- The test criteria for the implementation of the social preservation statute in the “Alte Südstadt” conservation area are designed to be more transparent for citizens and in a coarser grid for easier approval. This means that the test criteria should be defined more generously or partially deleted.
- Changes to the floor plan of apartments should remain subject to approval.
- Extensions of living space, e.g. Increases in owner-occupied property should continue to be approvable, taking into account the size of the family.
- The municipal council decides on an intensive monitoring of the southern part of the city, which observes the real estate market in the “old southern part of the city”. The conservation statute is only used as a suitable instrument when intervention is necessary. This requires a new decision by the municipal council, taking into account the monitoring and the presentation of the resulting effects.
- The social preservation statute comes into effect for a period of three years from its inception and, after evaluation, will be presented again to the municipal council for further approval.
The social preservation statute for the southern part of the city was initiated by the majority of the municipal council to counteract gentrification in the district. The statutes that are now available can help investors shy away from luxury renovations, as they involve an enormous amount of bureaucracy in order to comply with the regulations. In addition, the statutes in the current version also contain some disadvantages for the traditional population in the southern part of the city and in the development as a quarter. This also includes climate-related renovations or upgrading for the living space as well as possible floor plan changes for the optimized use of living space. This does not affect large investors, but in some cases mainly families. New bureaucratic hurdles are set up and bureaucratic efforts are introduced on the part of the city without developing the district in a sustainable manner. This is also a cost.
The proposal contains three proposals. A coarser version of the criteria to keep the actual goal of the Social Preservation Statute in view of gentrification in focus, without preventing organic development of the quarter. In the second point, we propose stronger monitoring without the adoption of the statute. This then serves as a completed instrument as a last resort should the monitoring identify an intervention by large investors and the associated gentrification. In the third point, the statute should initially be in force for a period of three years when point 2 takes effect or through the appointment of the municipal council, in order to be able to monitor the effects more closely or to adjust the statute based on the findings. We propose a separate vote on all the points mentioned in this amendment.