The negotiations on the EIA procedure for the S10 section Freistadt Nord / Rainbach bypass were scheduled from Tuesday to Thursday of this week. Due to numerous detailed questions, the negotiation, which was carried out as a video conference due to the corona pandemic, was extended by an additional day and thus concluded yesterday.
Numerous entries and requests for improvement from the local residents and landowners involved, as well as a working group set up in Rainbach with citizen participation, were discussed. A large part of it will flow into the project, said Rainbach’s mayor Gnter Lorenz (VP), who followed the negotiation throughout, in an interview with the O news yesterday afternoon: “For the most part, we worked very constructively and tried to conscientiously incorporate all aspects introduced . “
Tap Population Population
The Viennese lawyer Wolfgang List, who was engaged by the Rainbach Citizens’ Movement (BBfR) and several private individuals, raised numerous objections to the route at hand. Supported by the expert Egon Zwicker, he hooked the chapter on wildlife biology in particular: The survey of endangered animal species in the project area is largely incomplete, which is why the route was chosen prematurely as suitable. A new survey on this subject area is unavoidable in order to be able to issue a permit for the building project.
List and Zwicker submitted additional statements and documents to the negotiation management several times, which in turn forced pauses in negotiations during which these documents were viewed. On Thursday evening, lawyer List finally submitted the application that all of the BBfR’s requirements should be met in the further project development. Only then will they refrain from further legal action.
Asfinag’s legal representation rejected this request: Asfinag was subject to the scope of the audit office and had to justify all additional costs precisely. Since the objections of the project critics for additional compensatory measures cannot be argued from a technical point of view, they cannot be discussed further. The road builders thus maintained their course: the BBfR’s criticism that the Rainbach bypass was primarily a savings option, with reference to the careful use of tax money and adequate noise protection measures, has already been rejected.
In view of the already promised replacement measures (keyword: bat replacement areas) and protective structures, a building permit is now expected to be issued in the coming spring. It remains to be seen whether an objection will actually be raised against this decision, as indicated during the EIA negotiations. Then the Federal Administrative Court would have to deal with the matter. In this case, Rainbach’s mayor Gnter Lorenz expects the start of construction to be delayed further by around a year: “I ask everyone who is toying with this idea to think twice about this step.”
Warning of savings option
Klaus Reichinger, spokesman for the citizens’ movement for Rainbach, is satisfied with the course of the proceedings: “Our aim has always been to show why the additional measures we are calling for are necessary to protect neighbors.” In the past four years, 14 specific points have been defined as to how this can be achieved and these have also been incorporated into the current EIA procedure by lawyer List. “We do not want to be treated worse than the people in the wilderness, who have been protected from noise and pollutants by numerous engineering structures. That’s our concern, not the prevention of the S10-Nord. emphasizes Reichinger on request.
turned_in
info With a click on the icon you add the keyword to your topics.
–
turned_in
info
With a click on the icon you open your “my topics” page. They have of 15 keywords saved and would have to remove keywords.
–
turned_in
info With a click on the icon you remove the keyword from your topics.
–
turned_in
Add the topic to your topics.
–
–
–
