They have to get away ...

They have to get away, and very fast

Actually allotment gardens are particularly protected. But as was the case in Kaufering, tenants have to leave their parcels from one day to the next by Gerald Modlinger

Micro-apartments instead of allotments: Within a few days, the allotment gardeners on Kauferinger Bahnhofstrasse have to vacate their plots of land in the middle of winter. With the date of 5 December, their landlord, the non-profit organization Bahn-Landwirtschaft, has terminated their notice without observing a deadline of 30 November. The property had previously been sold to the Landsberger property developer inventus. And now he wants to access the approximately 3300 square meter area at Kauferinger Bahnhof. Earthworks are to be carried out already during the winter, so that the actual construction work can begin in the spring, announces investor Peter Kerler.

What is happening in Kaufering these days, it should not be so. Because allotments are under a special protection - actually. But as is often the case in individual cases is not so clear.

The said allotments are located on former property of the Federal Railways. They were eventually transferred to the company founded by the railway company Aurelis. The former railway company is now in the hands of private investors.

The Kauferinger allotments have been on their sales list for years: In May 2013, for example, Carmen Iacone, one of the allotment gardeners, got the offer from Aurelis Real Estate Management to buy her parcel. However, there was a catch: "My 250 square meters would have cost 70,000 euros," says Iacone.

Then a preliminary construction request was made for two apartment buildings or two four-in-hand. Both Kaufering and the district administration gave their plazet for such a development. The allotment garden could now be offered as building land. Since then, many interested parties have looked around the place, recalls Carmen Iacone. Most of them would have left their mark, not only on suspected land contamination, but also because the allotment gardeners pointed to the special circumstances of this property: six months' notice on November 30th, and then perhaps repayment claims and the disposal of pergolas, greenhouses, and others Things; matters.

Landsberg investor Peter Kerler did not shy away from this. The purchase was sealed in August, he reports. Previously, in January, Aurelis had already terminated the lease agreement with the Association Bahn-Agriculture on 30 November this year. Now the railroad agriculture would have had to give notice to its sub-tenants, the Kaufinging allotment gardeners, with a six-month notice. That did not happen. Instead, an immediate termination followed.

How the railway agriculture got cold feet

Karl-Heinz Bendner, the managing director of the Association of Railway Agriculture in Munich, has a simple explanation from his point of view. The dismissal pronounced against his club by Aurelis was in his opinion not legally effective. The company justified the termination by referring to paragraph 34 of the Building Code. Clause 34 means a buildable interior. But allotments are legally outside areas, "no matter how big they are," says Bendner. Because the dismissal was considered ineffective, the allotment gardeners had not been terminated.

A change brought then a letter of the new owner Peter Kerler of 3. November, reports Bendner. In it he had informed him that he would like to take over the vacated area in Kaufering after 30 November. When the railroad agriculture then presented their legal opinion, a lawyer letter had arrived, which threatened an eviction action and claims for damages against the board members of the railway agriculture. "That prompted me to announce a termination to the sub-tenants without notice," says Bendner.

But if, according to the opinion of the railway agriculture, the dismissal against them is not legally effective, why should the sublease be deducted without a time limit? Bendner begins to tell, "On the high seas and in court ..." And he makes it clear that the club is definitely fighting for its members. Six to nine court hearings are in the year, sometimes over all instances. Often one is subject, especially before the district court and the Higher Regional Court in Munich, says Bendner. The judges are often little familiar with the allotment garden law, he would not comment on the case law, which usually follows the investors. Lost processes often cost five-figure euros, and if he was too risky, he would not go to court, Bendner continues.

The Kauferinger risk

Kaufering is such a risk for him. For to the question indoor or outdoor there are two answers in this case. Although the principle applies that allotment gardens are "planning law not building areas". For example, in a technical report from the Standing Conference, the garden director of the German Association of Cities and Towns states. The Federal Association of German Garden Friends also assesses such areas in principle as an outdoor area, but limits: "For indoor use, the area only if their construction, imposing '." In Kaufering at least evaluated both the municipal construction office as well as the district office, the allotments as an indoor area , In this respect, the company Aurelis could in this specific case at their dismissal certainly refer to paragraph 34.

The gardeners are now as quickly as possible to clear their land, reduce their huts and greenhouses, dig up plants. The new owner offered to send them two workers at his own expense. "I'm really sorry for the people," says Peter Kerler, "we are not rigors who are on it, and make no eviction action," he assured after a conversation with the allotment gardeners.

Directly to the Landsberger Tagblatt