Speakers
Description
Planning and law are two disciplines that are closely intertwined in practice, as legal norms have a decisive influence on planning processes and, conversely, they also change the interpretation and application of the law through everyday planning practices (Salet 2002: 26). The application of law plays a central role in planning practice for the success of a project. At the same time, spatial plan-ning in the transformation of urban spaces must fulfil the various demands and requirements for land use planning (Baumgart 2020: E 8). For example, analysing and managing noise conflicts is currently a key challenge for the inner development and redensification of urban spaces in Germany. This is because noisy locations, often along busy transport axes or close to commercial uses, are increasingly under planning development pressure in order to facilitate the housing construction that is urgently needed in Germany (Preuß et al. 2020: 167; Hellriegel & Artmann 2024: 702). It must be borne in mind that employees of a planning administration ensure the implementation of legal requirements, whereby different scopes of judgement and discretion arise in urban planning. The conflict of objectives between inner-city development and noise can become even more acute as densification progresses, as legal, technical and normative requirements are often complex and cont-radictory.
The current legal structures for the consideration and management of noise in German cities are described as confusing and opaque and are weighted differently, which overall makes the analysis and management of noise conflicts more difficult and leads to uncertainties in the planning process (Kment 2022: D 101; Lamker et al. 2017: 19-20). Even though there are comprehensive legal regulations, technical rules, calculation bases and acoustic guidance values for dealing with noise conflicts when planning new urban areas in Germany, noise is a major problem, particularly in urban land-use planning, which can often lead to the failure of development planning procedures (Dillmann et al. 2018).
Court decisions play a decisive role in this context: statutory regulations, standards and judgements are key elements for resolving such spatial conflicts. However, the uncertainties and ambiguities that exist in practice in the application of the law as well as technical difficulties in its interpretation often lead to inadequate management of noise conflicts and thus to a blockage of sustainable planning processes. The presentation addresses this issue and discusses the systematic analysis of court decisions as a planning science method in the German context. On the basis of an analysis of abstract standardisation control procedures, it is explained by way of example how sources of error in urban land-use planning can be identified that contribute significantly to the failure of urban land-use planning procedures due to noise conflicts. Supplemented by further methodological approa-ches, principles can be derived that can favour the successful design of planning processes. In this way, central methodological impulses for a transformative and legally secure spatial planning practice are identified. The systematic integration of court decision analyses into planning science and prac-tice is emphasised as the key to the further development of planning instruments and processes.
References
Baumgart, S. (2020): Die nachhaltige Stadt der Zukunft - Welche Neuregelungen empfehlen sich zu Verkehr, Umweltschutz und Wohnen? Gutachten E zum 73. Deutschen Juristentag. München: C.H. Beck.
Dillmann, O.; Mohrenstein, A.; Vielberg, A.; Zemke, R. (2018): Woran scheitern Bebauungspläne? Ergebnis einer bundesweiten Analyse von abstrakten Normenkontrollverfahren. Bau-recht, 2018(2). S. 179-188.
Hellriegel, M. & Artmann, N. (2024): Zur Abwägung von Lärmkonflikten in Gemengelagen. Besprechung der Entscheidung des BVerwG, Urt. v. 10.05.2022 – 4 CN 2.20, BauR 2022, 1607. Baurecht, 2024(5). S. 702-708.
Kment, M. (2022): Die nachhaltige Stadt der Zukunft - Welche Neuregelungen empfehlen sich zu Verkehr, Umweltschutz und Wohnen? Ergänzungen zum Gutachten D zum 73. Deutschen Juristentag. In: Ständige Deputation des Deutschen Juristentages (Hg.): Verhandlungen des 73. Deutschen Juristentages, Bonn 2022. München: C.H. Beck, D87-D110.
Lamker, C.; Rüdiger, A.; Schoppengerd, J. (2017): Gewerbelärm contra Nutzungsmischung. Zur Praxistauglichkeit des Urbanen Gebiets. RaumPlanung, 2017(2). S. 15-20.
Preuß, T.; Bunzel, A.; Hanke, S.; Michalski, D.; Pichl, J.; Steinrücke, E.; Janßen, A.; Riemer, E. (2020): Gute Praxisbeispiele kompakter und zugleich lärmarmer städtischer Quartiere. Reihe: Texte, 195/2020. Umweltbundesamt, Dessau-Roßlau.
Salet, W. G. M. 2002: Evolving Institutions: An International Exploration into Plan-ning and Law. In: Journal of Planning Education and Research, Jg. 22, H. 1: 26-35
| Keywords | planning and law; court decision analyses; noise conflicts; urban planning |
|---|---|
| Best Congress Paper Award | Yes |
