After intense public debate, Uznach clearly says NO to community input on the A15 regional link road.
Uznach local council publishes this press release:
“Without a vote without a vote of 57.0 percent, the voters of Uznach rejected the municipal contribution to the regional link road A15-Gaster on Sunday, November 24, 2024. The municipal contribution to the regional link road A15-Gaster was rejected with a negative vote of 57.0 percent. Voter turnout was 63.4 percent.
Disappointing advice
The local council spoke out in favor of the relief project and are disappointed with the outcome. He wants to carefully analyze over the next few weeks what exactly led to the non-vote. It will be the task of the newly established local council from next year 2025 to answer the question of what will happen in traffic planning.
Aware that the A15-Gaster regional link road has not only advantages but also disadvantages, the local council gave greater consideration to the benefits in a thorough full assessment and supported the project with conviction.
Voting is part of democracy
However, it was important for the local council to democratically legitimize the community’s contribution. That is why he campaigned for an adjustment to the municipal code, which made ballot voting possible. With the results of the voting now available, the electorate says “no” to the previous approach.
Transport strategy was questioned
Félix Brunschwiler, President of the Lake Zurich-Linth region, recalled the regional approach of the project at the orientation of the media. Aware that the traffic problems in and around Uznach can only be solved throughout the municipality, the Lake Zurich-Linth region adopted a regional traffic concept back in 2009.
The Uzner center bypass is listed as one of the main features. Brunschwiler regrets the result of the vote. It asks a fundamental question about the transport strategy of Uznach and the surrounding communities.
There is no plan B in the drawer
There is no plan B that you can simply pull out of the drawer. According to Manfred Huber, project manager at the St Gallen Civil Engineering Authority, the government will analyze and calmly assess the situation in the coming weeks. We will inform you of the next steps in due course.”
What potential alternatives could replace the A15 regional link road after Uznach’s no vote?
Interview: The Implications of Uznach’s No Vote on the A15 Regional Link Road
Time.news Editor: Welcome to our discussion today, where we dive deep into the recent decision by Uznach voters to reject community input on the A15 regional link road. Joining me is Dr. Eliane Keller, a transport policy expert and academic from the University of Zurich. Thank you for being here, Dr. Keller.
Dr. Keller: Thank you for having me! It’s a pleasure to discuss such an important topic.
Editor: Let’s start with the basics. The voters of Uznach rejected the municipal contribution to the A15-Gaster link road by a significant margin – 57%. What are the implications of this decision for local traffic planning?
Dr. Keller: This decision certainly sends a strong message. With a turnout of 63.4%, it’s clear that local residents are engaged but also concerned. The rejection of the project means that the local council will need to reconsider their approach to traffic planning entirely. They must address community concerns seriously to foster trust and collaboration moving forward.
Editor: The local council expressed disappointment regarding the outcome. What do you believe were some of the factors that led to this rejection?
Dr. Keller: There are several potential factors to consider. First, there may have been a lack of sufficient communication regarding the benefits of the project. Local communities often fear the impact of infrastructure projects on their daily lives, including noise and air pollution. Moreover, if residents feel that their needs weren’t adequately represented or considered during the planning phase, it can lead to strong opposition.
Editor: That makes a lot of sense. The local council plans to analyze the reasons behind the non-vote before the newly established council takes over in 2025. What methods do you think they should employ to gather this feedback?
Dr. Keller: It’s crucial for the council to engage in a transparent dialog with the community. They could conduct surveys, hold public forums, and even establish focus groups to gather insights into community sentiment. It’s important to genuinely listen to the concerns and ideas of residents. Only through this inclusive approach can they design strategies that align better with the community’s needs and expectations.
Editor: Looking ahead, what do you think the next steps should be for the new municipal council regarding traffic planning?
Dr. Keller: The incoming council should prioritize rebuilding trust with the community. This starts with transparent communication and includes involving residents in the planning process from the outset. They should also consider alternative solutions or adjustments to the original A15 project that might mitigate concerns while still addressing traffic issues in the region.
Editor: In your opinion, what broader lessons can other municipalities learn from Uznach’s experience?
Dr. Keller: Uznach’s experience highlights the importance of community involvement in local planning. Infrastructure projects can significantly affect residents’ lives, so it’s vital for councils to actively engage with the community to understand their perspectives. This incident serves as a reminder that community support is not just beneficial but essential for the success of such initiatives.
Editor: Thank you, Dr. Keller, for sharing your insights on this significant decision and its implications for the community of Uznach and beyond. We appreciate your expertise!
Dr. Keller: Thank you for having me! I look forward to seeing how the new council navigates these challenges.