The key data: Kovanda wants to go up 4.9 hectares of gravel mining, namely on an area on the outskirts of the city that is designated for this purpose according to the Mineral Resources Act. For the family, this is a project with a clear advantage: the mining area would be only around 700 meters from the company’s concrete mixing plant and outside of all districts; only one street would have to be crossed. Local raw materials, short distances, job security in the region – these arguments persuaded the family to buy the grounds.
However, for the opponents of the project, which include residents as well as the entire local council, the gravel pit would be a cut in theirs Quality of life. They fear even more noise, dust and traffic in the already densely populated and polluted urban area. In addition, the mining zone would be created in the middle of the five districts and in the agricultural core area of the region, which are also often used as a natural recreation area – by people and animals alike. Reasons that could now be used to collect 5,100 signatures against the project.
Lots of fears
Two sides, two perspectives. The case is currently before the State Administrative Court, which will decide whether Environmental impact assessment for the gravel pit is necessary or not. Kovanda is already likely to dismantle the area; The company has received all valid notices for this, and the Constitutional Court has lifted a further delay due to complaints. After the first work steps in the spring, the work is on hold until a verdict is available.
And this is crucial for the opposition, namely also when it comes to the future use of the mining area. Because the area where Kovanda wants to work is in the middle of one 88 hectares potential areawhich was intended for gravel mining in the 1960s – long before Gerasdorf became a rapidly growing settlement area.
“If Kovanda is allowed to mine, all other interested parties will also be allowed to mine in the eligibility zone and that will take decades,” is Christian Koza, Green Party environmental councilorconvinced. In addition, there is a fear among city politicians and citizens that a “salami tactic” could be pursued, i.e. buying up the area piecemeal in order to avoid an environmental impact assessment.
allegations about which Managing Director Leopold Kovanda can only shake his head. “The new pit is part of a long-term plan to be able to continue pursuing our business. This is not about panic buying,” he says. And he emphasizes that as a family business, we have a responsibility towards the region, far beyond the official standards – and the standards of many other companies; Kovanda relies on greening and the creation of new habitats for nature, as well as the recycling of old materials – which would be no different with the new gravel pit.
Hard fronts
It is unclear when the State Administrative Court will decide on an environmental impact assessment. What remains are deep rifts between those involved. “We would like to show that the opponents’ allegations are not true,” says Kovanda, emphasizing that his door is open to anyone interested. However, despite decades of acquaintance, this offer has hardly been used so far.
The opposition, on the other hand, sees itself deceived by Kovanda. In an information letter to households, she accused the entrepreneur of merely pursuing a PR campaign with his environmental measures. Kovanda took legal action against this.
