CANCELLED THE PGT of the City of Cermenate Tar from the Lombardy region, since it considered illegitimate Valatuazione the process of strategic environmental (SEA).
The Court finds that the municipality can not be both prosecuting authority and competent authority to approve the VAS, particularly when the competent authority is hierarchically subordinate to other body organs political / administrative.
Read the sentence
ITALIAN REPUBLIC
ITALIAN REPUBLIC
The Regional Administrative Court of Lombardy
(Section Two)
gives the following Judgement
On use of general register number 2305 of 2009, as supplemented by additional grounds, proposed by:
Giuseppe Vergani, represented and defended by the lawyer. Umberto Grella, with an address at the same in Milan, Via Cesare Battisti 21;
against
Cermenate Municipality, represented and defended by the lawyer. Richard Ananias, with an address at the same in Milan, Via Brera, 16;
Province of Como, Lombardy Region, unincorporated trial;
against
Pinuccia Rumi, Peter Bellotti, Lorena Sinigaglia, Angelo Gaiani, not made in court;
for cancellation
after suspension of effectiveness
in the main action, with all the acts preordained, consequential and online
a. board resolutions of the City of Cermenate No And No 12 of 13.3.2009 13 of 16.3.2009 bearing rebuttal to the comments and approval of the new government of the Territory Plan No ex LR 12/2005, published on the BURL n. 29, 22.7.2009;
b. of resolution giuntale n. 38 del 28.2.2009 del Comune di Cermenate recante avvio del procedimento di valutazione ambientale strategica per la formazione del Piano di Governo del Territorio;
c. del rapporto ambientale, della sintesi non tecnica, del piano di monitoraggio e della dichiarazione di sintesi resi nella procedura VAS ex D.Lgs. n. 152/2006 e art. 4 L.R. n. 12/2005 e recepiti nel nuovo Piano di Governo del Territorio;
d. in parte qua, della D.G.R. VIII/6420/2007 limitatamente all'art. 3.2. dell'Allegato 1 (modello generale);
per la condanna
del Comune di Cermenate al risarcimento dei danni patiti e patiendi in misura non inferiore ad euro 5.000.000,00 o nella maggior somma da quantificarsi in corso Because of an equitable or even after espletanda CTU;
in the application filed on 26.11.2009 for additional grounds, provincial of the order
16.2.2009 laying opinion on the compatibility of the proposal for the City of PGT and Cermenate order the City to pay damages.
Given the appeal and additional grounds including their annexes;
Since the entry of appearance in court of the City of Cermenate;
view of the briefs;
Taking all of the acts of the case;
Rapporteur the public hearing of April 28, 2010 Dr. Zucchini and John heard the parties to the defenders Umberto Giuseppe Grella Vergani, Riccardo Ananias for the City of cement;
held and considered the facts and law as follows.
FACT
The geom. Vergara, owner of an individual firm operating in the construction industry, is the owner of certain land in the City of Cermenate.
With the use hereof, which application for an injunction and damages, he appealed to the deliberations of City Council Cermenate No And No. 12 13 of 2009, bearing the rebuttal to the comments and approval of the new government of the Territory Plan (TMP), in addition to the resolution to the City Council No 38/2008 and, albeit partially, the decision of the Regional VIII/6420/2007.
These, in summary, the grounds of appeal:
1) violation of Article. 78 of Legislative Decree no. 267/2000, as the Board resolution approving the PGT would be taken by the intervention of certain directors and vote on which hung the other hand, according to the policy, the duty of abstention;
2 ) infringement of Directive 2001/42/EC, art. 16 out of 274 and RD 275 of 1929, Articles 11 and following of Legislative Decree no. 152/2006, art. 4 of Law 12/2005 of the Regional Council and Resolution No. VII/351/2007, all rules of the SEA (Strategic Environmental Assessment);
3) breach of Law 183/1989, of Articles 8, 9, 10, 25 and 57 of Law 12/2005 and other regional decisions, to the absence of an assumption, which is a geological study effectively;
4) violation of Law 13/2001 and the opinion issued by ASL in the evaluation of the proposed PGT;
5) breach of Articles 8 and 11 of Law 12/2005, as the Plan document contains requirements that affect, either directly on the regime of soils;
6) violation of Article . 13, paragraph 7, lr 12/2005 and Articles 38 and 39 of the NTA PTCP, since there is no compliance with the settlement sustainability indices provided by the Province;
7) violation of Articles 7:41 quinquies della legge 1150/1942, del DM 1444/1968, degli articoli da 8 a 11 e 46 della l.r. 12/2005, nonché eccesso di potere per carenza di istruttoria, difetto di motivazione e disparità di trattamento, nel quale si denunciano presunti errori nel calcolo della capacità insediativa e degli standard urbanistici;
8) ulteriore violazione degli articoli 7 e 41 quinquies della legge 1150/1942, del DM 1444/1968, degli articoli da 8 a 11 della l.r. 12/2005 e violazione degli articoli 2 e 3 del Trattato CE, degli articoli 42 e 97 della Costituzione, del DPR 327/2001, dell’art. 1 della legge 241/1990, dell’art. 2 della legge 287/1990 ed eccesso di potere sotto vari profili, nel quale si denunciano le asserite PGT illogical targets urban areas assigned by the applicant.
It was the only court in the City of Cermenate, pleading the inadmissible and in any case to rebut the substance of the appeal.
On 29.10.2009, the representative sent an appeal on added, which was contested with a further act - that is the measure of provincial opinion on the compatibility of the PGT with the Provincial Territorial Coordination Plan of Como - and they were carried out further investigation of complaints of no reason 6 of the main action.
interim hearing of 03/12/2009, the request for suspension was canceled.
the public hearing on 28.4.2010, the case was retained in the decision.
LAW
1. The first ground of appeal, it is alleged the violation of art. 78 of Legislative Decree no. 267/2000, since the Plan was approved by the intervention in the municipal council, a number of directors (namely Messrs Bellotti, Rumi, and Sinigaglia Gaiani), which should have been refrain, as the decisions relate to their interests or their relatives or marriage up to the fourth degree (see art. 78, paragraph 2, above).
On this point, the exponent produces documentation (doc is seen her. 5), showing areas of ownership of the directors and their relatives who were in qualche modo “beneficiate” dal nuovo strumento urbanistico generale, attraverso – ad esempio - l’attribuzione di destinazione edificatoria o produttiva.
In relazione a tale mezzo, occorre dapprima rilevare come senza dubbio sussiste interesse ad agire in capo al ricorrente, contrariamente a quanto evidenziato dalla difesa resistente, visto che l’accoglimento della censura finirebbe per travolgere l’intero PGT, con obbligo per il Comune di determinarsi nuovamente in relazione all’intero strumento urbanistico, il che appare sufficiente a fondare l’interesse strumentale dell’esponente il quale, per effetto della nuova approvazione del Piano, potrebbe vedere accolte le proprie doglianze riguardanti the allocation of areas of his property in Cermenate site. The defense
city, compared with no reason 1, also asserts that the factual reconstruction deals on appeal would be false, as the City Council, which complained about the attendance at board meetings would actually removed from the classroom. Resolution No. 13/2009, the Administration continues strong, failing to act with clarity of such removal, would be vitiated by a clerical error, it is easy to understand and correct this, so much so that the City has, on this point, a series of self-certifications advisers and the town clerk, stating precisely the error that would incorsa la delibera, oltre alla copia del “brogliaccio” del segretario stesso, contenente i suoi appunti, ove è indicato l’avvenuto allontanamento dei consiglieri di cui è causa.
Secondo il Tribunale, tuttavia, la difesa del Comune non appare convincente, in quanto pretenderebbe di rettificare o correggere un errore contenuto in una deliberazione consiliare, quindi in un atto pubblico avente efficacia probatoria privilegiata (cfr. artt. 2699 e 2700 del codice civile), attraverso delle autocertificazioni o addirittura attraverso semplici appunti, asseritamene redatti dal segretario comunale ma privi di qualsivoglia efficacia probatoria.
Reputa, al contrario, il Collegio che l’eventuale errore di verbalizzazione doveva invece essere corretto attraverso una nuova deliberazione dello stesso organo, vale a dire del consiglio comunale, non potendosi ammettere, pena la perdita di ogni valore di certezza giuridica proprio dell’atto pubblico, che quest’ultimo possa essere integrato o addirittura smentito attraverso semplici dichiarazioni dei soggetti interessati o mediante appunti manoscritti di questi ultimi.
Tuttavia, nonostante le argomentazioni difensive del resistente non siano condivise dal Tribunale, il motivo n. 1 non può trovare accoglimento, per le ragioni che seguono.
L’art. 78 del D.Lgs. 267/2000, al comma 4° prevede, nel caso di piani urbanistici per i quali si sia verificata l’ipotesi di cui al comma 2° del medesimo articolo (vale a dire un conflitto di interessi, come sopra riportato), che siano annullate le sole parti dello strumento urbanistico per le quali sia stata accertata la correlazione fra il contenuto del medesimo e gli specifici interessi dell’amministratore pubblico e dei suoi parenti.
La disposizione del menzionato comma quarto è intesa, dalla più recente giurisprudenza, nel senso che l’eventuale conflitto di interesse dell’amministratore, quand’anche accertato, non travolge l’intero piano urbanistico ma solo le parti ritenute per così dire “collegate” all’interesse personale dell’amministratore medesimo, secondo il noto brocardo “utile unnecessary for non vitiatur.
Consequently, the owner of urban areas included in the instrument has an interest in denouncing the violation of art. 78 mentioned, if you feel that self-interest of the adviser, who should have given it an abstention, has also caused direct damage to your funds.
Otherwise, if the board administrator's intervention in a conflict of interest did not have any effect on the legal status of the areas of the exponent, there is interest in the latter's complaint of breach of Article. 78, since the consequences would have to uphold the appeal only on properties not owned by the applicant, who would not, therefore, changed the legal status of their property (see TAR Lombardia, Brescia, sec. I 8/7/2009 No 1461 and the State Council, sect. V, 06/12/2009 No. 3744).
However, in this case the exponent has not given specific and unambiguous test of the utility that could result from the partial - partial as relating only to the parties on council conflict of interest - cancellation of PGT, whereby the first reason must reject.
2. The second reason is the alleged violation, in several respects, the legislation, state and regional cooperation on SEA (Strategic Environmental Assessment) and in this regard, the exponent
contests, even if only partially, the decision of the Regional Board 27.12.2007 No 8 / 6420 on the procedure for Environmental Assessment of Plans and Programs (also known as the Strategic Environmental Assessment or SEA). The City of
Cermenate, for the mandatory submission of their PGT at the SEA procedure, has done so by resolution of the Board No 38/2008 (doc. 6 of the applicant) to start the process of strategic environmental assessment, identifying the same time the so-called authority of the SEA, made up by the team of two city employees, namely the geom. Symposium Perniola and PIE, respectively Head of Planning and OSS Production and Head of the Public Works.
According to the applicant, the identification of the competent authority for SEA within the same municipal government required the approval of the TMP is unlawful, as a structure responsible for the SEA completely internal to the city would not offer sufficient guarantees of impartiality and impartiality in the environmental assessment, resulting in an illegitimate mingling of active management functions (approval PGT) and control (environmental assessment), with the consequence of defeat the purpose - required by European legislation and the national implementation - own strategic environmental assessment.
With regard to this reason it is necessary first to point out how there interest to act for the applicant, as a result of accepting the complaint would have invalidated the entire PGT, with the requirement for the adoption of a new municipal administration of the Plan, However, in accordance with the provisions of the SEA, so you set the ends of the geom. Vergani an instrumental interest in a remake of the administrative power, which could take place in the sense most favorable to the plaintiff (see the point, TAR Lombardia, Milano, sez. II, 27.1.2010, n. 188).
No Turning back to the medium 2, must be rejected the plea of \u200b\u200bacquiescence - Raised by the defense in the communal memory of 11/04/2009 - for failing to appeal the decision of the Regional Council No 8 / 351, 13.3.2007, always on the VAS, as the latter decision (see doc. 15 of the Town), does not provide anything on the composition of the competent authority for SEA, but only sets (art is seen. 2.0 Lett. Annex 1 to the resolution of the Board), the tasks of the same, while its composition is provided by subsequent resolution of the Regional Council, 27.12.2007, ritually contested - although in part here - with this appeal. Nor could
maintained, as is foreshadowed in the public hearing dal difensore del Comune, una presunta inammissibilità del ricorso per omessa notificazione ad eventuali controinteressati, individuati nei proprietari dei terreni o in altri soggetti menzionati nel ricorso. Infatti, secondo pacifica giurisprudenza, i proprietari delle aree comprese nel Piano Regolatore Generale (ma tale conclusione vale senza dubbio anche per il PGT, quale strumento urbanistico generale), non sono qualificabili come controinteressati al momento dell’impugnazione del Piano stesso (cfr. Consiglio di Stato, sez. V, 2.3.2010 n. 1184 e sez. IV, 30.9.2008 n. 4712), né risultano tali le altre persone indicate in ricorso, visto che l’eventuale accoglimento di quest’ultimo non determinerebbe alcuna diretta ed immediata lesion in their legal position, not having enough of the rest of the mere mention of a subject in the contested decision or action, to rise to the same role as the other party (see in this regard, TAR Calabria, Catanzaro, sec. I, 11:12 .2007, No 2004).
is added, for the sake of completeness and notwithstanding the foregoing, the present application has been notified in any way certain individuals deemed defendant - that the City Council, alleging failure to abstain - for which the exception of 'Directors - all want to give - if anything, could result in an integration of contradictory but not a declaration of ineligibility.
E 'can then examine the merits of the appeal of the second half.
outset, however, appear to justify certain assumptions relating to the Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) in the light of the guidelines and national legislation.
Strategic environmental assessment has been introduced by Directive 2001/42/EC of the European Parliament and the Council of 27.6.2001 on the assessment of the effects of certain plans and programs. The stated purpose of the Directive (Article 1), is to ensure a \u0026lt;
E 'was also noted, the doctrine that the organization Community VAS, together with that of the Environmental Impact Assessment-EIA has its roots in earlier experiences of the U.S. legal sixties of last century and even in some of the initiatives of the United Nations for the international environmental protection (see, in this regard work of the UN Commission on the Environment and Development, concluded with the Brundtland report of 1987, which sets out for the first time the principle of "Sustainable Development").
Returning, however, the guidelines, remember that the law of the Region Lombardy n. 12/2005 on the territorial government, art. 4 ("Environmental Assessment of Plans") richiama espressamente la direttiva 2001/42/CE, rinviando a successive deliberazioni del Consiglio e della Giunta l’approvazione di indirizzi ed ulteriori adempimenti per la valutazione ambientale dei piani. In attuazione dell’art. 4 citato, il Consiglio Regionale ha approvato gli indirizzi generali per la valutazione suindicata, con deliberazione 13.3.2007 n. VIII/351, mentre con successiva delibera di Giunta 27.12.2007 n. 8/6420 è stata disciplinata la procedura per la VAS.
Lo Stato italiano ha dato compiuta attuazione alla direttiva 2001/42/CE con il decreto legislativo 16.1.2008 n. 4, quindi successivo alla regolamentazione regionale sopra richiamata.
Per effetto del citato decreto legislativo, è stata entirely rewritten in Part II of the Legislative Decree no. 152/2006 ("Environmental Regulations", cd Environmental Code) and was told a specific provision for SEA in Articles 4 et seq.
That legislation was considered and constitutionally legitimate expression of state legislative power, as inherent in matter of "environmental protection", that Article. 117, paragraph 2, Lett. s) of the Constitution, subject to the exclusive legislation of the State (see Constitutional Court, 22.7.2009, n. 225).
Article. 5, paragraph 1, lett. a) of Legislative Decree no. 152/2006, defines SEA as environmental assessment of plans and programs, including conducting an audit of subjection, the preparation of an environmental report and its evaluation of the plan or program.
part of the SEA procedure, Article. 5 separates the competent authority (p) by the preceding example (lit. q), the latter is defined as the government initiating the plan or program, while the first is the public administration which is responsible for the activities environmental assessment. For the purposes of the competent authority, the art. 7, paragraph 6, takes care to specify that in the regional office, the competent authority is public administration with responsibility for protection, enhancement and environmental protection.
The additional provisions contained in the SEA Environmental Code confirms, clearly, the need for separation between the two different authorities - and that the prosecuting authority - whose relationship in the process of strategic environmental assessment is altogether dialectic , in confirmation of the understanding of the legislature to entrust the role of authority to a subject specialist public prosecuting authority in juxtaposition, but coincides with the public body that approves the plan (see, among others, Art. 11, paragraph 2, art. 12, paragraph 4, Articles. 13, 14 and 15).
is then confirmed the absolute imperative nature of VAS, so much so that the appropriate administrative approval of plans and programs adopted without the VAS, where required, \u0026lt;
examination of the legislative framework referred to above - the transposition of Directive 2001/42/EC - the conclusion is, according to the writer's Court, which, in the choice of the competent authority concerned must identify public offering adequate assurance not only of technical expertise and specialization in environmental protection, but also of impartiality and independence from the proceeding authority, in order to perform the function of environmental assessment as objectively as possible, without conditions - and indirectly - by the proceeding.
If the latter, in fact, identify the competent authority only among subjects placed at home, perhaps linked by ties of subordination in relation to political or administrative organs of government administration, the role of environmental assessment would end up losing all effectiveness, to be replaced by a simple internal bureaucratic shift, with the risk of anything but remote vanificare la finalità della disciplina sulla VAS e di conseguenza di pregiudicare la corretta applicazione delle norme comunitarie, frustrando così gli scopi perseguiti dalla Comunità Europea con la direttiva 2001/42/CE, come quello di salvaguardia e promozione dello “sviluppo sostenibile”, espressamente enunciato all’art. 1 della direttiva, come già sopra evidenziato (si ricordi che lo “sviluppo sostenibile” costituisce uno degli scopi dell’Unione Europea, espressamente enunciato all’art. 3, comma 3°, del Trattato dell’Unione Europea in vigore dal 1.12.2009).
A tale proposito, pare utile al Collegio rammentare l’obbligo del giudice nazionale di interpretare il diritto interno alla luce di quello comunitario (cfr., sul punto, Consiglio di Stato, sez. VI, 3.9.2009 n. 5197 e TAR Piemonte, sez. I, 5.6.2009, n. 1563), in modo da garantire il c.d. “primato” di quest’ultimo sugli ordinamenti difformi degli Stati membri (sul “primato” del diritto comunitario, si veda Corte di Giustizia CE, sez. III, 19.11.2009 n. 314).
Nel caso di specie il Comune di Cermenate, in attuazione dell’art. 3.2 dell’allegato 1 alla delibera di Giunta del 27.12.2007, ha individuato l’autorità competente all’interno dello stesso Comune, scegliendo in particolare i Responsabili del Settore Urbanistica e del Settore Lavori Pubblici.
The composition of the competent authority, beyond any assessment on the preparation and the professional competence of the individual municipal workers, does not appear in any case, compliance with Community standards and state above, as is absolutely unfit to ensure the necessary impartiality of ' competent authority with respect to that proceeding.
In addition, moreover, that the Head of the Urban Planning of the City, a member of the competent authority, is among those who have contributed to the preparation of the Plan document, which is to strengthen the belief of the Board about the illegality of the composition the competent authority, a causa dell’evidente commistione fra il ruolo di controllore e quello di controllato.
Sono quindi illegittimi sia il provvedimento comunale di designazione dell’autorità competente sia quello regionale ivi impugnato, che prevede la composizione della suddetta autorità con soggetti scelti all’interno della differente autorità procedente.
L’illegittimità della delibera regionale del 2007 non è esclusa neppure dalla lettura della legislazione regionale in materia, vale a dire l’art. 4 della L.R. 12/2005. L’articolo si limita, infatti, sotto il profilo dell’individuazione dell’autorità competente, a rinviare a successive deliberazioni del Consiglio o della Regional Council, but without much to say. It should be added - and forgive the obvious - that in the SEA Region is in any case be subject to strict guidelines, so that certainly does not seem possible for the regional body to introduce exceptions to it.
Moreover, the same does not seem to be the Lombardy Region has always been consistent with its decision of 27.12.2007, taking into account that, with the opinion expressed by the Strategic Environmental Assessment and Design program negotiated with a note of 06.04.2009 No 6818, addressed to the City of Campodolcino the case, the regional structure exclude the possibility that the Mayor would assume the role of authority, where the authorities procedente era stata individuata nell’Amministrazione comunale.
Nel parere si ricorda il principio, desumibile dal D.Lgs. 4/2008 e assolutamente condiviso dallo scrivente Collegio, della separazione dell’autorità competente rispetto a quella procedente e, con riguardo alla prima, della necessità di un suo sufficiente grado di autonomia e di competenza in materia di ambiente e sviluppo sostenibile (cfr. il parere regionale, doc. 9 del ricorrente).
Ciò premesso, il motivo n. 2 del ricorso principale appare suscettibile di accoglimento, con conseguente annullamento non solo – seppure in parte qua – della delibera regionale impugnata, ma anche della delibera di Giunta Comunale n. 38/2008 di establishment of the competent authority of VAS and no board resolutions And No. 12 13 of 2009 approving a flawed PGT in its entirety on the illegality of the SEA procedure, as indicated above.
The acceptance of the complaint No. 2 absorbent in nature than other flaws reported in the application and additional reasons, which need not therefore be examined.
3. The question of damages should be rejected, as a result of accepting the appeal, the City will again provide for approval by the PGT, after renewal of the strategic environmental assessment, carried out by a different "authorities competente”, come indicato in motivazione.
Allo stato quindi, dovendo l’Amministrazione di Cermenate determinarsi nuovamente sul proprio Piano di Governo del Territorio, nessun danno risarcibile è ravvisabile in capo all’esponente, che del resto neppure offre adeguata prova del danno lamentato (cfr. sul punto, le sentenze del TAR Lombardia, Milano, sez. II, n. 5215 e n. 5218, entrambe del 1.12.2009) .
4. La complessità e la novità delle questioni trattate inducono il Collegio a compensare interamente fra le parti le spese di lite.
P.Q.M.
Il Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per la Lombardia, Milano, sez. II, definitivamente pronunciano sul ricorso e sui motivi added as an epigraph, welcomes them, in accordance with the reasons given and the effect cancels the contested measures.
rejects the claim for damages.
offset expenses.
Order that the above is carried out by the Administration.
Decided in Milan in chambers on April 28, 2010 with the intervention of the Lords:
Mario Arosio, President John
Zucchini, First Legal secretary, Stretchers
Silvia Bini, First Referendary
L ' THE PRESIDENT EXTENDER
FILED IN OFFICE
on 17/05/2010
(Art. 55, L. 27/4/1982 No 186)
THE SECRETARY
0 comments:
Post a Comment