← Alle henvendelser
Afsendt

Faktuel opdatering forud for KFU 7. maj — punkt 4 (Holmen Dirt)

Supplerende noter til alle 11 medlemmer af Kultur-, Fritids- og Borgerserviceudvalget forud for genbehandlingen 7. maj. Anerkender forvaltningens to vigtige indstillinger (forlængelse af brugsaftale til 31/12 2026 og at scenarie C er medtaget), forklarer at foreningens drift reelt allerede er stoppet og højsæsonen tabes uden midlertidig procedure for starttårnene, gennemgår 2-måneders fristen i TMF-varslet og at § 8-sporet retter sig mod ejer (KEJD), foreslår en formel arbejdsdeling for scenarie C, og giver tre præciseringer til indstillingens sprog (især at Bilag 2 er fra 17. november 2025 og overhalet på flere punkter).

Dato
1. maj 2026 kl. 09:18
Fra
Behroz Karimi, forperson · Holmen Dirt
Til
11 medlemmer af Kultur-, Fritids- og Borgerserviceudvalget (Christopher Røhl · Klaus Mygind · Maria Frej · Lars Aslan Rasmussen · Klaus Goldschmidt Henriksen · Kristina Westerberg Thomsen · Shukri Hamda Dol · Emma Bach · Mathilde Kastbjerg · Casper Øhlers · Birgitte Kehler Holst)
Emne
Re: Opdatering forud for KFU 7. maj — Holmen Dirt (sag på Arsenaløen)

Kære medlemmer af Kultur-, Fritids- og Borgerserviceudvalget

Tak for jeres tid til at gennemgå sagen forud for torsdag. Et par korte supplerende noter til den indstilling, der er offentliggjort 30. april — særligt med tanke på hvor præcist beslutningsgrundlaget er.

Forvaltningens indstilling — to vigtige punkter

Jeg vil indledningsvis takke forvaltningen for, at indstillingen lægger op til to ting, der er afgørende for, at foreningen kan gennemføre en koordineret lovliggørelse:

  1. At udvalget forlænger nuværende brugsaftale til 31. december 2026 på uændrede vilkår (4. dot under "Indstilling").
  2. At foreningsdrevet lovliggørelse er medtaget som løsning C blandt alternativerne i den senere finansieringsbeslutning.

Begge er reelle fremskridt i indstillingen siden 24. april. Det er udvalgets beslutning at vedtage dem — og jeg beder jer gøre det. Hvis brugsaftalen ikke forlænges, eller hvis løsning C ikke holdes åben på lige fod med A og B, falder den koordinerede lovliggørelse fra hinanden, fordi foreningens juridiske grundlag og rådgiverforløb begge forudsætter en aftalt ramme.

Foreningens drift er reelt allerede stoppet — og højsæsonen starter nu

Indstillingen anfører under løsning C: "Banen vil være lukket indtil foreningen har lovliggjort anlægget." Den formulering er en skærpelse i forhold til den hidtidige sondring mellem bane og starttårne:

Driften er stoppet i praksis. Starttårnene er den fysiske forudsætning for hele træningen på en dirt jump-bane — uden adgang til at bruge dem kan ingen af foreningens aktiviteter gennemføres: træning, klubturneringer, sommer camp, åbne dage, besøg af andre foreninger og fritidsinstitutioner. Den frivillige nedlukning, foreningen har gennemført i april 2026 (fotodokumenteret) i tillid til at en midlertidig procedure ville blive anvist, har dermed standset driften helt.

Vi står lige op til højsæsonen. Maj til september er det halvår, hvor langt størstedelen af foreningens aktivitet finder sted — det er den periode, hvor 283 medlemmer (heraf 185 under 25 år) typisk bruger banen, hvor sommer camp afholdes, og hvor samarbejdet med Børnebyen Christianshavn, Dyveke og andre fritidsinstitutioner udmønter sig i praksis. Uden en anvist midlertidig løsning til starttårnene mister foreningen hele driftssæsonen 2026 — ikke som hypotese, men som faktisk konsekvens af status i dag.

Foreningen har siden foråret 2025 — senest til TMF 7. maj 2025 — anmodet om en anvist procedure for midlertidig sikkerhedsvurdering af tårnene. Ingen myndighed har endnu anvist en sådan procedure. Det er det forhold, der skaber tabet af sæsonen.

Foreningen er åben for forholdsmæssige vilkår der balancerer myndighedskravene med foreningens drift: voksentilsyn ved al brug, certificeret statisk tilsyn, brug i bestemte tidsrum eller for bestemte medlemsgrupper, eller andre konkrete vilkår TMF eller kommunen vurderer egnede.

Om 2-måneders fristen i TMF-varslet

Indstillingen henviser til, at "et påbud forventes at være med 2 måneders frist". Det er på dette stadie et varsel om påbud (TMF dok. D2026-104578, 17. april 2026), ikke et påbud. TMF træffer afgørelse om eventuelt påbud først efter høringsfristen 8. maj.

Påbuddet retter sig mod ejer af ejendommen — Københavns Kommune (KFF/KEJD, CVR 64942212) — ikke direkte mod foreningen. TMF's varsel angiver det eksplicit på side 1 og side 3: "I henhold til byggelovens § 17, stk.1, er det jer som ejer af ejendommen, der har ansvaret for at lovliggøre ulovlige forhold på ejendommen."

Hvis et påbud udstedes, anfører TMF's varsel på side 3, at lovliggørelse kan ske ved (1) at ændre forholdene tilbage eller (2) at søge byggetilladelse. Til mulighed (2) bemærker TMF eksplicit:

"En ansøgning om lovliggørende tilladelse ikke vil kunne behandles, førend der er meddelt tilladelse iht. anden lovgivning."

Den procedurale rækkefølge er altså: § 8-tilladelse efter jordforureningsloven og dispensation fra naturbeskyttelsesloven skal meddeles før byggetilladelse kan behandles. Alene myndighedsbehandlingen af § 8 og dispensation tager længere end 2 måneder, og det er derfor fysisk umuligt at være færdig-lovliggjort indenfor en 2-måneders frist.

§ 8-sporet retter sig juridisk mod arealets ejer. § 8-tilladelsen er knyttet til arealet og dets V2-kortlægning, og det grundlæggende ansvar tilhører kommunen som grundejer — selvom foreningen kan søge på ejers vegne via ejerfuldmagten af 30. april 2025 (sagsnr. 2025-0132435). KEJD har anvist DJ MILJØ & GEOTEKNIK som miljørådgiver.

Foreningens forslag til arbejdsdeling i scenarie C. I lyset af at § 8-tilladelsen retter sig mod ejer og hænger sammen med den V2-kortlagte forurening, foreslår foreningen en formel arbejdsdeling, der kan skrives ind i en scenarie C-aftale:

Foreningen har i sine bemærkninger til TMF (29. april) anmodet om, at fristen i et eventuelt påbud forstås som frist for indsendelse af ansøgning, ikke som frist for afsluttet lovliggørelse.

Tre præciseringer til indstillingens sprog

Indstillingen bruger ord som "misligholdt deres brugsaftale", "udvist passivitet", "tvivl om foreningen har kapacitet" og "fastholdelse af status quo". Jeg accepterer fuldt ud, at foreningen ikke har drevet lovliggørelsen i det tempo myndighedsforløbet kræver — det skrev jeg også i brevet 23. april. Men sproget bør sammenholdes med det aktuelle billede:

1. Foreningen har handlet — i flere parallelle spor. Bilag 2 (baggrundsnotatet) er sagsbehandlet 17. november 2025 og dækker derfor ikke det forløb, der ligger i 2026:

SkridtStatus
Ejerfuldmagt fra KEJD (sagsnr. 2025-0132435)✅ Indhentet 30/4 2025; forlængelse anmodet 24/4 2026 og under behandling
Forhåndsdialog med TMF (sag S2025-4016)✅ Afholdt 10/6 2025; mødenotat fremsendt 1/4 2026
Professionel opmåling/situationsplan✅ 3D-Metric-Design, 30/3 2025
Tilknytning af eksterne rådgivere✅ OIKO (dispensation, april 2026), RKE Consult (byggetilladelse + § 8, tilbud under indhentning), DJ MILJØ & GEOTEKNIK (jordforurening, KEJD-anvist)
Frivillig nedlukning af starttårne✅ April 2026 (fotodokumenteret)
Lovliggørelsesplan (forslag til drøftelse)✅ Fremsendt 28/4 2026 med foreslåede milepæle 15/5, 15/6, 30/6, 31/12 — åben for formel aftale med forvaltningen
Bemærkninger til TMF som berørt part✅ Sendt 29/4 2026 til Nina Bischoff (LG1@kk.dk)
Kontakt til § 8-myndighed✅ Henvist til Pia Thomsen 28/4 2026

2. Forsinkelserne har været tovejs. TMF brugte 10 måneder på at fremsende mødenotatet fra forhåndsdialogen (10/6 2025 → 1/4 2026), uden hvilket en komplet ansøgning ikke kunne udarbejdes. KEJD svarede ikke i 10½ måned på TMF's henvendelse om ulovlige forhold (17/1 2025 → 5/12 2025). KFF satte selv helhedsplanen i bero 14/3 — 18/9 2025 (6 måneder). DJ MILJØ er KEJD-anvist rådgiver — foreningen har rykket Søren Bomholt 15/4 og 21/4 2026 uden svar. Disse forhold bør indgå i vurderingen af, hvorfor lovliggørelsen ikke er afsluttet.

3. "Fastholdelse af status quo" stemmer ikke med det foreliggende. Foreningens scenarie C er konkret:

Det er forhold der ikke har eksisteret før.

Til "kommunen bør drifte" og "flere brugere"-argumenterne under løsning A

Indstillingen begrunder løsning A bl.a. med, at kommunen bør drifte "for at undgå at der fremadrettet laves ændringer på arealet uden de nødvendige tilladelser" og at løsningen "vil åbne op for flere brugere af banen". Begge dele bør sammenholdes med foreningens praksis og forpligtelse:

Ingen nye ændringer uden tilladelser — under og efter lovliggørelse. Foreningens drift fremover er udelukkende vedligehold af eksisterende faciliteter. Eventuelle nye konstruktioner, ny jordtilkørsel eller ombygninger sker udelukkende efter forudgående lovlig ansøgning og myndighedsgodkendelse. Det indgår i lovliggørelsesplanen af 28. april og kan skrives ind i en formel aftale med forvaltningen. Erkendelsen af, at tidligere ændringer skulle have været forelagt myndighederne, er en del af grundlaget for det foreningen nu tilbyder — bekymringen i indstillingen håndteres dermed via en bindende aftale, uden at foreningen behøver fjernes fra driften.

"Flere brugere" er ikke et argument mod foreningens drift. Helhedsplan-arbejdet blev igangsat af foreningens egen ansøgning om puljemidler — som indstillingen selv anfører under "Problemstilling": "På baggrund af, at foreningen Holmen Dirt ansøgte om puljemidler til udvikling af klubfaciliteter på areal ved Holmens Idrætsanlæg, besluttede Kultur- og Fritidsudvalget 7. december 2023 at afsætte en screeningsbevilling fra Pulje til outdoor idrætsfaciliteter til en helhedsplan for området med henblik på at skabe flere aktivitetsmuligheder, der kan komme flere brugere til gode." Foreningens drift i dag er allerede åben: 283 medlemmer (heraf 185 under 25 år), samarbejde med fritidsinstitutioner (Børnebyen Christianshavn, Dyveke), modtagelse af besøg fra andre foreninger, og en klagenævnsanerkendt formålsbeskrivelse om at "udbrede kendskab til og interesse for cykelsporten for bl.a. sårbare og udsatte borgere" (afgørelse af 7. juli 2022). Foreningen arbejder aktivt for flere brugere og er åben for konkrete forslag til, hvordan det kan styrkes.

To forhold som ikke er nævnt i indstillingen

Disse er relevante for det fremtidige § 8-spor og er gjort kendt for TMF i foreningens bemærkninger 29/4. De påvirker ikke direkte beslutningen 7/5, men bør indgå i grundlaget for den senere finansieringsbeslutning efter 1. august:

Anmodning

  1. Vedtag forlængelse af brugsaftalen til 31. december 2026 som indstillet (4. dot under "Indstilling") — det er det vigtigste enkelte signal til foreningen, rådgiverne og myndighederne om, at lovliggørelsen kan gennemføres koordineret. Uden vedtagelse udløber aftalen 31. maj.
  2. Bed forvaltningen om at anvise en konkret midlertidig procedure for brug af starttårnene under lovliggørelsesforløbet, og at "banen er lukket" under løsning C bekræftes som den hidtidige sondring (banen åben, kun tårnene afspærret indtil byggetilladelse). Foreningens drift er reelt allerede stoppet, og uden en midlertidig løsning er hele højsæsonen 2026 tabt for 283 medlemmer.
  3. Bak op om, at scenarie C beskrives med samme detaljeniveau som A og B i den senere budgetbeslutning efter 1. august 2026 — herunder en anslået ramme for kommunal medfinansiering.
  4. Bak op om administrativ forlængelse af ejerfuldmagten (KEJD sagsnr. 2025-0132435) — anmodningen er sendt 24. april og er under behandling. Forlængelse er forudsætning for, at foreningen kan indsende myndighedsansøgninger.
  5. Ved scenarie C: bed forvaltningen om en formel arbejdsdeling mellem KEJD som ejer (§ 8-sporet med DJ MILJØ) og foreningen (dispensation, byggetilladelse, containerplan). Det placerer ansvaret juridisk korrekt og lægger den realistiske ressource-fordeling til grund for tidsplanen.

Jeg står til rådighed på telefon og kan møde fysisk eller online. Den samlede skriftlige korrespondance og dokumentation ligger på kommune.holmendirt.dk.

Tak fordi I læser med.

Med venlig hilsen

Behroz Karimi
Forperson, Holmen Dirt · CVR 35685510
behroz@behroz.dk · +45 26 31 78 88
← All correspondence
Sent

Factual update ahead of KFU 7 May — item 4 (Holmen Dirt)

Supplementary notes to all 11 members of the Culture, Leisure and Citizen Services Committee ahead of the rescheduled hearing on 7 May. Acknowledges the administration's two key recommendations (extending the use agreement to 31 December 2026 and including scenario C among the alternatives), explains that the association's operations are effectively already stopped and the high season is lost without an interim procedure for the start towers, walks through the 2-month deadline in the TMF notice and notes that the § 8 track is directed at the owner (KEJD), proposes a formal division of work for scenario C, and provides three clarifications to the language in the recommendation (notably that Annex 2 is dated 17 November 2025 and is overtaken on several points).

Date
1 May 2026 at 09:18
From
Behroz Karimi, chair · Holmen Dirt
To
11 members of the Culture, Leisure and Citizen Services Committee
Subject
Re: Update ahead of KFU 7 May — Holmen Dirt (case on Arsenaløen)
Note: This email was sent in Danish. The text below is an unofficial English translation for international readers — the Danish version (switch to DA in the top nav) is the authoritative wording actually sent to the recipients.

Dear members of the Culture, Leisure and Citizen Services Committee,

Thank you for your time in reviewing the case ahead of Thursday. A few brief supplementary notes to the recommendation published on 30 April — particularly with a view to how precise the decision basis is.

The administration's recommendation — two important points

Let me start by thanking the administration for proposing two things that are decisive for the association's ability to carry out a coordinated legalization:

  1. That the committee extends the current use agreement to 31 December 2026 on unchanged terms (4th bullet under "Indstilling").
  2. That association-driven legalization is included as solution C among the alternatives in the later financing decision.

Both are real progress in the recommendation since 24 April. It is the committee's decision to adopt them — and I ask you to do so. If the use agreement is not extended, or if solution C is not kept open on equal footing with A and B, the coordinated legalization falls apart, because the association's legal basis and advisor process both presuppose an agreed framework.

The association's operations are effectively already stopped — and the high season starts now

The recommendation states under solution C: "The track will be closed until the association has legalized the facility." This phrasing is a tightening compared with the previous distinction between track and start towers:

Operations are stopped in practice. The start towers are the physical precondition for all training on a dirt jump track — without access to use them, none of the association's activities can take place: training, club tournaments, summer camp, open days, visits from other clubs and youth institutions. The voluntary closure carried out by the association in April 2026 (photo-documented) in trust that an interim procedure would be designated has therefore halted operations entirely.

We are right at the start of the high season. May to September is the half-year in which the vast majority of the association's activity takes place — it is the period when 283 members (185 of whom are under 25) typically use the track, summer camp is held, and the cooperation with Børnebyen Christianshavn, Dyveke and other youth institutions is realised in practice. Without a designated interim solution for the start towers, the association loses the entire 2026 operating season — not as hypothesis, but as a factual consequence of the status today.

Since spring 2025 — most recently to TMF on 7 May 2025 — the association has requested a designated procedure for an interim safety assessment of the towers. No authority has yet provided one. That is the matter that creates the loss of the season.

The association is open to proportionate terms balancing the regulatory requirements with the association's operations: adult supervision during all use, certified structural inspections, use during defined times or by defined member groups, or other concrete terms TMF or the City may consider suitable.

On the 2-month deadline in the TMF notice

The recommendation refers to the fact that "an order is expected to carry a 2-month deadline". At this stage this is a notice of order (TMF doc. D2026-104578, 17 April 2026), not an order. TMF will only decide on a possible order after the hearing deadline of 8 May.

The order is directed at the owner of the property — the City of Copenhagen (KFF/KEJD, CVR 64942212) — not directly at the association. TMF's notice states this explicitly on pages 1 and 3: "Pursuant to § 17(1) of the Building Act, you as the owner of the property bear responsibility for legalizing unlawful conditions on the property."

If an order is issued, TMF's notice on page 3 states that legalization can take place by (1) reverting the conditions, or (2) applying for a building permit. To option (2) TMF explicitly notes:

"An application for a legalizing permit cannot be processed before a permit has been granted under other legislation."

The procedural sequence is therefore: § 8 permit under the Soil Contamination Act and exemption under the Nature Protection Act must be granted before a building permit can be processed. Authority processing of § 8 and exemption alone takes longer than 2 months, and it is therefore physically impossible to be fully legalized within a 2-month deadline.

The § 8 track is legally directed at the owner of the area. The § 8 permit is tied to the area and its V2 mapping, and the underlying responsibility belongs to the City as landowner — even though the association can apply on the owner's behalf via the owner's authorization of 30 April 2025 (case no. 2025-0132435). KEJD has appointed DJ MILJØ & GEOTEKNIK as the environmental advisor.

The association's proposed division of work in scenario C. Given that the § 8 permit is directed at the owner and is tied to the V2-mapped contamination, the association proposes a formal division of work that can be written into a scenario C agreement:

In its observations to TMF (29 April) the association has asked that the deadline in any order be understood as a deadline for filing applications, not as a deadline for completed legalization.

Three clarifications to the language in the recommendation

The recommendation uses words such as "breached their use agreement", "shown passivity", "doubt about whether the association has the capacity" and "a continuation of the status quo". I fully accept that the association has not driven the legalization at the pace that the regulatory process requires — I also wrote that in the letter of 23 April. But the language should be set against the current picture:

1. The association has acted — across several parallel tracks. Annex 2 (the background note) is processed on 17 November 2025 and therefore does not cover the developments in 2026:

StepStatus
Owner's authorization from KEJD (case no. 2025-0132435)✅ Obtained 30/4 2025; extension requested 24/4 2026 and being processed
Pre-application dialogue with TMF (case S2025-4016)✅ Held 10/6 2025; meeting notes sent 1/4 2026
Professional survey/site plan✅ 3D-Metric-Design, 30/3 2025
Engagement of external advisors✅ OIKO (exemption, April 2026), RKE Consult (building permit + § 8, quote pending), DJ MILJØ & GEOTEKNIK (soil contamination, KEJD-appointed)
Voluntary closure of start towers✅ April 2026 (photo-documented)
Legalization plan (draft for discussion)✅ Submitted 28/4 2026 with proposed milestones 15/5, 15/6, 30/6, 31/12 — open for a formal agreement with the administration
Observations to TMF as a party affected✅ Sent 29/4 2026 to Nina Bischoff (LG1@kk.dk)
Contact with the § 8 authority✅ Referred to Pia Thomsen 28/4 2026

2. The delays have been mutual. TMF used 10 months to send the meeting notes from the pre-application dialogue (10/6 2025 → 1/4 2026), without which a complete application could not be prepared. KEJD did not respond for 10½ months to TMF's enquiry about unlawful conditions (17/1 2025 → 5/12 2025). KFF itself put the master plan on hold 14/3 — 18/9 2025 (6 months). DJ MILJØ is the KEJD-appointed advisor — the association has chased Søren Bomholt 15/4 and 21/4 2026 without reply. These factors should be taken into account in assessing why the legalization has not been completed.

3. "A continuation of the status quo" does not match the current situation. The association's scenario C is concrete:

These are conditions that have not existed before.

On the "the City should operate" and "more users" arguments under solution A

The recommendation justifies solution A among other things by saying that the City should operate "to avoid changes being made on the area in future without the necessary permits" and that the solution "will open up for more users of the track". Both should be set against the association's practice and commitment:

No new changes without permits — during and after legalization. The association's operations going forward consist solely of maintenance of the existing facilities. Any new structures, soil deliveries or rebuilds will only happen after prior lawful application and regulatory approval. This is part of the legalization plan of 28 April and can be written into a formal agreement with the administration. The recognition that previous changes should have been put before the authorities is part of the basis for what the association now offers — the concern in the recommendation is thereby handled via a binding agreement, without removing the association from operations.

"More users" is not an argument against the association's operations. The master-plan work was initiated by the association's own application for funding — as the recommendation itself states under "Problem statement": "On the basis of the association Holmen Dirt's application for grant funding for the development of clubhouse facilities at the area at Holmen Sports Grounds, the Culture and Leisure Committee decided on 7 December 2023 to set aside a screening grant from the Outdoor Sports Facilities Pool for a master plan for the area with a view to creating more activity opportunities benefiting more users." The association's operations today are already open: 283 members (185 under 25), cooperation with youth institutions (Børnebyen Christianshavn, Dyveke), receiving visits from other associations, and an appeals-board-recognised purpose statement to "spread knowledge of and interest in cycling for, among others, vulnerable and disadvantaged citizens" (decision of 7 July 2022). The association is actively working for more users and is open to concrete suggestions on how that can be strengthened.

Two matters not mentioned in the recommendation

These are relevant for the future § 8 track and have been made known to TMF in the association's observations of 29/4. They do not directly affect the decision on 7/5, but should form part of the basis for the later financing decision after 1 August:

Request

  1. Adopt the extension of the use agreement to 31 December 2026 as recommended (4th bullet under "Indstilling") — this is the single most important signal to the association, the advisors and the authorities that the legalization can be carried out in coordinated form. Without adoption the agreement expires on 31 May.
  2. Ask the administration to designate a concrete interim procedure for use of the start towers during the legalization process, and that "the track is closed" under solution C is confirmed as the previous distinction (track open, only the towers barricaded until building permit). The association's operations are effectively already stopped, and without an interim solution the entire 2026 high season is lost for 283 members.
  3. Support that scenario C is described at the same level of detail as A and B in the later budget decision after 1 August 2026 — including an indicative framework for municipal co-financing.
  4. Support an administrative extension of the owner's authorization (KEJD case no. 2025-0132435) — the request was sent on 24 April and is being processed. An extension is a precondition for the association being able to submit applications to the authorities.
  5. For scenario C: ask the administration for a formal division of work between KEJD as owner (the § 8 track with DJ MILJØ) and the association (exemption, building permit, container plan). This places responsibility legally correctly and lays the realistic resource allocation as the basis for the timetable.

I am available by phone and can meet in person or online. The full written correspondence and documentation is at kommune.holmendirt.dk.

Thank you for reading.

Kind regards,

Behroz Karimi
Chair, Holmen Dirt · CVR 35685510 (Danish business registry)
behroz@behroz.dk · +45 26 31 78 88