The City of Villa San Giovanni (RC) and the Metropolitan City of Reggio Calabria have notified the Presidency of the Council of Ministers and all the ministers concerned, the Regions of Calabria and Sicily, the other interested party proposing the appeal to ask the Lazio Regional Administrative Court to annul the opinion of the EIA Commission of the Ministry of the Environment “due to defects in legitimacy and excess of power in all its forms”, raising doubts about the constitutionality of the emergency decree of the Bridge Decree and the Infrastructure Decree.
«The two administrations – we read in a note signed by the mayor of Villa, Giusy Caminiti, the council and the “City in motion” council group – had jointly asked the two competent ministries (MASE and MIT) since the start of the procedure , to suspend the procedure pending specific technical studies, highlighting the design gaps such as to make it impossible to judge the merits of the same, highlighting among other things the unfinished risk linked to the so-called «construction by progressive construction phases».
A request to the MIT (14 and 31 May 2024) which continues to be valid, – it should be noted again – considering that the Administrations to date have no knowledge of the direct impact of the project on the municipal and metropolitan territory. Territories have the right to have guarantees and certainties, they have the obligation to protect the environment and landscape and to defend the rights of citizens, they have the right and duty to govern the phases of change”.
The opinion of the EIA Commission published on 10.19.2024 «notes – it is underlined – the non-compliance with the requirements set in 2003 for the preliminary project and places 62 requirements on the current updated definitive which confirm all the exceptions raised by the Metropolitan City of Reggio Calabria in last April and by the City of Villa San Giovanni until 13 October, especially regarding the lack of specific detailed studies, construction site projects and resolution projects for interference. In reiterating a position already expressed, not ideologically oriented but aimed exclusively at the protection of the territory and the defense of the rights of its inhabitants (mainly those of the expropriated), the two administrations have carefully evaluated from a legal and technical point of view – continues the press release – the opinion expressed by the VIA VAS commission, reaching the conclusion that it does not provide guarantees, ending up postponing any environmental compatibility assessment of this project to a judgment of compliance envisaged for the majority of the requirements «before the presentation of the executive design”».
According to the appellants «the failure to execute the SEA culpably neglects this requirement. The definitive project updated and approved by the VIA VAS Commission, according to current legislation and Legislative Decree 50, does not rise from any point of view (technical-design, economic, environmental, landscape) to the level of definitive design. The authorities are concerned about the lack of provision for continuous monitoring – before, during and after the possible construction of the bridge – of air quality, coastal erosion and the lack of nourishment interventions; the lack of regulation and regeneration of the identity elements of the Strait area. An area that must not be distorted by the bridge work, but must protect its historical, environmental and cultural heritage and the bodies representing the territories cannot be passive subjects of interventions that would substantially and definitively modify the Strait Area. Protection of the landscape as a constitutional value, protection of those being expropriated, feared risk of an eternal unfinished business with unimaginable harmful consequences for the survival of the metropolitan social fabric itself, are the purely political reasons for the decision taken, considering that the opinion expressed by the VIA VAS Commission presents profiles of dubious constitutionality, violations of the law and excess of power, and therefore, it is necessary to protect the interests of the city of Villa San Giovanni as a municipality on which completely impacts the Ponte work and the interests of the Metropolitan City of Reggio Calabria and the Strait Area. We know there is broad administrative and political convergence on the position expressed, above all – concludes the note – we know there is convergence on this of our communities who want to be protagonists in every development decision of this extraordinary territory”.
This consideration, it is written, «is confirmed in the contested opinion, since the in-depth analysis and documentary additions requested in the Environmental Impact Assessment procedure presuppose the execution of analyzes and field investigations, both for the Sicily side and for the Calabria side, which have never been carried out; the need “to carry out in the most accurate and thorough way the additions requested by the competent authorities with a view to giving full and effective promotion to the environmental value” remained only a good intention but nothing more than the designer’s update report which did not is based on further scientific data.”
With specific reference to the City of Villa San Giovanni, «the existence of an active and capable fault called «Cannitello» under the foundations of the pillars on the Calabria side is proven with the prescription of the «Technical Commission for environmental impact verification» to carry out new investigations which pose further doubts on the feasibility of the work (regulatory the definitive design must clarify every aspect of this type with certainty), specific and detailed studies and complete preliminary in-depth studies on all the active and capable faults present in the area in question. Ditto with respect to the problem of coastal erosion, which has not been evaluated and lacks specific studies; there is no analysis of the provisions of the planning documents, in contrast with the precise prescription n.1 of the CIPE Resolution of 2003 approving the preliminary project on the basis of which the definitive project must be developed in such a way that, without prejudice to the aforementioned location, it is achieved to the maximum possible compatibility with the strategies and development plans with which it is intended to interact”.
Even environmentalists appeal to the TAR against the Via sul Ponte
Legambiente, Lipu and WWF Italia also notified the appeal to the Lazio Regional Administrative Court «against the favorable opinion with requirements» on the Environmental Impact Assessment concerning the Bridge over the Strait of Messina, «despite the negative opinion» of the Impact Assessment. The three associations made this known, explaining that the appeal “highlights the illogicality” of the opinion issued by the EIA Commission which presents “significant analytical deficiencies”. According to Legambiente, LIPU and WWF Italia «the negative impact assessment prejudices the positive opinion issued, while the analyzes and in-depth analyzes requested – in particular on mitigation and compensation – should have already been presented with the definitive project as it is unreasonable to ask for them for the project executive after the assignment for the construction of the work”. The Bridge over the Strait of Messina “remains a project with a very serious and irreversible environmental impact, which cannot be mitigated or compensated for”, state the three associations, pointing out that the Via Commission itself “admits” it which, in relation to the Impact Assessment, highlights: «The same analyzes of the proponent lead us to believe that for some sites of the Natura 2000 Network it is not possible to conclude that the project will not determine significant impacts, or rather there remains a margin of uncertainty which, for the precautionary principle, does not allow negative effects on these sites to be excluded”.