The place name sign at the northern end of Unterhaching attests the proximity: It is only 0.5 kilometers to Munich. A stone’s throw, one would say. And so it is perhaps not at all surprising that the city sees the community on its south-eastern edge as an appendage, as a suburb, in its planning. People there are therefore alarmed when their big neighbor develops future scenarios, such as the current urban development plan 2040. The residents of Unterhaching have taken a close look at the plans right on their doorstep and see conflicts and therefore a need for improvement. They fear that many a problem will simply be passed on to the small neighbors. Above all, they want to be taken seriously and call for talks “at eye level”.
From their point of view there is still a lot to talk about. About green spaces. “When working through the drafts, the impression is created that the balance between the settlement area and the open space is intended to create the surrounding area,” was the statement in Unterhaching’s town hall. How did the “Local Development” department there come up with it? Head of department Stefan Lauszat recently made it clear to the municipal council that no larger parks are planned in the city planning. Those looking for relaxation would be directed to the outskirts and the surrounding area.
Many Munich residents are already cavorting in the Hachinger Tal landscape park.
(Photo: Claus Schunk)
For example in the landscape park Hachinger Tal, where the visitor pressure is growing. A survey has shown that 40 percent of the people who are out and about there with their dogs come from Munich. People in Unterhaching take a critical view of this, especially with regard to species and nature conservation, and they think that the city of Munich itself should create more green spaces, both smaller open spaces and connected areas.
The residents of Unterhaching are also not entirely happy with the planning of the transport connections. Although they also advocate a rapid cycle connection to the city, but not along the S3 S-Bahn line. Above all, they warn of a bottleneck at the station forecourt and rather call for a better linking of the cycle paths. They have a few suggestions: a path that leads straight ahead at Fasanenpark station, the continuation of the cycle path on Biberger Strasse and a fast connection to Munich via Stadelheimer Strasse.
Unterhaching is also not satisfied with the rail connection. Sure, there is the S-Bahn. But an extension of the U1 from Mangfallplatz to the community is also considered sensible there, but not to the Harlaching clinic. And should the people of Munich reduce their parking spaces and car lanes, as proposed, Unterhaching sees the surrounding communities as the losers of such measures. Then even more long-term parkers would park their mobile homes and vans in the district.
The city sees development potential in the former “American settlement” in Perlacher Forst in the Fasangarten district.
(Photo: Alessandra Schellnegger)
The alarm bells are also ringing in Unterhaching when you look at the development opportunities in Munich’s residential areas. Because there the “settlement at the Perlacher Forst”, which is known to most under the name “American settlement”, is designated as a “potential area”. In Unterhaching, this is seen as problematic in that “population growth in an urban area that borders another municipality can of course affect the balance of housing, employment and services in that municipality,” warns the administration.
59 Munich children and young people are currently attending the Unterhaching primary and secondary school at the sports park. That’s at least 2.36 classes. The municipality is in the process of extending the relatively new school building with an extension. The grammar school is also too small and gets an additional wing of the building. 129 students from the state capital are currently attending the Lise-Meitner-Gymnasium. This corresponds to 4.3 classes. Unterhaching says quite clearly: “The admission of further guest school children is not possible from a spatial and educational point of view and should therefore be rejected.”
Even when it comes to caring for smaller children, the community has long seen itself at the limit. In the past five years, the number of children under the age of three has increased by 28 percent. The number of kindergarten children looked after is approaching the thousand mark. The numbers are also increasing in the afternoon care for elementary school students. The community expects 1,200 children in the various facilities by the end of the 2020s. “We no longer have the air to cover urban needs,” said Lauszat. The city must not believe that someone will solve the problems. To this end, the head of the department sent a resolute “No!” over the city limits.
If the city reduces parking spaces and car lanes, the surrounding communities fear even more long-term parkers like here on Albert-Schweitzer-Strasse in Unterhaching.
(Photo: Claus Schunk)
So the situation is tricky. Because the municipality also knows: “If the city can hardly create any more living space, the pressure on the surrounding area will increase. However, if living space is to be created ‘at any price’, the issues such as social infrastructure, the need for leisure and sports areas, desire for nature and relaxation in the surrounding area and lead to problems there,” she writes in her statement on the draft of the urban development plan. “They should breathe the spirit that we want to work on an equal footing,” emphasized Unterhaching’s mayor, Wolfgang Panzer (SPD). It is important that Unterhaching is not seen as a mini-partner, Lauszat also said: “The aim is a voting process with the Munich city council.”