, would only be acceptable if a sorption layer were introduced to protect the groundwater. The application does not adequately and bindingly describe their nature, said Sommer. However, these defects are curable. Frank Sommer: “If the time limit and the groundwater protection are secured, the intervention is to be accepted temporarily.” The district office has the possibility of replacing the agreement of the municipality, and the municipality has a comprehensive right of action, which, if necessary, an examination of the entire project guarantee. Sommer: “For these reasons you don’t forgive yourself with the rejection and stay involved.”

The statements of her party colleague Sommer met with little approval from the Greens. Ulrike Tuchnitz objected that the mining area would be “less than 300 meters” away from the residential area in Großhadern. Frank Sommer referred to the reports that showed “that dust and noise remain below the limit values”. And the planned recultivation with deciduous trees will increase the quantity and quality of the forest there in the medium term.

Criticism of the lawyer’s choice of words

Green councilor Martin Feldner, who had organized a gathering in the form of a rally in front of the community center before the meeting, criticized Sommer’s “choice of words and argumentation”. In view of the “climate catastrophe” one could not afford to cut down further forests. Instead, gravel should be mined regionally, but where there are fields or meadows, not forests.

Frank Sommer pointed out the difference between political and legal appreciation. Sommer: “We are a constitutional state, and if there are claims, they apply, even if that doesn’t suit you. Politically, everyone can see it differently. “

Even Wolfgang Balk (IGG) found the political discussion at this point in time, as it was about legal issues “and we also want to reject it”, making little sense. Only Ochmaa Göbel (CSU) voted against the decision not to give the agreement.

–