“We could define it as an own goal – begins Evaristo Silvi – we would have expected everything except that it was the property itself that confirmed that in June 2022 the area where they would like to build the Protected Village was hit by fire”.
In fact, following the request made by the minority for the annulment in self-defense of the determination with which the Municipality of Cori positively concluded the services conference, GIOMI, partner of I Borghi d’Italia srl promoter of the project, told us required to clarify in the press that the fire in the area actually occurred, even if the reports of the firefighters who intervened do not precisely report the square meters that were affected.
“Therefore, the fact that the fire occurred is an incontrovertible fact – continues Silvi – and the framework law regarding forest fires is very clear: it is not possible to change the urban destination from agricultural to private services and above all it is not possible to build on ”.
“What is very anomalous is that the company replaces the public body. In fact, it is up to the Municipality to ascertain with a resolution of the Council, which must be drawn up by January of each year, the areas affected by the fire. The Municipality of Cori, however, did not comply with the assessments relating to 2022 and 2023. We understand that the draft resolution, which is prepared by the Manager of the competent office, has been ready for some time and also reports the fire that occurred on the land of GIOMI, and the Mayor did not want to bring it into discussion. Perhaps because such an assessment would have blocked the Protected Village project?”.
“All these arguments were included in our request for annulment in self-protection, because we believe that the omission of the correct declaration of the fire even to the supra-municipal offices, or rather the having produced an untruthful declaration in this regard, has distorted the entire procedure . Suffice it to say that most of the regional opinions were issued after the fire.”
Our request also highlights a whole series of further anomalies present in the determination whose annulment we requested. For example, according to the reconstruction of the SUAP Manager of the Municipality of Cori, all the supra-municipal offices expressed “silent consent”: from ASTRAL, to the Fire Brigade, to the Province of Latina.
But this is not the case, just think that the Ecology and Territory Protection Sector of the Province has declared its inability to express its opinion due to lack and inconsistency of information, including the fact that the indication of the methods of draining the pool water. In the Acts, these information gaps are not filled, nor is there any trace of them in the Determination in question.
Another very relevant issue is the lack of quantification and destination of the extraordinary contribution, additional to the urbanization costs. In fact, the law provides that this capital gain must be calculated up to 66% of the “greater real estate value achievable in the face of significant real estate enhancements generated by the general urban planning instrument,…”. The “calculation”, “how to collect it” and “what to use it for” represent fundamental elements for expressing the planning decision, therefore the law requires that this data be included in the project documentation. But in this case they aren’t there.
Another important aspect is linked to the transfer of standard areas to the Municipality, as required by law. But we ask ourselves, how is it possible that some areas become municipal property for public utility services if, as far as we can understand, the residential complex would be off-limits to the community, so much so that it has a security service?
“And finally, the question of favorable conditions for elderly residents in the municipality of Cori which should be included in the agreement. As far as we know, the agreement for now contains no indications other than that there will be “services/rentals at favorable conditions”. But the agreements have not been made explicit and could even be negligible. In fact, that term “services/rentals” could be a real trap. We could find ourselves faced with the controlled use of services such as the “swimming pool” or the “gym”, because the granting of leases would be particularly costly for society.
In short, it seems to us that this project is a big mess for the De Lillis administration, and we are surprised by the acceleration given immediately after the arrival of our request for cancellation, by the new Manager of the Urban Planning Office who published the public notice , preparatory to the final approval of the project. Prudence would have liked that, faced with the issue of the fire, which was also confirmed by the ownership itself, as well as the many “shortcomings” and omissions noted, greater caution would have been taken. We hope that the Public Prosecutor’s Office, Nipaaf and the Lazio Region will intervene to block this procedure.
In recent months, we have constantly declared that our position was not against the project, and we confirm it again, so much so that we have also put forward a motion to the City Council for a review of the project that can be carried out in the historic center, for the benefit not only of the potential customers of Giomi, but also of the citizens of Cori. Now, however, we are less sure that the project was legitimately presented by the private entity, because it knew that building could not be built on that territory affected by the fire.
It remains an interesting project. But it cannot be achieved in that area and without having defined issues relevant to the interests of the community.”
