To the Mayor
Mr. Franco Miracles
Gaggiano City (MI)
SUBJECT: Resolution of the City Council against observations No 16 of 02.02.2009 "Renovations of the approval procedure for the Former Agricultural Consortium PII via Marconi - in the current version PRG - presented by Elle Realty Company Ltd., already adopted by resolution of the City Council No 47 of 24.09.2008.
This committee consists of citizens spontaneously RON7 Plans Gaggianesi, having as its President Mr. Sacchi as Coordinator and Mr. Silvano Gregori Tiziano, located in Gaggiano (MI), Via Marconi 16, according to the procedure for renewal of the adoption procedure mentioned in the subject and following several meetings held with local citizens, presents the comments are discussed below.
First a general comment
First of all it should be noted that the purpose of this Committee is not only to oppose the raising of up to 7 floors of a building in the former consortium, but to be the bearer also common interests with regard to the area in question and more as discussed below, even for interventions that will cover all the urban district Torretta. That said
area in question is organically included in an urban area where there are larger urban transformation, which is not only a doubling of the railway line Milano-Mortara with their equipment, environmental restoration of the Piazza IV Novembre and the system of mobility, but also the future destiny of the areas located between the railway and roads state / provincial, called the current PRG ZS.2.ae ZS.2.
This particular project would require a larger workforce capable of defining the overall spatial planning (urban planning, environmental, functional and mobility involving, beyond the railway areas, the areas above. Break individual implementation projects in an area so important, instead of resorting to an overall project (always feasible, however, in part, and at different times so as provided in Art. 93 paragraph 3 LR 12/2005), means generally demolish and redo what we did before when does not connect organically with what takes place after and, above all, it means giving up a single view of the public, with regard to environmental restoration and reorganization of the urban area, by giving precedence to the interests of the private sector.
second comment on the environmental quality and sustainability of the intervention
Already the weather synthetic green design on private public and give no indication on the plant species to be planted to be suitable climatic environment of the area.
The draft convention, about the sustainability of the intervention does not require any constraint on the Elle Realty Inc., owner of the area in question, the use of renewable energy, eco-friendly building materials, not to mention the recovery and recycling of water already used for non-drinking, roofs and green walls that "capture" carbon dioxide. To tell the truth in this draft convention, despite the established presence in areas of the former consortium of two big old tanks, where they were paid oils and diesel, we find no special rule that forces the Elle Ltd to submit a technical investigation, to verify by ARPA, the state of pollution of soil and subsoil. Also in PII
re there is no environmental impact assessment (EIA) of the settlement especially in an urban area already affected by the movement of commuters using the train. For example, limited to the impact caused by the increase car (not counting the impact on public services, water consumption, waste disposal, etc.). For more than 50 families provided (and not forty as he said the ' Councillor Pezzotti the re-presentation in the City Council on February 2, AC) and taking into account that on average two cars traveling in the province for family, we will have more than 100 new vehicles in the area concerned. This number must be added the conservative number of other motor vehicles recalled by the presence of new retail space / tertiary recovered in the restored building in Via Marconi, estimated at 40 per day (if there were authorized to open a bar) or more ( if it were authorized to open a restaurant). This
impact (and the same is true for the others) can be absorbed without any worsening of environmental conditions of human life, particularly in the urban area between the Naviglio Grande and the train station, or not?
to this question too PII readjusted, as before, gives no answer!
Third observation: the re-adoption PII effects "in pejus" from previous PII
However on entering the content re-adopting urban intervention, there is a development "in pejus" compared to the previous PII, even at the cost of living healthy living and citizenship (values \u200b\u200bof interest).
With this new project has attempted to give the appearance of listening to what was said by Comita RON7 plans, the Province Milan and submitted to the above instances Intendenza (until now, again, did not respond). With drawings nuodi project has tried to disguise the substance making new prospects builders empathy adicenti. But "within" what is it?
Notwithstanding the provision of 130 new residents (but will be a few dozen more as will be shown below) readopted the PII, which assumes the character of variation of the PRG and PTCP provides under Art. 4 of the Draft Convention, a newly built residential volume amounted to 14,093 cubic meters instead of 13,950 cubic meters (as per the draft agreement provided for PII in the previous decade), approximately 18 new parking on the west side (near field Blue Arrow) and some new parking lot in November p.za IV that can be counted on your fingers (do not forget that there are already parking on p.za IV Novembre and along the Via Marconi). Now
making simple accounts for the above, although that will not be a 7-story tower (thinking that they satisfy the requirements of the Committee), an attempt to conceal certain truths: is the existing height of the silos in which will be located 5 floors + 1 loft (so we are about 6 floors), there comes an even more speculation (see increased residential volumes even those), and being that the types in the residential complex correspond to 1,2,3 bedrooms apartments on the floor or duplex apartments or multi-level, it is very unlikely that the new population estimated to be only 130. In fact, consider that the building located on Via Marconi provides not only the action on the ground floor which would be authorized to open a bar or even a restaurant (!), A residential project on the first floor. Consider also that the Councillor Pezzotti reported the City Council that the underground garage (private and therefore possible sale or lease to other individuals) are a hundred: then the newly built apartments will only be greater than 50, and not " forty " Pezzotti as the same councilor said the Municipal Council on 2 February about
Fourth observation on the differences of PII with the directions of the current PRG
In detail: Given that the PII is a planning instrument of private initiative that may provide for law, changes are contrary to the advice of a municipal plan in force (whether it be a PRG or TMP), which are variants automatic "in the latter respect, it is worth recalling that such differences when they are shared by public bodies of government land, should be justified by specific interest to the general interests of local communities. The
vary greatly with the current PRG PII readjusted in the town of Caggiano are:
a) provides that the creation of a volume greater than that permitted by the technical rules of implementation (NTA) on the areas of the former Consortium. Applying the virtual height of 3.30 meters art. 4 of the NTA, the total volume of existing buildings is equal to 12101.76 mc., While the total volume of existing buildings is equal to aa mc 12,101.76., While the total volume indicated by the PII has always been equal to 15,500 cubic meters, an increase of 3398.24 cubic meters. amounted to an increase in percentage of about 25% compared to the existing. It is pointless trying to hide this substantial discrepancy shown in the table of the project a volume calculation taking into account the existing heights of the buildings actual production. Everyone knows (or should know) that now in planning to make similar volumes of abandoned industrial buildings with residential structures, multiply the total gross floor area (3667.20) to a height of 3.00 meters (not 3 , 30) which in our case would lead to a difference between the existing massing and design even more: 11001.6 cubic meters. existing, against 15,500 cubic meters. project = 4498.4 cubic meters. that are at least more than a dozen (maybe 15) of flats in surplus - "a gift"! Possible that this local council if they do not have noticed?
b) E 'expected to form a public park on part of the former areas of the Consortium with the recovery of a building to be used not only to private tertiary functions but also for public office. It also provides for the public acquisition of the building subject to the intervention of recovery. These regulatory requirements that have a strong value journalism, have also been totally abandoned by the PII
These differences of PII with the indications of general planning instruments in force in the town of Caggiano, are certainly not in the public interest: the ' increasing the capacity of settlements and private functions, increases only Profit and revenue of a private operator.
Fifth observation on quality standards
quality standards correspond to those in public works of general interest, made by the owners of PII outside the compartments, or in other parts of the city, municipalities may require economic benefits in their compensation of policyholders to the same owners for the implementation of settlements in "automatic variant" of forecasts of PRG or PGT force.
quality standards are in addition to urban standards that by law should be found in inland areas to the areas of PII or even monetized, as in this case, where the City Council does not consider it necessary to find h internal or external, but did not specifically show that this choice is most appropriate for the public interest, as required by art. 90 paragraph 4 of Law No 12/2005. This Committee believes it is illegal
deduct the sum of the monetization of urban standards due to the City of Caggiano, the full cost of achieving the quality standards borne by Elle Realty Ltd., as it seems to want to do art. 10 of the draft Convention, the truth is unclear in its final part. Should be greater clarity without that deduction, and reiterating the draft convention, as prescribed by Article. 90, paragraph 5 of Law 12/2005, the commitment of the City to use the amount of the sum received for monetization, exclusively for the acquisition of property areas to be devoted to facilities and public services.
It is believed that the only standard of quality is really, regardless of its goodness or otherwise of the proposed project, the environmental regeneration of p.za IV Novembre. All other actions (way of linking the square and the Via S. invention, regeneration of natural gas networks, water supply and street pavement Marconi) appear normal primary infrastructure works still required to meet the needs created by the weight of the new settlement for which the costs, not only economic, otherwise would weigh on the entire community. In particular, as regards the road linking the p.za Via IV Novembre and S. Invention, there is nowhere in the documents of the PII Elle Ltd or the municipality may own or have the actual availability of the relevant areas. The question that this work has been made between the quality standards to be implemented only to make more palatable the PII but in fact is impossible, is certainly more than legitimate.
Sixth observation: the problem of traffic and parking
A minimum of logical thinking would claim that when the building, one must march hand in hand roadway structures. Instead, on these, for some reason (should not pay the real estate agents?), We prefer fly. Unforgivable error. As history teaches urban planning, the Napoleonic era onwards, anywhere in the world, the streets, the boulevards have been carried out before the buildings. Here that happens in this context? The (non) answers given in the two PII are all indications to the contrary. Nothing we say!
But at least it was expected the large increase of the influx of traffic that will generate massive new building quickly, without prejudice to the more predictable increase in traffic since the catchment area who will benefit from the doubling of the railway line Milano-Mortara? Hath been tempted to doubt, as the only way to access and exit (via S. invention / intersection traffic light) remains what it was. Let's say it once and for all: the much-vaunted subway as a way outlet for release on the SS 494 (Abbiategrasso / Milan) exists on the card fraudulently. It 's about 1 year and a half that this culvert has been excluded by the same majority with the Railway
Un'assessore municipal building, un'assessore traffic and road conditions and a Mayor, who are silent on the issue roadway as a whole, let us, makes us think. The traffic light intersection of Via S. Invention whatever people may say, will remain the only outlet in and out of the car around the neighborhood Torretta.
The parking problem is in its substance. The commissioner and Mayor Pezzotti Miracles do well, so we are close to the spring and the temperature evening / night is mild, continue to see the only public car park in Via Marconi, vicinity of house number 16, which in the evening (weekdays) on 60 stalls available, on average, 40 are occupied by parked vehicles of existing residents, even if they had the goodness to pass during peak hours of the morning, check to what was is not only that but the whole road parking surrounding it. You can go ahead: just look at the photos on the site of this Committee: http://no7piani.blogspot.com, which were taken on a normal morning of October 30, 2008, at 08:00.
is well to ask: you can accept the project in a total increase of only about 20 parking spaces, compared to an increase of 130 and more new residents, whereas the external users who leave their cars wanting to use the local train? And if you actually were open as it has always said Councillor Pezzotti an exercise bar or even a restaurant, how do you? Where will we park? Those already existing ones are already congested enough (not considering we cheat in the total count of the parking p.za IV Novembre, please). At the time the province had "strongly advised" the administration of municipal Gaggiano to increase the supply of public parking spaces at the current train station and pay attention to accessibility to the north of the same PII now lapsed. What was considered that? Elle Ltd. The company plans to re-adoption of the EIP provides only a score of more public parking. This can then Municipal Administration in the person of Mayor and Councillor Miracles urbanism Pezzotti, compared and demonstrable evidence of the above and what has been planned in the draft convention, to rule officially, once and for all, on the feasibility of any project that is clearly untenable in our view, and in the roadway on "dynamic and static" throughout that area? It 's really all that acceptable?
missing all over a paper plane, and there is no plan framework. We are anxiously waiting for responses that will take kindly to these recipients.
Seventh observation
extraordinary contribution of urbanization in the draft Convention in re-adoption of PII, the PII verbatim fallen the article states that planning for the effects of the intervention (never specified) on infrastructure in general, Elle Ltd respects the City, upon signing of the agreement, the sum as a lump sum of € 100,000 (one hundred thousand ). This sum, in fact, had already been released in June 2008 (it should now be returned as it was already referred to the PII lapsed and if it were not so there would have to reflect on what types of agreements was the Elle Related Ltd. with the municipal administration) as a "down payment on charges of secondary infrastructure" that is, not as a sum one-off, and, moreover, even before the City Council has approved the Gaggiano PII, PII and only after the approval of the signing of the Convention, there are also tired of repeating it in front of the courtroom, the City may lawfully earned money. Not before!
Even in this re-adoption of PII it does the same thing. There is enough to reflect a competent judicial authorities so that screens the existence of acts worthy of an offense.
After all it is worth remembering that in the draft convention all the infrastructure costs are expected to deduction of expenses that ownership of the areas affected by the PII should provide support for direct execution public works. By what right was paid this sum?
This unusual procedure, clearly at odds with the normal bureaucratic and legislative approval of a PII, can only be explained through the following two assumptions:
a) is an attempt by Elle Ltd influence the outcome in advance of the bureaucratic Approval of PII to obtain a result favorable to it;
b) to Elle Ltd has ensured the certainty that the PII is approved.
These two hypotheses could also weave and this procedure, little transparency, a glimpse, in this case, the possible existence of collusion between the private aspects and the public and in the best case, the existence of highly damaging political implications for democracy, as free decision-making powers of the City Council (in its majority) would thus be reduced to a simple acknowledgment of choices decided elsewhere.
Endnotes
awaiting written responses (from the Chairman of the Committee plans RON7 - dr. Silvano Sacchi, via Marconi 16 - Caggiano) that this authority will kindly refer to everything as noted above, we inform that this Committee, concerned for some time about the approval of land use decisions made so far throughout the Gaggianese, will Load observe what will cover the renovation of the former stud farm of Major. In fact, this Municipal Administration will compropartita as the supply of land at the bottom of Via S. Invention which will be built on two new residential buildings (as planned so far: maybe you will be 3 or 4).
begs the question: will provide for new ways to end solutions, roadway, etc.. Etc..? But this will be another story. Sincerely
The Chairman of the Committee Dr. Silvano
RON7 plans. Sacchi
The Coordinator of the Committee plans RON7
Tiziano Gregori
Caggiano, March 5, 2009
0 comments:
Post a Comment