TAR welcomes appeal from the Municipality of Milan

The monumental constraint on the Milanese QT8 district that had been affixed by the former Minister of Cultural Heritage Alberto Bonisoli (government of the 5 Star Movement and of the League) disappears and was strongly contested by the majority of the population, by the Council of Municipio 8 and also by the Municipality from Milan. The latter, in July 2019, had filed an appeal now accepted by the Lombardy TAR. The monumental constraint, the first in Italy for an entire neighborhood, had been decided by the former minister to protect the Garden of the Righteous inside Monte Stella, but its rigidity risked having repercussions on the inhabitants of the neighborhood.

“It is a sentence of fundamental importance”, comments Enrico Fedrighini, councilor of the Sala List at Palazzo Marino and, at the time, councilor of Municipality 8: “It clarifies that the landscape and not the monumental constraint is the appropriate tool to protect the neighborhood and its public spaces. It allows the inhabitants to use the incentives for energy saving and energy efficiency interventions in buildings. And consequently it guarantees an environmental improvement for the community “.

The affixing of the monumental constraint had immediately blocked dozens of building practices for which the bureaucratic process had changed. And it had also made it very difficult to use the recent energy incentives including the 110% superbonus, whose works, requiring an improvement of at least two energy classes, impact on the aesthetics of the building itself.

The monumental constraint, many obligations for the residents

The monumental constraint provided for the prior authorization of the Superintendency for interventions to be carried out on roads (such as Zone 30 that was planned at the time), squares, green spaces, residential buildings and public buildings including the Martin Luther King elementary school and the Via Pavilion Pogatschnig. “The monumental constraint on the neighborhood”, declared in 2019 the then city planning councilor Pierfrancesco Maran, “is an anomalous choice, which seems very ideological and which will cause critical intervention in maintenance for the Municipality and unreasonable bureaucratic rigidity for the owners of housing. A landscape constraint is much more consistent “.

With the monumental constraint, commented Paolo Mazzoleni of the order of architects, “protection is minimized and bureaucracy is maximized”. The Ministry, after having affixed the restriction, had sent some clarifications with which it imposed the obligation of authorization by the Superintendency for some works in private gardens, for the ordinary and extraordinary maintenance of public green spaces and roads, for the works on the ‘most representative’ buildings (that is, those that have remained almost unchanged over the years). At the same time, the owners would have had to pay attention to deterioration of the buildings, because they could have been liable for it criminally.

For the most protected buildings, then, even the deeds of sale should have been communicated to the Ministry, because the State has the right of pre-emption over what has monumental protection. The case of Pogatschnig 40 was the most problematic of all. A public housing building by Piero Bottoni, densely inhabited by former assignee families, elderly people and low-income households for which it would have been very complicated to carry out renovations with the expensive authorization procedures. And yet they should have guaranteed the preservation of every element, for example the precious wall mosaics, otherwise risking to answer for it.

PREV Maria Chiara Gavioli was found dead: former model and famous entrepreneur of the Treviso upper middle class
NEXT Covid, new negative record in Lombardy: 3429 new positives in Bergamo