Seelisberg: Halter defends himself against criticism of Sonnenberg project

Opposition is forming against the major project that Halter AG wants to realize around the historic Hotel Sonnenberg in Seelisberg (UR): The Lake Lucerne Landscape Conservation Association (LSVV) has called for a "new start in planning" for the CHF 200 million project.

In a press release published shortly before Christmas, the LSVV writes that a renovation of the historic hotel complex is indeed desirable. However, the approach of the project sponsors and the project proposal for new buildings at this "scenically exposed and sensitive location above the historic Rütli" is not convincing. According to the press release, a project of this magnitude at this location requires a broad public debate and, in particular, a qualified process involving several interdisciplinary planning teams.

On the one hand, Halter's project proposal envisages the preservation of the Sonnenberg and Kulm hotels. On the other hand, the complex is to be densified. A hotel with around 130 units and around 120 apartments will be built on four building plots, Halter announced at the presentation of the proposal at the beginning of November. The ensemble will be complemented by gastronomic offerings.

Owner rejects the accusations

Halter AG defends itself against these accusations. In a statement, the real estate company points out that "the municipal council of Seelisberg and the most important cantonal authorities as well as the local population" were involved in the planning process from the outset. The government council of the canton of Uri was also informed. When the project proposal was submitted, a preliminary inquiry was also made to the Federal Commission for the Protection of Nature and Cultural Heritage (ENHK) as part of a provisional preliminary review in order to obtain basic planning certainty and information for further processing at an early stage. Feedback is expected during the first quarter of 2024.

Halter is also fundamentally critical of the LSVV's approach: the accusations are abstract and cannot be verified by laypersons, the real estate company says. "The process issue is symptomatic here: if developers take the route of a competition in order to weigh up the interests at stake, the private conservation associations usually demand that an additional ENHK/EKD report be obtained after the competition has been concluded as part of the association's right of appeal in the hope of being able to kill the project in this way. If, as in this case, the developers come directly to the ENHK/EKD with a broadly supported project proposal drawn up by a top-class team of experts, the lack of an architectural competition is criticized, which unfortunately often serves more as an acquisition vehicle for the associations or their members and the maintenance of a fee cartel than quality assurance," the statement reads. (ah)