In Switzerland, is built and built. Annually, 2700 football fields, the settlement area since 1983, as the Federal office for statistics announced in November. It is this growth – almost 2000 hectares per year, the young Greens, the main argument in favour of the plebiscite on 10. February: The Zubetonierung of the country is to be prevented, ergo there is a need for the people’s initiative, “ urban sprawl stop”.
If the voting citizens approve of the concern, will be capped by the floor of the personal living spaces available, in the future strictly. In fact, the roughly 230’000 hectares would, according to the latest Federal statistics, the Federal government (in 2017) may be built or are already built over, to a kind of upper limit. New land may incur the initiative’s text only in the case of a one-to-One compensation: A non-built space of equal value and the extent must elsewhere be excluded from the construction zone.
landscape protection Switzerland decides on a Yes-Parole
The young Green company was a new start for a concern, a few years ago to the debate. The so-called landscape initiative demanded that the building area is not allowed to at least grow for a period of 20 years.
all The more striking is it, therefore, that the leading force behind the Initiative is missing today on the list of backers of the young Greens. The Foundation for landscape protection Switzerland has decided not to sprawl initiative, namely, the Yes-word, but only voting share.
criticism from its own stock
In a position paper the Foundation released this week, it has on the urban sprawl initiative, forthright criticism. Parts, although the objective to limit the construction areas. However, with a strict Ceiling for the Construction threatens to shift in accordance with the landscape conservationists where you want them least: in rural communities with partially oversized building zones. If it is in the population of cities rich very hard is possible to create new building land, the benefit of the builders, just the reserves in the country – so the idea with the Foundation for landscape protection.
image to enlarge
Raimund Rodewald, managing Director of the Foundation, would now like to give the new spatial planning act a Chance. “An excellent law, also in comparison with foreign countries” – and for Rodewald and his comrades-in-arms the reason why in 2013 withdrew their landscape initiative. The law, by Parliament as a counter-proposal designed, is also directed against the urban sprawl, however, with a more flexible and differentiated resources: Where reserves of building land are too big, they should be reduced in size, and with more value if you want to prevent taxes on that land speculators feel overly large incentives for new Einzonungen. Currently, the last cantons to revise their lesson plans to you by the Federal government to approve. Rodewald fear that one might throw to sprawl initiative, the planning process back years.
The main problem locates Rodewald currently, anyway not in the building zones, but outside the same where it’s actually green should stay, there is a construction boom. “But, of all things, for Building outside the development zones, the urban sprawl initiative does not provide for targeted measures,” he Rodewald. He also has a fear that the Initiative could lead to increased pressure on protected sites.
Initiator “slightly surprised”
About the lack of Support Lucjan Franzini, Co-President of the young Greens of Switzerland, “slightly surprised”. Other organisations, such as WWF, Pro Natura and the VCS would support the concern. The Foundation for landscape protection, not more pronounce differently than in the past, for a building ceiling, can be explained Franzini with the presence of bourgeois politicians in the Board of Trustees – including the Bernese BDP-States Werner Luginbühl, who was a few years ago a proposal to simplify the realization of building projects in protected nature.
Rodewalds fear that the Initiative could lead to more Baudruck in remote valleys, Franzini. “If that were to actually happen, would have implemented the Parliament of our Initiative, very bad and completely against your Ghost.” There is enough land reserves to move to the place where you most likely would be needed. Anyway, Franzini refers to the Initiative, not as a replacement for the new spatial planning act – but as a much-needed Supplement.
Lucjan Franzini of the criticism of the landscape, preservationists don’t want too high of importance. The voting share of the Foundation remains, of course, bad news for the initiators, since they are politically largely alone. Really, they are supported only by the Greens. The SP does, it is already severe, and the Civil reject the concern as a business hostile and inflexible.
(editing Tamedia)
Created: 04.01.2019, 22:07 PM
