Berlin city goods

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Berliner Stadtgüter GmbH

logo
legal form state-owned GmbH
founding October 19, 1922, re-established: January 1, 2008
Seat Friedrichshain-Kreuzberg, Berlin
Frankfurter Allee
management Katrin Stary
Number of employees 35
Website www.berlinerstadtgueter.de

The Berlin city goods GmbH ( pronunciation ? / I ) is a commercially active real estate company . The central tasks include the management of Berlin's own urban estate in Brandenburg , the upgrading of built-up and undeveloped properties, the remediation of contaminated sites and the marketing of properties. The first Berliner Stadtgüter GmbH was a company of the city of Berlin , which was removed from the "Deputation for Goods and Forests" by the Berlin magistrate on October 19, 1922 . Audio file / audio sample

Beginnings of the Berlin city goods

The rapid increase in population from the middle of the 19th century and the associated urban development prompted the city of Berlin to build a comprehensive sewer system with sewage treatment. The city administration finally decided to irrigate the wastewater on specially prepared areas, the sewage fields . On March 16, 1873, the decisive city council decision was made for the purchase of these areas around what was then the city area. On July 14, 1874, the "Police Regulations Concerning the Canalization of the City of Berlin" came into force, which stated that "every built-up plot of land must be connected to a street pipe (street canal) on a street with an underground drainage system", which meant that enormous Areas were needed, the excrement of all residents should be trickled on them (one hectare for 250 residents).

The Charlottenburger Rieselfelder in Gatow and the city's sewer system around 1900

In 1874, the city of Berlin began buying land, mainly north and south of the city. The first to be bought were the manors Osdorf and Friederikenhof, followed by the Falkenberg and Bürknersfelde estates in 1875. Since irrigation proved its worth as a purification method, the surrounding communities began to build a sewer system with subsequent sewage fields. In 1886 , Charlottenburg was the first municipality to buy land in the districts of Gatow , Seeburg , Spandau , Staaken and Groß Glienicke , which later formed the Carolinenhöhe Rieselfeld.

But Berlin did not only buy land for trickling, which later came under the administration of the city's estates, also for garbage disposal ( Pinnow , Spreenhagen ), for the housing reform decided by the municipal authorities in 1924 (Ribbeckshorst, Joachimshof-Vogtsbrügge ), the creation and expansion of one Forest and meadow belts (e.g. Wuhlheide , Grunewald , Schönwalde, Buch  ...), for urban expansion ( Düppel , Britz , Biesdorf ) and for land price regulation, areas were acquired. All areas were administered and cultivated from 1886 to 1920 by the "Deputation for Sewer Works and Goods of Berlin". This company name also shows that the city goods belong together to the sewer system, which was only to be resolved in 1920.

Turn of the century to 1945

Deputation "Sewer Works and Goods of Berlin"

Since the wastewater still contained a lot of nutrients, the mostly light sandy soils of the sewage fields were well fertilized and the cultivation of agricultural crops became possible on them. Rieselgrass proved to be a successful cultivation, as it allowed several cuts per year, but only brought in little. With a lot of work, vegetables and cereals were also grown, which required more care than the grass and were also not very economical: Since the city estates were seen as the final link in the sewage treatment chain and not as independent businesses with the purpose of food production, their machinery was their equipment bad, there were only threshing sets and mowers. In addition, it was difficult to use machines on the small sewage fields. Even the use of oxen did not prove itself, as they were not agile enough, so horses were preferred.

The Rieselspeicher with remains of the old commercial railway in Hobrechtsfelde

It was not until 1905 that people changed their minds about the town's property and its function. With the aim of increasing yields and generating profits, the city of Berlin invested in the purchase of state-of-the-art machines, which meant that the goods were unusually well equipped, but also had machines that were unsuitable for the sewage fields.

But not only the stock of machines was extraordinarily complete, the structural condition of the courtyard buildings on the manors was also very good, as they were repeatedly repaired and renewed.

Since it was not always entire estates that were taken over, but the Boddinsfelde , Hobrechtsfelde , Schönerlinde , Albertshof and Deutsch Wusterhausen businesses were formed from purchased farms and communal lands, completely new farms were built there. The construction costs skyrocketed, as great importance was attached to a massive appearance of the building, but some turned out to be inexpedient. In 1908, for example, the Hobrechtsfelde estate received a trickle storage facility (the grain could trickle from one floor to the next) with a capacity of 18,000  quintals . The storage facility was state-of-the-art, but unfortunately it was too far away from the railway, so that transporting the grain to and from the storage facility ate up any profit.

Solidly built horse stable in Börnicke

Massive pig stalls were also built in which pig rearing should take place. However, as it was dripping from the ceiling of these “pig palaces” in winter, they were completely unsuitable for piglet rearing and could only be used for fattening. So-called “Lochow stables” were built for rearing.

In addition, exemplary buildings were also built, such as B. the many workers' apartments, which are characterized by high living comfort.

It should be noted that the urban estates by no means only cultivated sewage fields, but also had a lot of natural land in use, as not all areas were converted, i.e. H. were redesigned to sewage fields. Some of these areas were only acquired as reserve areas for possible extensions to the sewage areas. Artificial fertilizer was only used in the rarest of cases, where necessary it was fertilized with manure from cattle that were fed the rye grass. A special feature was an area near Fürstenwalde on which rubbish had been brought that had weathered over the years and made the soil extremely fertile. This landfill with an area of ​​240  acres was intensively farmed for years from 1915 onwards and nevertheless retained its fertility.

Experience showed that for optimal management of the goods a ratio of adapted area to non-adapted area of ​​1: 4 would be necessary, which only very few goods could achieve, as some consisted exclusively of natural land and others 90 percent of sewage fields. In order to still be able to work reasonably economically, Rieselland leased these estates to small tenants who cultivated vegetables or grass grass for their cattle by hand on the plots. The small tenants only paid for the land; with their lease they did not acquire any right to run-off water, but they also had no veto right if too much was poured onto their land.

The Rieselland was very popular among small tenants because they didn't have to worry about fertilizer, they could grow inexpensive fodder for their cattle and vegetables for sale in the market. The small-scale areas were not as problematic for these tenants as they were for the large farms, since they only worked by hand anyway. The Rieselland was also in high demand during the First World War , as was the allotment gardens on the Rieselfelders in Blankenfelde , Blankenburg and Osdorf . Food was scarce and, unlike other products, vegetables were not subject to any compulsory economy.

But not only small businesses kept livestock, the city estates were also large milk producers, some of whose milk was processed at the Weißensee dairy farm. Until 1919, the city estates operated purely for milking, then they switched to a combined rearing and milking management in order to avoid the introduction of diseases by foreign animals.

Hobrechtsfeld farmers mucking out

The Black Holstein lowland cattle were bred, only animals with a very good pedigree were taken in order to increase milk production. This also succeeded: in 1922/1923 milk production was 6.65 l / cow and day, in 1927/1928 it was 9.1 l / cow and day. But despite a total output of 18,000 l / day in summer and 14,000 l / day in winter, the milk production of the city's estates remained of minor importance for Berlin for the time being.

Deputation for goods and forests (1920–1922)

In 1920, the " Deputation for Sewer Works and Goods" was dissolved because the goods management wanted to separate from the sewer works in order to gain more independence. A "deputation for goods and forests" was then created

As a result of the merger of Berlin with several suburbs to form Greater Berlin , the land ownership of Berlin's municipal estates rose to over 32,000 hectares , of which 8,000 hectares were forest, 13,000 hectares were natural land  and 11,000 hectares were Rieselland.

Berliner Stadtgüter GmbH (1922–1935)

Overview of self-managed goods, 1928

On August 30, 1922, the Berlin city estates were exempted from all regulations of the magistrate in order to achieve greater mobility and commercial freedom. On October 19, 1922, the magistrate decided to found a Berlin Stadtgüter GmbH, which enjoyed commercial freedom, but to which municipal corporations always had to agree when it came to taking out fixed bonds, transferring the management of goods to third parties or leasing them whole goods went. The commercial court registration of the Berliner Stadtgüter-GmbH took place on April 5, 1923. A deputation for forests continued to exist.

Overview of the leased property, 1928

The next major expansion of the area took place in 1927 under the name Berliner Stadtgüter-GmbH: In the south, the goods Groß-Ziethen with 286 ha and Selchow with 601 ha were bought, in the east Berlin Vogelsdorf with 106 ha. In addition, parts of the manor became Münchehofe Dahlewitz enlarged. The main purpose of the expansion was to stock up on space. After all, around 3.6 million people in Greater Berlin were already connected to the sewer system at that time, and the pumping capacity per person per day was 162 liters.

Although not all goods were still profitable, the city estates often kept them in-house. Much land was leased to small tenants, so that in 1930 they cultivated 9,200 hectares.

Overview of the other possessions of the Berlin city goods, 1928

There are many reasons for Berlin's refusal to fully lease out the sewage areas in particular. The main reason was certainly that the town's estates were still used for sewage treatment. So there always had to be enough land that could be sprinkled if necessary to damage the agricultural crops. That would have been difficult with tenants. In addition, it was also true that a leaseholder had to own farmsteads, which would then have had to be rebuilt to a considerable extent, which in turn would have caused excessive follow-up costs. The third reason was that the tenants would have become the rents had all the land been leased. The city estates wanted to prevent this.

As already described, the city estates kept large quantities of cattle for milk and meat production. In addition, refined country pigs were also bred, in Hellersdorf there was a poultry farm whose performance poultry were also given to the farm workers. Sheep farming had established itself on the Rieselfeldern, but it played a minor role for the Berliner Stadtgüter-GmbH. The sheep were bought lean in spring, fattened on the paths and ditches between the sewage fields and sold again in autumn and winter. Another side effect of the trickle economy was the formation of ponds with trickle or drainage water, in which fish farming was successfully carried out, e.g. B. in Schönerlinde, as the name of the local nature reserve " Schönerlinder Teiche " makes clear.

Consumption and production of certain foods in Berlin, 1927

Despite the good machine equipment, horses were still kept on the town estates, as they were essential for the work on the small sewage tables. On comparable large farms, it was usual to have a tension of 2.2 horses per 100 acres, but in the case of non-polluting estates there were 3.4 horses per 100 acres, which was due to the extra work that resulted from the small tables. This high level of tension made it possible to set up an additional forwarding company during the low-work period.

The financial strength of the owner of Berliner Stadtgüter GmbH, Berlin, made it possible to continue to provide the city goods with unusually good equipment. By 1930 the electrification of all companies was already complete. Where there were no overhead lines, there were separate lighting systems.

Own operation of the city of Berlin (until 1949) I

After the Berliner Stadtgüter-GmbH was dissolved in 1935, the Stadtgüter was owned by the city of Berlin. Little is known about the self-management in the following war period due to the limited sources. It is certain that from 1941 Polish and Ukrainian forced laborers were employed on the Osdorf and Hobrechtsfelde estates and that a hospital for forced laborers was operated on a city estate in Mahlow between 1942 and 1945. In the "hospital of the capital in Mahlow, Kr. Teltow" in 1494 epidemic and seriously ill people died.

After the Second World War: East Berlin

Summary

The time of the GDR represented a very changeable phase in the history of Berlin's city goods. Never before and since have the goods been restructured and affiliations changed so often. Some goods and areas were converted, others were given up and the areas were used for urban expansion (e.g. in Rosenthal, Biesdorf, Mahlsdorf etc.). Farms and areas were expropriated and restructured into nationally owned goods (VEG), parts of the areas were incorporated into agricultural production cooperatives (LPG), while others were declared land reform land . Nevertheless, at the time of the political change, most of the urban estates were held together due to the large economic units and formed a unit that could later be taken over by the State of Berlin. Due to the preservation of the urban estate for the (sometimes intensive) agricultural use, a sharp boundary formed between the city and the rural environment, especially in the south between Teltow and Schönefeld. These urban open spaces enable a comparatively orderly development of the surrounding area (state development plan of joint state planning (LEP-BB)).

Own operation of the city of Berlin (until 1949) II

After the Second World War , the city estates fared rather badly. In May 1945 only 87% of the arable land had been cultivated, resources and animals had been abducted before the end of the war, managers had abandoned the goods and what was left of the inventory was stolen. However, some employees stayed at their workplaces and continued to manage the goods together with the local population. The stock of estates in May 1945 was as follows: eight urban estates in the urban area of ​​Greater Berlin, 20 urban estates with ancillary goods in Brandenburg, a dairy farm in Weißensee and a meat factory in Hobrechtsfelde, which, however, did not go back into operation.

Handover of the Großbeeren estate to the Germans by SMAD

Eight of the 28 goods went to the Soviet administration as auxiliary farms, but were returned to the magistrate until the GDR was founded : Blankenfelde, Deutsch-Wusterhausen, Schmetzdorf, Schöneiche, Schönerlinde, Tasdorf , Waßmannsdorf with Kleinziethen , Werben. The order of the commander-in-chief of the Soviet troops that the goods should be handed over to the GDR was issued on October 13, 1949 and was to be carried out between November 1, 1949 and November 15, 1949. The goods were also given agricultural machinery, equipment, inventory, draft and farm cattle, tractors, means of transport, seeds, fodder, fertilizer and bread grain for sowing.

Livestock of the Berlin city estates 1927–1953

There are only concrete figures for the cattle and the number of tractors, which indicate that 266 work horses, 40 foals, 1212 cattle, 437 cows, 909 sheep, 847 pigs, 120 breeding sows and 20 tractors were handed over.

In 1945 the city goods were converted into state-owned goods , VEG. In addition, the land reform was due in 1945 ; Berlin had voluntarily offered 2,000 hectares for this purpose, but 5,000 hectares were still included in the land reform fund. But 2,400 hectares, mainly Rieselland, were later returned to Berlin. For the missing 600 hectares, Berlin got the Pramsdorf estate, which was returned to Brandenburg in 1950.

The goods, which were owned by the city of Berlin in 1946, had a total of 16,460 hectares of usable agricultural area , 6,780 hectares of which were leased (not including the auxiliary farms of the Soviet administration). In terms of area, the largest estate in Berlin's urban estates at the time was Gut Sputendorf with 1,715 hectares of agricultural land, the smallest was Britz with just 184 hectares of agricultural land.

From 1948 the manors were repaired and expanded with new buildings such as greenhouses and stables. Prisoners' quarters were also built on Gut Stolpe .

VVG Berlin (1949–1953)

On September 1, 1949, the city of Berlin gave up its own operations. The VEG merged with the "Association of the Community Agricultural and Horticultural Society" to form the " Association of People's Own Goods ", VVG Groß-Berlin, which consisted of the following:

  • Berlin goods: Blankenfelde, Biesdorf, Buch, Buchholz, Falkenberg , Friedrichsfelde , Heinersdorf , Hellersdorf , Malchow , Rummelsburg , Weißensee
  • Brandenburg goods: Boddinsfelde, Deutsch-Wusterhausen, Großbeeren , Hobrechtsfelde, Karolinenhöhe, Kleinziethen, Osdorf, Schönerlinde, Selchow, Sputendorf, Wansdorf , Waßmannsdorf
  • Commercial operations: VEB sports field construction, Weißensee dairy, Buch central workshop, pig fattening

The central workshop in Buch was only founded in 1949. In 1949, the estates mainly grew cereals, potatoes and rye grass, but vegetables also played a not insignificant role. Furthermore, legumes, oil and fiber plants and root crops were grown to a relatively small extent.

The furnishings of the city estates, however, were nowhere near as good as had been thought. During a labor consultation with the farm managers in 1949, it was found that 50–60% of the tractors needed repair. Too many new buildings were started at the same time, so that building materials became scarce before the first was completed. For some of the foals there was not enough feed and there was a shortage of apprentices.

Problems were also discussed in the discussions in 1950: There was a lack of trickle water, since many apartments in Berlin had been destroyed and so less wastewater was produced. In addition, the magistrate criticized the city property because each property saw itself as an individual operation and not as part of the VVG Berlin. In view of this criticism, the farm managers at the labor consultation in June 1950 came to the conclusion that the joint sale of vegetables should be better organized. The situation with the tractors had meanwhile become even worse: in 1950 only eight of 30 tractors were fit for work.

On October 10, 1950 it was decided that the goods, which consisted only of natural land, should be transferred to the administration of the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry in Brandenburg on January 1, 1952. This affected VEG Albertshof, Birkholz, Joachimshof, Lanke , Ribbeckshorst, Siethen , Spreenhagen and Stolpe. Together with the VEG Großbeeren, the goods Birkholz, Lanke, Siethen and Spreenhagen then remained permanently under the administration of the Potsdam and Frankfurt / Oder districts until 1990, depending on their geographical location.

In order to increase production, VEG Blankenfelde, Boddinsfelde, Buch, Buchholz, Deutsch-Wusterhausen, Falkenberg, Großziethen, Hobrechtsfelde, Karolinenhöhe, Mahlsdorf, Malchow, Schönerlinde, Selchow, Sputendorf, Waßmannsdorf and Weißensee were assigned 1,471.38 ha of self-cultivated area merged into larger trickle tables. This corresponded to around 33.6% of the self-cultivated area of ​​VVG Berlin.

Fruit trees on the Karolinenhöhe sewage fields

In addition to arable and natural grassland (9810 and 1292 ha), orchards (mainly on the roadsides, 86 ha) and osier (26 ha) were cultivated.

On December 31, 1952, the VVG Berlin owned six VEGs on Berlin land (presumably Biesdorf, Blankenfelde, Falkenberg, Hellersdorf, Hobrechtsfelde and Schönerlinde), one VEG horticulture (formerly formed from eight horticultural businesses), a dairy farm in Weißensee, a central workshop Buch, a VEB Sportplatzbau and twelve VEG on Brandenburg areas (these were probably the goods Boddinsfelde, Deutsch-Wusterhausen, Heinersdorf, Karolinenhöhe, Kleinziethen, Großziethen, Osdorf, Pinnow, Selchow, Sputendorf, Wansdorf and Waßmannsdorf).

2569 workers were employed on the 18 estates and farmed 8853.16 hectares of land. The dairy in Weißensee employed another 85 workers, the tree nursery 1342 workers and the VEG horticulture 381 workers.

In 1953 one began to combine the goods into larger units. It all started with VEG Weißensee and VEG Malchow, which merged on October 28th, followed by VEG Kaulsdorf, which was merged with VEG Biesdorf one day later. In addition, VEB Sportplatzbau was dissolved in 1953 and integrated into VEB Tiefbau.

Although the goods were expanded in the GDR by z. B. bought new machines and built stables. But there were always problems in this area due to the planned economy. The new sheep stables in Großbeeren z. B. had no haylofts due to lack of wood and were therefore incredibly impractical. There was a lack of healthy seeds for growing potatoes and there was a lack of protein feed for the laying hens in Schönerlinde.

200 pig houses for the VVG Berlin - construction in Selchow

The constant construction activity of the city estates, in 1953 alone 114 agricultural construction projects were realized at 26 locations, led to increasing losses. This non-compliance with the financial regulations was also criticized by the magistrate in 1953: the granting of advances and the financing of company parties and kitchens had led to a record loss of 10,942,500 marks in 1953  . The city estates had suffered annual losses since 1947.

Administration of state-owned property (1954–1963)

At the end of 1953, on December 20, the magistrate decided to dissolve the VVG Berlin, but was unable to enforce a new administration for the VEG. That only happened on April 14, 1954, when the decisive municipal decision was passed. On April 15, the municipal department "VEG Administration" was formed and the VVG Berlin was finally dissolved. This means that nine VEGs that were located in the state of Brandenburg were also transferred to VVG Potsdam: Boddinsfelde, Deutsch-Wusterhausen, Karolinenhöhe, Kleinziethen, Osdorf, Selchow, Sputendorf, Wansdorf and Waßmannsdorf.

At the same time, the Albertshof, Birkholz, Großbeeren, Joachimshof, Ribbeckshorst, Siethen, Spreenhagen and Stolpe goods also moved to the administration of the responsible district offices, either Frankfurt / Oder or Potsdam.

Thus the eight Berlin estates of Biesdorf, Blankenfelde with the pig fattening Sperlingslust and Möllersfelde, Buch with Lindenhof, Hellersdorf, Falkenberg, Malchow with Wartenberg , Hobrechtsfelde and Schönerlinde, the horticultural business consisting of Kaulsdorf, Mahlsdorf, Buchholz, Heinersdorf were still in the inventory of the VEG administration and Weißensee, as well as the VEG Friedrichsfelde, Rummelsburg, the VE tree nursery and the central workshop in Buch.

BD-VEG Berlin (1964–1973)

Because on January 1st, 1964, the District Directorate VEG, or BD-VEG for short, was founded. It replaced the VEG administration and also took over some of the city goods that had been handed over to the district offices of Potsdam and Frankfurt / Oder in 1954, as well as goods that were adjacent to the original goods and new foundations. This is how the following came into the BD-VEG portfolio: The VEG companies:

  • Albertshof with the operating parts Börnicke , Wesendahl, Weesow and Bernau ,
  • Biesdorf,
  • Blankenfelde with pig fattening Buchholz, Rosenthal , Möllersfelde and Lindenhof,
  • Boddinsfelde,
  • Book,
  • Deutsch-Wusterhausen,
  • Falkenberg,
  • Horticulture Berlin with operating parts and with Borgsdorf ,
  • Hellersdorf,
  • Joachimshof with Vogtsbrügge,
  • Malchow,
  • Osdorf with Birkholz, Heinersdorf and Friederikenhof,
  • Stolpe with Lindenhof, Pinnow and Luisenhof,
  • Sputendorf with Schenkendorf and Marggraffshof ,
  • Schönerlinde,
  • Wansdorf,
  • Waßmannsdorf with Selchow, Großziethen and Kleinziethen.
Work at the Markee Manor

There were also neighboring companies:

and the start-ups:

The VEG Friedrichsfelde was converted into the Tierpark Friedrichsfelde . The goods of the BD-VEG Berlin were to become "supply goods" for Berlin, which is why by 1974 industrial animal production facilities and the milk processing facilities were expanded. During the time of BD-VEG Berlin, the operating units were steadily enlarged through mergers. Between 1964 and 1973 the VEG Boddinsfelde, Deutsch-Wusterhausen, Diepensee with Kienberg and Großmachnow with Pramsdorf, Gallun and Marienhof were awarded to the VEG Waßmannsdorf.

In addition, VEG Osdorf (with Birkholz, Friederickenhof, Heinersdorf) and Sputendorf (with Marggraffshof, Schenkendorf) were merged to form VEG Genshagen, to which Jünsdorf still belonged.

Pig farming in Diepensee , 1958

In 1969, four more mergers followed: VEG Biesdorf and Hellersdorf became VEG Lichtenberg. The VEG Falkenberg and Malchow formed the VEG Weißensee. VEG Pankow was also newly founded, which consisted of VEG Hobrechtsfelde, Blankenfelde, Buch and Schönerlinde. VEG pig fattening emerged from the pig fattening farms in Blankenfelde, Diepensee, Falkenberg, Hellersdorf and Schönerlinde. Pig fattening Diepensee played a key role in this, as it was expanded to 11,200 fattening places, which was a prerequisite for industrial animal production.

Two years later, in 1971, VEG Lichtenberg and Weißensee were merged to form VEG Lichtenberg / Weißensee.

In 1973 animal and plant production were separated. For this purpose, Cooperative Plant Production Departments (KAP) were established according to the territorial principle . In Berlin, the KAP Pankow and the KAP Lichtenberg / Weißensee were established, which cultivated the farmland of the VEG and LPG mainly for fodder production. This was done on the basis of special contracts, because a KAP was not an independent company like the VEG and LPG were. Due to the many amalgamations of the BD-VEG Berlin when it was dissolved on January 1st, 1974: Albertshof, Damm, Genshagen, Hertefeld, Joachimshof (with Vogtsbrügge), Lichtenberg / Weißensee, Markee, Pankow, Schweinemast, Stolpe ( with Lindenhof, Pinnow, Luisenhof), Wansdorf, Waßmannsdorf.

In 1974 only the Lichtenberg / Weißensee, Pankow and pig fattening estates remained under Berlin administration. All other goods were handed over to the administrations of the Potsdam or Frankfurt (Oder) districts, depending on the location .

Agriculture Department Berlin (1974–1981)

Flock of sheep in Großbeeren

The remaining goods Lichtenberg / Weißensee, Pankow and the pig fattening came from 1974 under the administration of the agriculture department of the magistrate of Berlin. The VEG Lichtenberg / Weißensee then worked in milk production, beef fattening, sheep breeding, the production of Brussels sprouts and fruit growing. In 1974 it made a loss of 487,300  marks . According to the plan, a loss of only 228,600 marks was foreseen.

Under the direction of the Agriculture Department, the Agrochemical Center (ACZ) was founded in Falkenberg in 1976 . In addition, in 1976 the VEG Lichtenberg / Weißensee and Pankow were merged to form VEG Pankow. This new VEG Pankow produced milk and otherwise operated calf rearing, beef fattening, sheep breeding, poultry breeding, remains of pig breeding and fruit growing. Forage production and cultivation took place only at the KAP, which was founded in 1973.

A year later, the KAP Lichtenberg / Weißensee and Pankow were merged under the name KAP Berlin. It supplied VEG and LPG with feed and produced grain, potatoes and vegetables for the state revenue.

BD-VEG Berlin, the second (1982–1991)

In 1982 a BD-VEG Berlin was founded again, which this time only had to manage VEG Pankow and VEG Champignon, Gartenbau Berlin and Geflügelzucht Alt-Glienicke.

1985 brought changes again to the BD-VEG. The KAP Berlin was dissolved, the farmland in Weißensee went to the LPG “1. Mai ", in Lichtenberg to LPG Hellersdorf and in Pankow to VEG Pankow, which was merged with VEG Schweinemast to VEG" T "Berlin in the same year.

The four VEGs of BD-VEG Berlin cultivated 1977 hectares in 1989, other farms, LPG, GPG and private farmers cultivated another 5,842 hectares. BD-VEG Berlin was dissolved on October 3, 1991, the goods went into the company's own operation State of Berlin over.

After the Second World War: West Berlin

After the Second World War, the history of the city goods in the western part of Berlin took a somewhat different and much more steady course than that of the goods in the eastern part of the city . It was only about the goods Britz, Karolinenhöhe and Marienfelde , which were continued as own operations. In 1958 the Dahlem domain was added with an area of ​​52 hectares, which was converted into a museum village in 1976. In the same year, Gut Karolinenhöhe went to Berlin Drainage; Gut Marienfelde was sold to the Federal Health Office.

The Britz Castle in the 21st century

Not much remained of the Britz estate. Since it had already been bought as a settlement area, the development of the estate was continued. Whereas in 1954 the estate still had an area of ​​185 hectares, in 1958 it had shrunk to just 77 hectares. The courtyard buildings and the Britz Castle , which was used as a children's home from time to time and today houses a museum, event rooms, guest rooms and a restaurant, are still preserved from Gut Britz . The estate park can also still be visited.

Dissolved urban goods

  • Gut Brusendorf and Telz: The arable land was cultivated by VEG Boddinsfelde, the manor buildings were used as apartments by the community.
  • Gut Mühlenbeck: The arable land was cultivated by VEG Schönerlinde, the manor house was inhabited by farm workers.
  • Gut Ruhlsdorf: Gut Ruhlsdorf became the state experimental and training institute for pig breeding.
  • Gut Schmetzdorf: The estate was used by the community for resettlers. The LPG later took over the estate. Some of the arable land went to the land reform fund. The remaining areas were cultivated by VEG Birkholz.
  • Gut Schönwalde: The agricultural area went into the land reform fund. Schönwalde Palace was leased from 1950.
  • Gut Stahnsdorf: The Stahnsdorf sewage treatment plant was built on the estate in 1931, the sewage fields were downstream. After 1945 the sewage treatment plant was operated by the Potsdamer Wasserbetriebe.
  • Gut Struveshof: Gut Struveshof was used as a social facility. Gütergotz (since 2001 Güterfelde) was taken over by the Potsdam district.
  • Gut Tasdorf and Gut Vogelsdorf: Both goods were divided - parts went to the land reform fund, parts became the property of the agricultural and horticultural faculty of the Humboldt University.
  • Good advertising: The good in advertising went completely into the land reform fund.

Ancillary businesses

The first ancillary operation of a town estate was the sawmill in Hobrechtsfelde, which emerged from the estate carpentry in 1909 . The sawmill was expanded in 1922 to include a wood processing company with construction and coffin joinery, of which only the coffin joinery was rebuilt after a fire in 1928. The wood processing plant was the main buyer of the cut material from the sawmill. Gradually, the sawmill had an annual output of around 10,000 solid meters of logs .

The meat factory, which emerged from a simple slaughterhouse that was attached to a pigsty in 1908, was also located in Hobrechtsfelde. The original intention was to be able to slaughter the pigs yourself. Over the years, the slaughterhouse was expanded into a large-scale butchery, the capacity of which exceeded the needs of the Berlin city estates. The main buyers of these masses of meat, for which even large cooling rooms were built, were the Berlin public institutions and the Berlin people's food service. Since they usually only bought pork or frozen beef, the number of beef slaughtered fell, as the fresh meat was otherwise difficult to sell. In contrast, the pig slaughter increased sharply. The poorer meat was taken from the institutions, the better was processed into sausages that could be sold at good prices. The large slaughterhouse provided work for 60 people.

A subsidiary that was completely rebuilt was the mill in Großbeeren. The electrically operated mill burned out completely in 1918 and was rebuilt in 1922/1923. After a further modernization, it was state-of-the-art at the time and, in contrast to other ancillary operations of the city estates, was competitive with the best mill products in Germany.

The seed breeding station in Kleinbeeren, which was set up in 1923, was also rebuilt. a. were made with grasses and potatoes , because these were the most important trickle products. The potatoes in particular were also bred for resistance to cancer and early ripeness. The operation of the seed breeding station was not economical, but necessary because of the difficult conditions on the sewage fields. The hoped-for better harvests should compensate for the economic outlay in operating the seed breeding center.

The milk processing plant in Weißensee also set up milk filling stations

Certainly the largest side business was the milk processing plant in Weißensee, which was taken over and expanded by the Berlin municipal estates in 1925. Just three years later, in 1928, it had to be expanded further and more modern machines installed. The aim was to produce good, flawless whole milk that was also suitable for children and the sick. In addition, more people should be fed milk consumption, which is why the Weißensee dairy farm did not compete with previous farms, at least it was argued. In order to increase the general consumption of milk, schools and businesses were supplied with milk. a. Siemens , AEG , Bewag and the newspaper and book printing industry received milk in glass bottles. The farms quickly realized that milk consumption is more beneficial to occupational safety than that of beer, which is why the farm managers pushed for the cheap sale of milk on construction sites and in the factories. At schools, milk was usually served in aluminum cups, so in 1928 around 40,000 pupils up to the age of 14 received milk at school (in Berlin there were around 350,000 pupils in this age group). In addition to schools and factories, hospitals, municipal institutions and, to a lesser extent, retailers were also supplied.

Only about one third of the milk that was processed in Weißensee came from municipal estates and two thirds from dairy cooperatives and private estates. The daily turnover was 40,000 liters of milk, which corresponded to the maximum capacity of the farm. However, sales were much lower on Sundays because there was no school. The suppliers had to keep this “Sunday milk” and sell it refined in Berlin.

The steadily growing dairy farm in Weißensee was spun off from agriculture in 1950 and run as an independent business, but remained part of the Berlin city estates.

The smallest ancillary businesses were the distilleries in Brusendorf, Buch, Lanke and Schmetzdorf. They produced between 125,000 and 225,000 liters of spirits annually in out-of-date plants , which was an extremely low yield. They didn't matter in the market.

The central workshop was set up in Buch by the VVG Berlin in 1949. In the former cowshed and on the ox farm, 50 people worked and repaired machines for the Berlin municipal estates.

In 1949 the VEB Sportplatzbau was part of the VVG Berlin portfolio for the first time , but it was so unprofitable that it was incorporated into VEB Tiefbau in October 1953 and from then on no longer belonged to the municipal goods. The most recently established subsidiary of the Berlin city estates was the Agrochemical Center (ACZ) described above, which began operations in 1976.

Personnel policy

From the beginning, the most important thing for the Stadtgüter was a good and reliable workforce who had to be attracted. While houselands from the municipal workhouse in Rummelsburg were still employed on the Rieselfeldern around 1903 , they later had to do without their "help". The aim had actually been to get these people back to work, which actually succeeded in some cases, but the regular farm workers felt insulted and humiliated in their work by the domestic workers, who were regarded as bad and uncultivated company. The workers encouraged their children to take up occupations other than farm labor so as not to come into contact with the homeless. The city estates saw the number of their future workers dwindle and no longer deploy the housebuilders. Due to the great attraction of the city, where work was easier and the possibilities for entertainment more numerous, a fight against rural exodus had to be fought, which was only promising by offering greater comfort.

House for workers of the city goods in Gatow

The good housing options (some with a garden and stables) were the greatest advantage of working in the countryside over urban work. The workers' apartment on the estate was always kept in good condition, because it was believed that a good apartment had a positive effect on the psyche of the workers and that they did better work. On many estates there were multi-family houses for eight, four and two families, whereby it could be observed that the two-family houses, which also had a garden, were the most popular and therefore only such houses were to be built later.

These attractive houses, however, were intended for families; the family apartments with garden and stables were not very attractive to single workers, who were important migrant and seasonal workers for the town's estates. The city offered more fun and work, and there was no need for a home. It was a matter of contrasting the charms of the city with something. In Hobrechtsfelde and Albertshof, community houses with 40 and 26 beds respectively were built between 1910 and 1913. There the single people could usually live in clean single rooms and only paid twelve marks per month for cleaning, heating and lighting . You could eat there relatively cheaply and there were sociable entertainment options. One could have fun in an entertainment room and on the bowling alley. In Hobrechtsfelde there was also a ballroom in which events were held regularly. On other estates that did not build a community house, seasonal workers etc. a. lured with a shower bath , because at that time there were usually no showers in urban workers' apartments, and the workers had common rooms with gaming tables and radios. Some of the goods offered work even in winter when basket weaving was carried out. After the harvest, the sensitive new potatoes were then transported in the baskets made in winter. So an attempt was made to maintain a core of reliable migrant and seasonal workers, which at least succeeded in Hobrechtsfelde and Albertshof. The community houses there were very well received, although this did not prevent the rural exodus: almost all workers came from distant provinces and not from Berlin.

However, the personnel policy of the Berlin Stadtgüter has not always been so exemplary. When rotting rubbish was to be spread over 240 acres in Fürstenwalde before 1915, it was not farm workers who were recruited, but prisoners.

After the First World War , an urban farm workers tariff was created for the first time, but this was dissolved again with the establishment of the Berliner Stadtgüter GmbH. For this purpose, a collective agreement between the GmbH and the Association of Community and State Workers came into force. It applied to "all employees of the companies and administrations of the Berliner Stadtgüter GmbH who are not purely industrial in character, with the exception of civil servants, office workers and persons permanently entrusted with supervisory posts, as well as Swiss, shepherds, permanent forest workers and reapers." The collective agreement dealt primarily with the protection against dismissal for workers entitled to retirement benefits, the sick pay allowance and the vacation allowance. As a result, many workers lost their pension entitlement, which was due to the fact that they wanted to secure future workers. Because without a pension, the pension would not be enough to afford an apartment. Only those who were already entitled to a pension on July 1, 1923 retained their entitlements. So the retirees should move in with their children who had an apartment when they worked in the town's estates. With the elimination of the pension entitlement, the workers received the Reichsversicherung instead, an invalidity insurance.

Although the goods tried very hard to attract their workers, Berliner Stadtgüter GmbH also cut jobs and increased the efficiency of the machinery. In 1924/1925 6.9 workers per 100 acres were needed, in 1926/1927 it was only 6.3 workers per 100 acres.

Development since 1990

On July 1, 1990, the VEG were subordinated to the Treuhandanstalt and transferred back to the State of Berlin in stages. The VEG Gartenbau, the VEG Champignon, the agrochemical center and the Kreisbetriebe für Landbetriebe (KfL) also came into Berlin's possession.

On November 18, 1991, the operating company Stadtgüter Berlin mbH (BSB) was founded, which cultivated approx. 25,000 hectares in the state of Brandenburg. The BSB was divided into the operating parts Albertshof, Birkholz, Lanke, Schönerlinde, Wansdorf, Joachimshof, Ribbeckshorst, Siethen, Sputendorf and Waßmannsdorf as well as the main administration. With the approx. 4,000 workers taken over, BSB operated milk production, cattle and pig fattening, pig breeding, plant and vegetable production and the distilleries. The main task of the operating company was to stockpile land for the State of Berlin and to manage and develop the property. In the first few years the development was marked by massive job cuts and the closure of unprofitable branches of the company. There was a concentration on dairy farming, the associated feed production and the management of the forest areas, which in 1995 did not become the property of the Berlin Forests.

In 2000 the Betriebsgesellschaft Stadtgüter Berlin mbH became a member of the foundation initiative of the German economy and thus made a contribution to the compensation of Nazi forced laborers.

Since the State of Berlin did not want to actively pursue agriculture itself and make the necessary investments, the Berlin House of Representatives decided in 2001 to spin off a property company (Berliner Stadtgutliegenschafts-Management GmbH & Co. Grundstücks KG, BSGM) to manage the land. The agriculturally active BSB should be privatized without the sale of the land, this should be retained as a strategic reserve. On January 1st, 2002 the BSGM consisted of 48 employees who managed an estate of around 16,000 hectares. Of this, around 11,000 hectares were leased to BSB, which continued to farm and, with 9500 dairy cows, was Germany's largest milk producer until 2003.

The goods (parts of the operations) of the BSB were sold as separate operations to private operators who had leased a large part of their agricultural land from the BSGM. On September 1, 2008, the BSGM and the empty shell BSB merge to form Berliner Stadtgüter GmbH.

The Berliner Stadtgüter-Gesellschaft since autumn 2008

Field of activity

Society itself no longer operates agriculture in the classic sense. It leases and rents its space and real estate to private users. They own 16,600 hectares of land outside the city of Berlin in the state of Brandenburg. The main task is the management of urban estates with regard to the redevelopment of open spaces, the limitation of settlements and the maintenance and development of agriculture and rural areas. Other tasks of the company are the revaluation and utilization of land, the remediation of contaminated sites , the provision of space for infrastructural measures, as well as compensation and replacement measures and regenerative energy generation , and their management.

Property management

Berliner Stadtgüter GmbH offers business premises, warehouses, open spaces, workshops, offices, garages and agricultural and horticultural areas as well as leisure and recreational properties and areas for the use of renewable energies for rent, lease or lease .

The BSG also carries out decontamination, ammunition removal, remediation of contaminated sites and securing sources of danger for nature and the environment.

Compensation and replacement measures

The Berlin Stadtgüter also offers its areas for compensatory and replacement measures that have to be carried out due to construction projects that are subject to compensation. This can be, for example, afforestation, hedges, soil unsealing, open land maintenance and water remediation. So was z. B. the nature reserve Schönerlinder Teiche renovated a few years ago.

Renewable energies and climate protection

Irrigation with clear water in Wansdorf

In addition, the Berliner Stadtgüter also provides areas for the generation of regenerative energies. There are already solar parks on the former Staaken airfield and a former rubble dump in Rüdersdorf. In addition, their own solar systems are operated on the roofs of manor buildings .

Biomass is also produced on the land of the Berlin city estates, primarily on sewage fields, where cultivation does not compete with food production. Short rotation plantations are already being operated on the sewage fields in Deutsch-Wusterhausen . There, as on most of the other sewage fields that are no longer used for trickling, the cultivation suffers from a lack of water. This is a common problem, as the sandy soil does not store water well and old drainage systems also drain. Therefore, in 2012 a pilot project was started on the Rieselfeldern in Wansdorf. There energy wood fields are irrigated with clear water from the Wansdorf sewage treatment plant as required. In this way, not only are the unused sewage fields upgraded, but the water balance in the region is stabilized. Keeping water in the landscape longer is an important measure to compensate for the extreme temperatures and dry periods that will increase due to climate change. In this way, the Berlin municipal goods not only make a contribution to climate protection by reducing emissions of greenhouse gases such as CO₂, but they also achieve a meaningful reuse of their own sewage fields.

There are also some wind turbines on the land of the Berlin city estates; 28 wind turbines with a total output of 38 MW are currently in  operation. They produce around 75,000 MWh per year. More wind turbines are planned, but the respective municipalities are resisting.

Ponds and paths

Dandelion path sign in Schönerlinde
Standpipe on the monument path in Großbeeren
  • Nature experience path "Dandelion path" for children and the extensive grazing project with water buffalo and Koniks in the nature reserve Schönerlinder Teiche
  • Monument path "Path of the water" at the "Rieselfeld Großbeeren technical monument"

See also

literature

  • H.-J. Kretzschmann: Development, management and importance of the Berlin city goods . Published by Paul Parey, Berlin 1930.
  • Heinrich Ruths: Fifty Years of Berlin City Estates. In: Fifty years of urban drainage in Berlin. Published by Alfred Metzner, Berlin 1928.
  • Reinhard Lobeck: Greater Berlin urban drainage . Published by Julius Springer, Berlin 1928.
  • Klaus D. Grote: In the front yard of Berlin. Nature reserves and renewable energies on old sewage fields. In: Märkische Allgemeine Zeitung , August 20, 2014, p. 19.

Web links

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ Berliner Stadtgüter, Findbuch: 1. History of the authorities . ( Memento of the original from October 26, 2007 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. Retrieved May 31, 2010.  @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.berlin-friedrichsfelde.info
  2. ↑ H.-J. Kretzschmann: Development, management and importance of the Berlin city goods. 1930, pp. 3-7.
  3. ↑ H.-J. Kretzschmann: Development, management and importance of the Berlin city goods. 1930, p. 11.
  4. ^ Police regulations regarding the canalization of the city of Berlin. July 14, 1874.
  5. ^ H.-J- Kretzschmann: Development, management and importance of the Berlin city goods. 1930, p. 11.
  6. ↑ H.-J. Kretzschmann: Development, management and importance of the Berlin city goods. 1930, p. 15.
  7. ↑ H.-J. Kretzschmann: Development, management and importance of the Berlin city goods. 1930, p. 23.
  8. ↑ H.-J. Kretzschmann: Development, management and importance of the Berlin city goods. 1930, p. 27.
  9. ↑ H.-J. Kretzschmann: Development, management and importance of the Berlin city goods. 1930, pp. 23-26.
  10. ↑ H.-J. Kretzschmann: Development, management and importance of the Berlin city goods. 1930, pp. 26-27.
  11. ↑ H.-J. Kretzschmann: Development, management and importance of the Berlin city goods. 1930, p. 22.
  12. ↑ H.-J. Kretzschmann: Development, management and importance of the Berlin city goods. 1930, pp. 29-31.
  13. ^ Reinhard Lobeck: The Greater Berlin City Drainage. 1928, p. 47.
  14. ↑ H.-J. Kretzschmann: Development, management and importance of the Berlin city goods. 1930, p. 54.
  15. ^ H.-J- Kretzschmann: Development, management and importance of the Berlin city goods. 1930, pp. 64-65.
  16. ↑ H.-J. Kretzschmann: Development, management and importance of the Berlin city goods. 1930, pp. 63-64.
  17. ↑ H.-J. Kretzschmann: Development, management and importance of the Berlin city goods. 1930, pp. 61-63.
  18. ↑ H.-J. Kretzschmann: Development, management and importance of the Berlin city goods. 1930, pp. 48/49.
  19. ↑ H.-J. Kretzschmann: Development, management and importance of the Berlin city goods. 1930, p. 54.
  20. ↑ H.-J. Kretzschmann: Development, management and importance of the Berlin city goods. 1930, pp. 53-55.
  21. ↑ H.-J. Kretzschmann: Development, management and importance of the Berlin city goods. 1930, pp. 65/66.
  22. ^ H.-J- Kretzschmann: Development, management and importance of the Berlin city goods. 1930, p. 30.
  23. ^ Reinhard Lobeck: The Greater Berlin City Drainage. 1928, pp. 43-44.
  24. ↑ H.-J. Kretzschmann: Development, management and importance of the Berlin city goods. 1930, pp. 18-19.
  25. ↑ H.-J. Kretzschmann: Development, management and importance of the Berlin city goods. 1930, p. 39.
  26. ↑ H.-J. Kretzschmann: Development, management and importance of the Berlin city goods. 1930, p. 53.
  27. ↑ H.-J. Kretzschmann: Development, management and importance of the Berlin city goods. 1930, p. 60.
  28. ↑ H.-J. Kretzschmann: Development, management and importance of the Berlin city goods. 1930, pp. 65-67.
  29. ↑ H.-J. Kretzschmann: Development, management and importance of the Berlin city goods. 1930, p. 64.
  30. ↑ a b Sigrid Weise: The history of Berlin's urban goods 1945–1989, Part II, a data collection. 2009, p. 124.
  31. ↑ Jens Leder: The story of Osdorf. 2003, p. 29.
  32. ↑ hobrechtsfelde.de Retrieved on July 10, 2012.
  33. ↑ denkmal-berlin.de  ( page no longer available , search in web archives )  Info: The link was automatically marked as defective. Please check the link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. Retrieved July 10, 2012.@1@ 2Template: Toter Link / www.denkmal-berlin.de  
  34. ^ Sigrid Weise: The history of the Berlin city goods 1945–1989, Part II, a data collection. 2009, p. 4.
  35. ^ Sigrid Weise: The history of the Berlin city goods 1945–1989, Part II, a data collection. 2009, p. 19.
  36. ^ Sigrid Weise: The history of the Berlin city goods 1945–1989, Part II, a data collection. 2009, p. 28.
  37. ^ Sigrid Weise: The history of the Berlin city goods 1945–1989, Part II, a data collection. 2009, p. 6.
  38. ^ Sigrid Weise: The history of the Berlin city goods 1945–1989, Part II, a data collection. 2009, p. 15.
  39. ^ Sigrid Weise: The history of the Berlin city goods 1945–1989, Part II, a data collection. 2009, p. 17.
  40. ^ Sigrid Weise: The history of the Berlin city goods 1945–1989, Part II, a data collection. 2009, pp. 20-21.
  41. ^ Sigrid Weise: The history of the Berlin city goods 1945–1989, Part II, a data collection. 2009, pp. 6, 10.
  42. ^ Sigrid Weise: The history of the Berlin city goods 1945–1989, Part II, a data collection. 2009, p. 29.
  43. ^ Sigrid Weise: The history of the Berlin city goods 1945–1989, Part II, a data collection. P. 8, 22.
  44. ^ Sigrid Weise: The history of the Berlin city goods 1945–1989, Part II, a data collection. 2009, p. 24.
  45. ^ Sigrid Weise: The history of the Berlin city goods 1945–1989, Part II, a data collection. 2009, p. 26.
  46. ^ Sigrid Weise: The history of the Berlin city goods 1945–1989, Part II, a data collection. 2009, p. 28.
  47. ^ Sigrid Weise: The history of the Berlin city goods 1945–1989, Part II, a data collection. 2009, p. 6.
  48. ^ Sigrid Weise: The history of the Berlin city goods 1945–1989, Part II, a data collection. 2009, p. 52.
  49. ^ Sigrid Weise: The history of the Berlin city goods 1945–1989, Part II, a data collection. 2009, p. 37.
  50. ^ Sigrid Weise: The history of the Berlin city goods 1945–1989, Part II, a data collection. 2009, p. 6.
  51. ^ Sigrid Weise: The history of the Berlin city goods 1945–1989, Part II, a data collection. 2009, p. 45.
  52. ^ Sigrid Weise: The history of the Berlin city goods 1945–1989, Part II, a data collection. 2009, p. 64.
  53. ^ Sigrid Weise: The history of the Berlin city goods 1945–1989, Part II, a data collection. 2009, p. 6.
  54. ^ Sigrid Weise: The history of the Berlin city goods 1945–1989, Part II, a data collection. 2009, pp. 66-67.
  55. ^ Sigrid Weise: The history of the Berlin city goods 1945–1989, Part II, a data collection. 2009, pp. 61-65.
  56. ^ Sigrid Weise: The history of the Berlin city goods 1945–1989, Part II, a data collection. 2009, p. 72.
  57. ^ Sigrid Weise: The history of the Berlin city goods 1945–1989, Part II, a data collection. 2009, pp. 72-73.
  58. ^ Sigrid Weise: The history of the Berlin city goods 1945–1989, Part II, a data collection. 2009, p. 11.
  59. ^ Sigrid Weise: The history of the Berlin city goods 1945–1989, Part II, a data collection. 2009, p. 11.
  60. ^ Sigrid Weise: The history of the Berlin city goods 1945–1989, Part II, a data collection. 2009, p. 20.
  61. ^ Sigrid Weise: The history of the Berlin city goods 1945–1989, Part II, a data collection. 2009, p. 79.
  62. ^ Sigrid Weise: The history of the Berlin city goods 1945–1989, Part II, a data collection. 2009, p. 108.
  63. ^ Sigrid Weise: The history of the Berlin city goods 1945–1989, Part II, a data collection. 2009, p. 13.
  64. ^ Sigrid Weise: The history of the Berlin city goods 1945–1989, Part II, a data collection. 2009, p. 90.
  65. ^ A b c Sigrid Weise: The history of the Berlin city goods 1945–1989, Part II, a data collection. 2009, p. 107.
  66. ^ Sigrid Weise: The history of the Berlin city goods 1945–1989, Part II, a data collection. 2009, p. 108.
  67. ↑ a b Sigrid Weise: The history of Berlin's urban goods 1945–1989, Part II, a data collection. 2009, p. 12.
  68. ^ Sigrid Weise: The history of the Berlin city goods 1945–1989, Part II, a data collection. 2009, p. 104.
  69. ^ A b c Sigrid Weise: The history of the Berlin city goods 1945–1989, Part II, a data collection. 2009, p. 14.
  70. ^ Sigrid Weise: The history of the Berlin city goods 1945–1989, Part II, a data collection. 2009, p. 108.
  71. ↑ Berliner Stadtgüter GmbH: History of the Berlin Stadtgüter brief outline. 2008, p. 2.
  72. ↑ Kulturstiftung Schloss Britz Website of the Kulturstiftung Schloss Britz. Retrieved June 6, 2012.
  73. ^ Sigrid Weise: The history of the Berlin city goods 1945–1989, Part II, a data collection. 2009, p. 116.
  74. ↑ H.-J. Kretzschmann: Development, management and importance of the Berlin city goods. 1930, pp. 72/73.
  75. ↑ H.-J. Kretzschmann: Development, management and importance of the Berlin city goods. 1930, p. 72.
  76. ↑ H.-J. Kretzschmann: Development, management and importance of the Berlin city goods. 1930, p. 73.
  77. ↑ H.-J. Kretzschmann: Development, management and importance of the Berlin city goods. 1930, pp. 76/77.
  78. ↑ H.-J. Kretzschmann: Development, management and importance of the Berlin city goods. 1930, pp. 73-76.
  79. ^ H.-J- Kretzschmann: Development, management and importance of the Berlin city goods. 1930, p. 72.
  80. ^ Sigrid Weise: The history of the Berlin city goods 1945–1989, Part II, a data collection. 2009, p. 29.
  81. ^ Sigrid Weise: The history of the Berlin city goods 1945–1989, Part II, a data collection. 2009, p. 6.
  82. ↑ H.-J. Kretzschmann: Development, management and importance of the Berlin city goods. 1930, p. 70.
  83. ↑ H.-J. Kretzschmann: Development, management and importance of the Berlin city goods. 1930, pp. 67-70.
  84. ↑ H.-J. Kretzschmann: Development, management and importance of the Berlin city goods. 1930, p. 48.
  85. ↑ H.-J. Kretzschmann: Development, management and importance of the Berlin city goods. 1930, pp. 70-71.
  86. ↑ H.-J. Kretzschmann: Development, management and importance of the Berlin city goods. 1930, p. 71.
  87. ↑ proteinmarkt.de (PDF; 99 kB) Report on the BSB in VeredlungsProduktion , 2/2003. Retrieved July 11, 2012.
  88. ↑ Berliner Stadtgüter GmbH: History of the Berlin Stadtgüter brief outline. 2008, p. 3.
  89. ↑ proteinmarkt.de (PDF; 99 kB) Report on the BSB in VeredlungsProduktion , 2/2003. Retrieved July 11, 2012.
  90. ↑ Chronology of the Berlin Forests . (PDF; 778 kB) Retrieved July 11, 2012.
  91. ^ List of the members of the foundation initiative . Retrieved July 10, 2012.
  92. ↑ Berlin city estates are for sale this week. In: The world . Retrieved June 7, 2012.
  93. ↑ juramagazin.de  ( page no longer available , search in web archives )  Info: The link was automatically marked as defective. Please check the link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. Retrieved July 11, 2012.@1@ 2Template: Dead Link / www.juramagazin.de  
  94. ^ Page of the Berliner Stadtgüter GmbH. Internet presence of the Berliner Stadtgüter GmbH. Retrieved June 7, 2012.
  95. ^ Page of the Berliner Stadtgüter GmbH. Retrieved June 7, 2012.
  96. ^ Page of the Berliner Stadtgüter GmbH. Retrieved June 7, 2012.
  97. ^ Page of the Berlin city goods. Retrieved June 7, 2012.
  98. ^ Page of the Berliner Stadtgüter GmbH. Retrieved June 7, 2012.
  99. ^ Page of the Berliner Stadtgüter GmbH. Retrieved June 7, 2012.
  100. ↑ Start of construction at Staakener airfield. Accessed on June 7, 2012.
  101. ↑ Handover of the Rüdersdorf solar park . Retrieved June 7, 2012.
  102. ^ Page of the Berlin city goods. Retrieved June 7, 2012.
  103. ↑ Short rotation plantations at the Schönefelder Kreuz .  ( Page no longer available , search in web archives )  Info: The link was automatically marked as defective. Please check the link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. (PDF; 227 kB) Accessed June 7, 2012.@1@ 2Template: Toter Link / www.forstbaumschule-pp.de  
  104. ↑ Pilot project in Wansdorf .  ( Page no longer available , search in web archives )  Info: The link was automatically marked as defective. Please check the link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. (PDF; 186 kB) Accessed June 7, 2012.@1@ 2Template: Toter Link / modul-b.nachhaltiges-landmanagement.de  
  105. ↑ Study on the Berlin energy concept. P. 40, study by the IÖW. Retrieved July 13, 2012.
  106. ↑ berlinerstadtgueter.de ( Memento of the original from April 8, 2014 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. Retrieved July 13, 2012.  @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.berlinerstadtgueter.de
  107. ↑ Description of the dandelion path in the NSG Schönerlinder Teiche. ( Memento of the original from July 24, 2013 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. Retrieved June 7, 2012. @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.barnim-wanderwege.de
  108. ↑ Sights in Großbeeren . Retrieved June 7, 2012.