Noise against aircraft noise

Appeals of opponents of the airport expansion in Munich in court

01/10/2014

If airports are to be expanded, this causes in most cases fierce discussions, which often end in a lawsuit. Apart from health aspects, which are due to the noise pollution, opponents usually also cite aspects of environmental protection as grounds for refusal. This is also what happened in the process of the new runway at Munich Airport.

Although according to media reports only in February or March with a judgment to the planned airport extension is to be counted, the plaintiffs evaluated the past course of proceedings around the third runway at the airport Munich, as confirmation of their arguments. In particular, the need for enlargement was not given and was therefore „to justify the interference with the rights of the applicants“, quotes the news agency „dpa“ the argument of the lawyer of the affected municipalities before the Bavarian administrative court. The noise pollution by flying jets over residential areas is therefore unacceptable. He called on the judges to take back the planning permission for the 1.2 billion euro expensive airport expansion. The advocate of the Federation of Nature Conservation in Bavaria e. V. (BN).

Nature destruction and health hazard
The chairman of the BN, Hubert Weiger, stated in a closing speech before the administrative court that in the light of the „Heavy nature destruction and health hazard“ the third runway should not have been allowed at all. The concerns were not refuted in the entire court proceedings, Weiger continued. In view of the fact that the number of aircraft movements has fallen to the level of 2003, because the machines are now larger and better utilized, no additional need can be identified here, said the BN chairman. In his closing remarks, Weiger came to the conclusion that the planned expansion contradicts all goals for the protection of man and nature, to which states have committed themselves on a national and international level. According to BN Species Protection Officer Christine Margraf, this also concerns the conservation of species, as the bird dying will continue with the expansion.

Noise pollution especially affects children
The chief administrators of the surrounding municipalities referred in their comments more to the aspect of aircraft noise, which meant significant burdens on their inhabitants. As the Freising Lord Mayor Tobias Eschenbacher said that he could understand the concerns well. Also, the citizens are unsettled due to the danger of falling over the city. The mayor of the municipality of Berglern, Herbert Knur, criticized the fact that the children were affected by the additional aircraft noise and that not even in the bedrooms of the nurseries was sufficient noise protection ensured. Similar is the charge of the Freisinger married couple Simone and Werner Oruche-Brand, who act as private claimants against the airport expansion. „Please consider the concerns of thousands of children“, so you appeal to the judges.

No need for an additional runway
The complaining citizens, environmental organizations and affected communities agree that the underlying forecasts of flight movements are flawed and do not reflect reality. The increase predicted here would by no means be achieved in view of the actually declining flight movements. As a member of parliament of the Greens and Freisinger BN district chairman Christian Magerl stressed that the airport company FMG with their forecasts „garnished next to it“ lie down and instead the loss of flight movements will continue. Here it is the FMG only „a luxury upgrade for Lufthansa, but not the need“, Magerl continues. How the judgment of the court will turn out, can be expected with tension. (Fp)

Picture: Dieter Hopf