Three residents have initially failed in their lawsuits against the expansion of the special educational support center in Thalkirchen before the Bavarian administrative court. As neighbors, they opposed two positive preliminary building permits from the state capital of Munich, which had approved an expansion of the existing center in the area of Allescher- and Becker-Gundahl-Straße.
However, the plaintiffs’ argument that only one “primary school” was permitted in the development plan, which has existed since 1972, was ineffective. According to the court, the type of use is not affected by the preliminary building permits. That’s what the next step is, namely the building permit process, as the 8th Chamber, chaired by Judge Josef Beil, determined.
In applications for preliminary planning permission, potential builders can, for example, ask what is possible before submitting a building application. For example, to what extent they may deviate from the provisions of a development plan. For example, the extent of the structural use of a property or whether storeys may be higher. The development plan in this case envisages four floors, two variants for a maximum of five or six are requested. In the future, 460 pupils will be taught at the location instead of 50. Newly planned are 24 remedial classes, three groups of a school preparatory facility and a house for children with two crèche and three kindergarten groups.
However, future use was not the subject of the preliminary building permits. The exemption from the stipulations of the development plan only refers to the floor area and not to what comes later in the building. Only what was queried is binding, said Beil. In addition, the interests of the neighbors would not be violated because neighbors outside the area could not claim protection. A plaintiff’s property was undeveloped, that of a plaintiff far away and another house was built after 1972. He wanted to know from the plaintiffs what the actual motivation was.
If the planning application is made, more lawsuits could come
The plaintiffs insisted that a special educational support center was not an “elementary school” as stipulated in the development plan. The preliminary decision of the city is also too vague. Their representatives sat relatively relaxed at the table. The plaintiffs themselves did not come to the hearing. She represented Thomas Schönfeld as attorney-at-law.
“In the early 1970s, elementary schools were considered elementary schools, secondary schools and middle schools,” said lawyer Schönfeld. “Legally, it doesn’t matter whether it’s judged differently today.” Judge Beil did not like to follow that. Schooling is compulsory in Germany and that applies to all children, said Beil. The argument that a special needs school is not one of them is “disappointing these days”.
After telephone consultations with his clients, lawyer Schönfeld finally withdrew the three lawsuits against the preliminary building permits. The court discontinued the proceedings. However, in the dispute over the massive expansion of the special school location, further proceedings should be expected – at least as soon as the building application has been submitted. “Then there may be more lawsuits,” lawyer Schönfeld had announced earlier in the hearing.