Archive post: »Remarkable how the city council of Sønderborg discriminates« · 2024-07-26

• Bo Vistisen — Mentioned in the current archived text
• Peter Hansen — Mentioned in the current archived text

Source title: Bemærkelsesværdigt, hvordan byrådet i Sønderborg forskelsbehandler

Text version dated 26 Jul 2024

Det er bemærkelsesværdigt, hvordan byrådet i Sønderborg tilsyneladende udviser en markant forskelsbehandling, når det kommer til bevarelsen af historiske bygninger. I Bo Vistisens debatindlæg "Kondemneret" rejser han spørgsmål ved beslutningen om at lade det gamle pakhus på Havnen 2 i Augustenborg forfalde og til sidst rive det ned. Dette sker trods pakhusets høje SAVE-værdi på 3, som gør det bevaringsværdigt.

Den tidligere ejer af pakhuset havde gentagne problemer med at få fjernet bygningen, og det synes at være uklart, hvor alle forhandlingerne med kommunen er blevet af. Mon ikke det har været en del af forhandlingerne, at kommunen køber grunden og fjerner bygningerne for skatteydernes penge, og sørger for at alle begrænsningerne fjernes. Hvis sælger ikke vil sælge, så skal Venstre nok sørge for, at det bliver bøvlet.

Den tidligere ejer har af flere omgange forsøgt at nedrive bygningerne. Nu kommer kommunen til at stå for nedrivning af det gamle pakhus, og skatteyderne betaler. Helt rimeligt, dog ikke det man normalt forbinder med et UNESCO-kulturarvsområde.

Skansegården er en anden sag. Denne bygning, også bevaringsværdig med en høj SAVE-værdi, er blevet forsømt af den tidligere ejer. Her sørgede Venstre for, at forsømmelsen blev den nye ejers problem.

Det er bemærkelsesværdigt, at Venstre, som nu taler om at få Augustenborg Hertugby anerkendt som UNESCO-kulturarvsområde, ikke har brugt mere tid og ressourcer på at forklare, hvorfor pakhuset skal nedrives. JydskeVestkysten har vist overraskende lidt interesse for de forsvundne SAVE-værdier – måske fordi det har noget at gøre med, hvem den nye ejer er. Der er noget besynderligt ved, at den omfattende dokumentation ofte forsvinder i Sønderborg, og sagsbehandlingen synes at være præget af åbenlys favorisering afhængigt af ejeren.

Hvordan hænger dette sammen med Venstres udmelding om at løfte Augustenborg Hertugby til et UNESCO-kulturarvsområde, når de samtidig tillader nedrivning af historiske bygninger for at bygge moderne lejligheder? Konkursrytteren Peter Hansen (V) udtalte engang, at "Sønderborg er ikke Korsbæk" – men det ser ud til, at selv i Korsbæk havde magthaverne ikke fantasi til de ting, der sker i Sønderborg. Kondemneret ejendom! https://www.sonderborgnyt.dk/debat-kondemneret-ejendom/

This is an automatic reading translation. The source’s allegations and assessments have not been independently confirmed through translation. Check wording, qualifications and meaning against the preserved Danish original. Some retained numbers may use Danish separators: a dot for thousands and a comma for decimals. Check amounts against the Danish original.

Remarkable how the city council of Sønderborg discriminates 

It is remarkable how the city council of Sønderborg appears to show marked discrimination when it comes to the preservation of historic buildings. In Bo Vistisen's debate post "Condemned", he raises questions about the decision to let the old warehouse at Havnen 2 in Augustenborg fall into disrepair and eventually tear it down. This is despite the warehouse's high SAVE value of 3, which makes it worthy of preservation.

The previous owner of the warehouse had repeated problems with getting the building removed, and it seems to be unclear where all the negotiations with the municipality have gone. I wonder if it was part of the negotiations that the municipality buys the land and removes the buildings for taxpayers' money, and ensures that all the restrictions are removed. If the seller doesn't want to sell, then Venstre will probably have to make sure it gets hassled.

The previous owner has tried several times to demolish the buildings. Now the municipality will be responsible for the demolition of the old warehouse, and the taxpayers will pay. Quite reasonable, but not what you normally associate with a UNESCO heritage site.

Skansegården is another matter. This building, also worthy of preservation with a high SAVE value, has been neglected by the previous owner. Here Venstre ensured that the neglect became the new owner's problem.

It is remarkable that Venstre, who is now talking about having Augustenborg Hertugby recognized as a UNESCO cultural heritage site, has not spent more time and resources explaining why the warehouse needs to be demolished. JydskeVestkysten has shown surprisingly little interest in the missing SAVE values – perhaps because it has something to do with who the new owner is. There is something odd about the fact that the extensive documentation often disappears in Sønderborg and the case management seems to be characterized by obvious favoritism depending on the owner.

How does this relate to Venstre's announcement to elevate Augustenborg Hertugby to a UNESCO heritage site, when at the same time they allow the demolition of historic buildings to build modern apartments? The serial-bankruptcy entrepreneur Peter Hansen (V) once stated that "Sønderborg is not Korsbæk" – but it seems that even in Korsbæk the powers that be had no imagination for the things that happen in Sønderborg.

Condemned property: https://www.sonderborgnyt.dk/debat-kondemneret-ejendom/