"Wild growth at the Wörthersee" - statement on the article in the small newspaper

2023-09-01 06:19:25

Incorrect statements and information from the municipality of Krumpendorf on the planned construction project – the photo montage presented also does not correspond to the plans of the property owner.

Klagenfurt, Vienna (OTS) – The statements and information from the municipality of Krumpendorf and its mayor on the planned construction project (link below) published in the “Kleine Zeitung” in mid-August were read with astonishment by the property owner and their representatives:

It is incomprehensible why the community speaks of “wild growth”. On the property are currently Detached houses with main residence in the middle price range planned, which can also afford community residents – the interests of the community have already been incorporated into the planning – the information quoted in the article is incorrect.
The potential (maximum permissible) buildability according to the photo montage does not correspond to the property owner’s plans. This was also communicated to the community.
The property owner or their legal and economic representatives for years in touch with the community; the mayor himself was last personally present on the property for a meeting with several witnesses on May 8, 2023 – the information quoted in the article is incorrect.
Because of the new partial development plan, TBP, the Municipal supervision of the state of Carinthia already working for the municipality of Krumpendorf; due to constant formal errors in the publication, this has now been announced for the 3rd time.
The municipal supervisory authority of the state of Carinthia also became active because of the “building ban” mentioned in the article – or it was only lifted by the municipality this summer, although the building ban had already expired at the beginning of the year and led to an inadmissible restriction of ownership.
In addition, the mayor speaks in the article of a new TBP, the “like an expropriation” would have an effect on the property owner, and that he “expects a lawsuit that will last for years”. We read the existing legal understanding with great astonishment. It would in future processes not just correct administrative decisions or civil law (liability) claims against the municipality or its representatives – but certainly also to check the official understanding of the people involved.
However, it is absolutely correct that the planned TBP designated use as building land in large areas excludes – as a result, this looks like an expropriation. This corresponds to the attitude of the community expressed to the representatives of the property owner, according to which development is simply not desired – even at the expense of the community residents, for whom the property would offer an attractive living space.