Dispute over Augustuspark: Scharbeutzer biotope about to be destroyed?

Dispute over Augustuspark: Scharbeutzer biotope about to be destroyed?

Scharbeutz is in the headlines again, and this time it's about a heated dispute that has arisen over the 8,000 square meter area of ​​the Augustus Park. The park, which is characterized by tall trees, bushes and many animal species, was previously designated as a private park to protect the tree population. This decision was once made when the property was threatened with foreclosure. The community wanted to prevent potential investors from uprooting the valuable biotope and converting it into building land. However, this measure met with resistance, as many Scharbeutzer citizens demanded that the green space be preserved.

In September 2021, the property was auctioned for 580,000 euros. The only buyers were little-known bidders from Hamburg. Since then, concerns have remained that the park's pond could dry up, leading to further debate about the future treatment of the site. The WUB and the FBB, together with the FDP, submitted the application to designate the Augustus Park as a protected part of the landscape. The entire park, not just the prestigious trees, should be protected. Both the municipality's environmental and building committees voted in favor of this proposal.

The administration refuses “double protection”

Contrary to these efforts, the Scharbeutz administration expressed considerable concerns about this so-called “doubling” of protection for the area. A spokesman for the administration said that legal questions could arise about possible compensation if the protection status was tightened. There would be an obligation to buy back the area at market value, which could entail considerable financial risks for the municipality.

Another key point in these events is the accusation of bias against Henning Nitz, member of the FBB and the building committee. Nitz, partner of Renate Sonntag - who is also on the building committee and whose property is in the immediate vicinity of Augustus Park - took part in the votes to improve the protection status. This led to a complete examination of the questions of bias by the municipal supervisory authority. Mayor Bettina Schäfer (independent) reports that the supervisory authority has confirmed Nitz's bias twice. In counterpoint, Nitz insists that there is no conflict of interest.

Criticism and waiting for the nature conservation authority

The process surrounding bias has led to intensive discussions and to the administration, local authorities and lawyers having to deal with the issue. “The question arises as to what speaks against a stronger protective position for the park,” says Nitz, who sees himself as being unfairly attacked. Gabriele Jungk, the chairwoman of the Environment Committee, is angry about the debate and emphasizes that this discussion distracts from the actual goal of protecting and preserving the biotope.

The community is currently awaiting a statement from the nature conservation authority, which may influence further action. Until then, the resolutions on “double protection” for Augustuspark remain valid, which will continue to complicate the situation and continue to affect the various interest groups in Scharbeutz. The situation remains tense, and citizens can continue to wait eagerly for the next steps in the dispute over the future of Augustus Park.