Here is the link to follow the FirenzeToday whatsapp channel
The cards on the table would, so to speak, have changed once the game had stopped. And this would also have created problems for the TAR’s decisions. This could summarize what happened in the dispute between the Municipality, individual owners and companies over short-term rentals, which led to the appeal to the regional administrative court. Appeal to the TAR for which many were awaiting its response on May 9th.
The case
Last autumn Palazzo Vecchio had approved a variant to the urban planning regulation – which immediately came into force – with the aim of putting a brake on the registrations of new accommodation to be used for short-term rentals in the UNESCO area, a measure taken to combat tourism and escape and in response to the government’s lack of “a law regarding the regulation of short-term tourist rentals” as the mayor Dario Nardella had underlined.
And following which, thousands of owners and hosts registered their properties on the Municipality’s website, revealing that in Florence there were more than 13 thousand accommodations available for short-term rentals and of which over 9 thousand, 3 out of 4 in practice, condensed into just Old Town.
From the owners to Codacons, as well as the companies that manage short-term rental apartments, everyone had risen up and threatened legal battle. Punctually arrived with a mass appeal to the TAR which the president Roberto Pupilella, given the large number of appeals received – more than 10 – had decided to group them into one and pronounce on 9 May admitting “a decision that will shift the geography, given that it concerns five kilometers of UNESCO heritage”.
The change after the appeal
In the meantime, however, the administration led by Nardella had not included the variant in the operational plan – published on 8 May on the Municipality’s website – “because – as the mayor had said – the process of the variant to the current Urban Planning Regulation is not yet concluded , is the subject of numerous observations and appeals in response to which, to maintain the operation and legitimacy of the current ban, it was preferred to wait for the TAR’s ruling given that it has been set for May 9th”.
And here the donkey fell, so to speak. If the Municipality’s lawyers maintain that the approved variant is still standing – and that it will also be integrated following the new plan launched by the Region – those of the opposing parties maintain that, by not referring to the ban on the UNESCO area in the new municipal operational plan, this has lapsed. And in the appeals the matter of dispute would cease.
What could happen
If the judge follows the line of the opposing lawyers, the variant would no longer find its legitimacy and would lapse.
At the same time, however – by not eliminating the possibility that the administration could re-present new measures on the matter – nothing excludes that the Municipality can move forward with its process and complete the process of the original variant approved in the autumn.
Maybe in six months. This is because the original variant has its own path: an initial approval and a definitive one. And it is ‘perfect’ only in its second approval which has not yet happened. Once approved, we could still expect appeals.
It will now be up to the judge to decide. The sentence should take place within 40 days and, regardless, it will certainly be “electoral bread”.
