After the Europe-wide tender for the construction of a new wholesale market hall by an investor, there is still one applicant in the running, namely the Büschl group of companies from Grünwald. The SZ learned this from the non-public meeting of the city council on Thursday. Accordingly, in her oral presentation, municipal officer Kristina Frank (CSU) named the company that had publicly expressed its interest in the project last year. For this, according to the plan, the city would assign a plot of land on the wholesale market site on Schäftlarnstraße in Sendling with leasehold rights. The Büschl Group, which has only roughly commented on its project so far, wants to build a building complex with a wholesale market in the lower area and an as yet unspecified number of apartments above it.
In the draft resolution on the result of the tender available to the SZ, municipal officer Kristina Frank writes that six companies have “registered as potential applicants on the tendering platform”. Two ultimately submitted an application. A law firm commissioned with the award procedure checked the documents to see whether “the suitability criteria were proven and fulfilled”, with the result that “only one applicant fulfilled the required criteria”, “therefore only this can be admitted to the further procedure”.
It is not known whether Stadtwerke München (SWM), which had publicly expressed interest in advance, failed with their application or whether they did not try. The municipal company did not comment on this when asked. After Frank announced the result in the city council, there was no debate on the subject.
Rents should stay low. But is that possible?
The success of the investor model decided by the old city council in 2018 and 2019 is dependent on the city coming to an agreement with the Büschl Group, which is one of the largest private housing developers in Munich, and a new city quarter with 1100 at the Paketposthalle Apartments, 3000 jobs and two 155 meter high-rise buildings. This involves a heritable building right contract with a previously targeted duration of 60 years for the property and a concession contract for the new construction and operation of the wholesale market. The negotiations on this are now the next step in the award procedure.
But it will also depend on whether the retailers who have previously rented their space from the city and will have to rent it from the new operator of the wholesale market in the future will take part in the solution. On the one hand, it would be important for the new wholesale market to be completed by the target of 2030, so that the old, dilapidated halls can be abandoned. On the other hand, it will depend on the conditions of the new leases. It is the city’s declared will that rents remain low. But some observers doubt whether a private investor can realize this in view of the complex construction project with high construction costs.
One aspect that could also cause discussion in this context is that the city can only conclude the concession contract for the operation of the new wholesale market for 30 years for legal reasons. After that, there is “basically no obligation to operate the wholesale market,” wrote municipal officer Frank in a non-public submission at the start of the tender. The investor could then “in principle freely dispose of the components and areas intended for the wholesale market”, i.e. theoretically also close the wholesale market and start another, more lucrative use. The city can also secure the operation of the wholesale market beyond 30 years if it rents the space, writes Frank.
The economics officer suggests moving to the outskirts
It is also currently unclear what will become of the initiative by economics officer Clemens Baumgärtner (CSU), who brought up the idea of building a new wholesale market on the outskirts of the city in the SZ a week ago and dedicating the site in Sendling to housing construction. Baumgärtner sees too many imponderables in the investor project and fears that retailers could leave Munich. However, the municipal department and planning department had stated that an examination had shown that no alternative locations were “immediately” available.
The departments left unanswered the question as to whether they could rule out that land would be available in two to five years. The presentations also do not directly address the question of whether a municipal container storage site in Riem, which was once under discussion as a location for a TSV 1860 stadium, was examined. However, you say that possible plots of land near the trade fair “did not meet the requirements”.