Listen to the audio version of the article
The Municipality of Milan is trying to “self-protect” itself with a resolution on the guidelines in the urban planning sector, following the 3 investigations already closed on the alleged building abuse by the Milan prosecutor’s office.
As a precaution, the Urban Planning Department takes action by asking its own structure that practices similar to those that ended up in the sights of the prosecutor’s office and therefore of the investigating judge – in via Crescenzago, in via Stresa and in Piazza Aspromonte -, for which it has not yet been once the building permit has been issued, follow the instructions deduced from the investigating judge’s decree on the case of via Crescenzago. Which, translated, means evaluation of the appropriateness of the Scia, the self-certification by the builder considered by the prosecutor’s office unsuitable for the new construction of skyscrapers, and the possibility of moving on to the more structured permit or implementation plan.
Two procedures that certainly take longer, but at this stage it would serve to protect the employees, who according to the Municipality are the most exposed at this moment. It should also be noted that Palazzo Marino itself has no intention of becoming a civil party in a possible trial, believing that the decisions taken were consistent with the law and that the officials acted correctly. The municipal leaders have repeatedly declared that they want to take charge of their defense.
To quantify the problem, we are talking about 150 construction sites that the Municipality will have to examine (out of a total of approximately 40 thousand per year). These are obviously the largest activities.
The situation is a little more complicated for everything that has already been built. With regard to construction works completed or in progress for which news “of investigations has emerged or for which the operators involved are requesting checks” will be evaluated “the possible consequences of the regulatory interpretations deducible from the investigating judge’s decree” to “identify any actions to be assume”. Here the indications are clearly even more generic, as they deal with previous decisions.