1/5
In the summer of 2020, the construction profiles for a single-family house were set up in the hamlet of Geimen near Naters, …
Martin SchmidtEditor Economics
When the Spatial Planning Act (RPG) was implemented, millions of national assets in Valais vanished into thin air. The law hits a young family in Naters VS particularly hard. After she had found and bought the perfect building land for her dream house after a long search, the Foundation for Landscape Conservation Switzerland (SL) and Pro Natura appealed. The municipality of Naters should first wrap up its rezoning, and said plot should be zoned out in the valuable water/meadow landscape anyway, according to manager Raimund Rodewald (63). The rezoning requirement in Naters is huge at 68 hectares.
The family wants to remain anonymous, everyone in the region knows each other. It’s been two and a half years since she submitted the planning application. And she still doesn’t know for sure whether it will ever be possible to build on the ground. According to the municipality, it should remain building land under certain conditions. But nothing is set in stone yet. The RPG implementation in the community is ongoing and must be voted on by the population. If the land is rezoned, the family would have to bury the purchase price, i.e. a good quarter of a million.
«David vs. Goliath»
Central National Councilor Philipp Matthias Bregy (44) is annoyed that a national foundation stands in the way of the dream of a family: “This case is one of the reasons why I want to limit the association’s right to complain about small projects.”
Bregy has submitted a proposal to the National Council, which is currently being developed into a bill by the responsible commission. In the future, associations should no longer be able to object to small individual projects within the construction zone. “This is an abuse of the association’s right of appeal. A powerful association with full coffers should not be able to take action against a young family. It’s an unequal duel,” says Bregy, who dubbed his advance “David versus Goliath.”
Raimund Rodewald counters the accusation of abusing the right to lodge a complaint. “We only speak to projects that involve a habitat that is worthy of protection and, as in Naters, an oversized building zone,” explains Rodewald. “In the Naters case, the canton and the municipality also rejected the building application for legal reasons.”
Three more cases in Schaffhausen
Rodewald is convinced that the case in Naters could have been avoided: “If the municipality had raised planning zones in good time, it would then have been clear where it was safe to build and where not.”
The SL, together with other environmental organizations in the city of Schaffhausen, has three other cases open. There she appealed against the construction of two single-family houses and one two-family house to protect dry meadows of national importance.
“But these are absolutely isolated cases,” emphasizes Rodewald. In the 53-year history of the foundation, this has only happened a few times. However, the small number of cases cannot reassure the leader of the middle group, Philipp Matthias Bregy. “With a large association as an opponent, many give up after the agreement negotiations,” he says. The young family, on the other hand, has not yet given up their building land.