Brescia Court Upholds Urban Plan Changes Aimed at Protecting Environment
An municipal administration aiming to protect, among other values, the environmental one, can decide, even in the absence of a widespread argumentative analysis, to impose variations to the general town plan. Neither its merit assessments regarding urban planning choices can be challenged in a legitimacy review, unless they are affected by factual errors or serious illogical flaws. These are the two key points of the Brescia TAR (Regional Administrative Court) sentence issued the other day, which dismissed the appeal filed by Eurosea, the Bologna-based company led by Francesco Maria Bernardi, designer of the controversial thermal generator that was supposed to be built in Campagna Trezza.
The administrative judges therefore sided with the defense’s argument presented by lawyers Alberto Luppi and Glauco Davolio, who represented Comune di Lonato. Thus, the first round was secured by the Perini administration, but the match is not yet over. In fact, Francesco Bernardi, CEO of Eurosea, has made a true declaration of war: «I have not yet been able to read the motivations expressed by the Brescia TAR judges, but one thing I can already guarantee: we will appeal, that is, to the Consiglio di Stato. Perhaps – Bernardi continues – in a different environment and context, away from a certain climate, our reasons will be discussed with greater serenity. Anyway, we are determined to see this through to the end…»
Amendment resolutions and political consequences
It should be remembered that the two famous amendment resolutions caused the fall of the Lega-led administration of Manlio Mantovani that very evening, whose party, the Lega, split in two. It was thanks to the decisive vote of the Lega councilors led by Ugo Ughi that the variations passed with a broad majority, with votes from the minority groups: center-left and civic groups.
Current jurisprudence, the judges also note, has clarified that «there is no absolute preclusion to new urban planning interventions that nullify in whole or in part the building expectations of private individuals, given that the right to modify the regulations of the town plan also includes, possibly, the right to review subsequent constraints assumed by the Comune». In simple terms, the decisions of a city council, which ultimately is a sovereign body, if aimed at protecting the environment and landscape of the community, are not subject to judicial review unless they are marred by errors or serious flaws of illogical reasoning.