The seal is notarial, the signature is that of a notary with a heavy name. The object of the dispute is a real estate deal destined to overturn the entrance gate to the capital of Sardinia, throwing the main infrastructure of the island, the airport, currently public and civil, into a vortex of road traffic and multiple interests. Cagliari-Elmas. When the notary "in Cagliari" Alberto Floris, the most rigorous of the powerful Cagliari Floris family, signs the observations-exhibit on the project intended to raze the ancient buildings of the ancient ironworks on the outskirts of the metropolitan city, he knows perfectly well what he is doing. And if a gentle man, perpetually striving for eternal mediation, decides to write such a weighty and precise indictment, it means that the game is high-class.

Two weights, two measures

At stake are statements without appeal, starting from what is clearly described as the policy of double standards. Let's be clear, the notary Floris does not write for pleasure, but rather to point out that in the old Elmas steelworks what has been forbidden to others is being permitted. The "others", mentioned in the opposition, are the shareholders of Esetali srl, the Floris family company which must submit to VIA its project for the "Environmental and Urban Redevelopment of an area in the Matzeu Garden and Swimming Pool area" in the Municipality of Assemini, less than 2 km from the Ex Fas site. The reasoning is straightforward: you impose an Environmental Impact Assessment on us for a decidedly smaller settlement, you force us, rightly, to calculate the cumulative impacts of all the shopping centers built or planned in that area, while this does not happen for the Fas operation.

Chaos “cumulative effects”

And the observations filed with the Regional Department of the Environment reveal names and surnames, tell of varied "treatments", and accuse: « it should be noted that in the documents viewed on the Region's website for the project in question of the former Fas it has never been assessed the cumulative impacts with other similar interventions already carried out or in the confirmed project development phase, such as, for example: the construction of the buildings in the Truncu Is Follas area, in the Municipality of Assemini" (so-called Bricoman move), proposed by Gesafin Immobiliare Srl Company, the “Thanit subdivision plan” project, proposed by the Spes srl, Mitosi srl, Aces srl companies, subjected to a verification procedure concluded with submission to the Street ». In practice, according to the notary's observations, for the Fas there would be no verification of the cumulative impact of that mega shopping center to be located between the airport, the entrance to Cagliari and an area already overloaded with commercial structures which alone make it unlivable and impracticable that stretch of the state highway one hundred and thirty. Not a generic accusation, but heavy as a boulder, also because you don't need a transport engineer to understand what will happen at the entrance to Cagliari on that side, with very serious repercussions on Cagliari airport itself.

Cellino “demolished”

Moreover, the crossfire that had "demolished" Massimo Cellino's idea of building the Cagliari stadium in the areas surrounding the airport, those of Santa Caterina, comes to mind. There were criticisms and bans, with the main accusation that the "anthropic" load of a stadium could not add to the safety and usability of an international airport like the one in Cagliari. They prevented him, without much preamble, even though it was a game every fortnight. Now that it involves a flow of tens of thousands of people, every day and at all hours, ENAC has "surprisingly" given the green light, despite the fact that in the services conference its representative had first voted against and then reneged on that opinion. to the contrary, giving the green light to the use of the airport's safety artery to discharge the traffic flow of the shopping center there.

The ENAC "traffic light".

A fact which alone would deserve much more in-depth analysis given that what is at stake is the access route for ambulances and emergency vehicles in the unfortunate event of an accident on the airport grounds. The "desire" to "please" the shopping center has led to the creation, with an imagination of times gone by, of a traffic light to be positioned on the overpass designed to connect the airport with the new building, as if it were a normal crossroads. village. An overall picture which - according to the opposition presented to the regional offices - should have required a very different evaluation given the project upheaval and the fact that " at present the planned works have not yet been carried out ". In no uncertain terms the document sent to the environmental department accuses « important and substantial design changes that have a significant impact on the environment, first of all by providing for a "permanent safety measure " and not a real "reclamation" of the site, as well as a demolition and reconstruction of existing buildings, instead of their renovation and recovery ".

Charges

The charges are explicit. All heavy and without appeal. Starting from the most delicate paragraph: "Risks for human health". For the gentlemen of the "Villa del Mas", the company that owns the Fas site, everything is in order, even more: « the intervention takes on a particular positive value in relation to the fact that it is partly a contaminated site, which the permanent safety measures on lot B have already been completed some time ago, while the contaminated part of lot A will also be subject to permanent safety measures thanks to the implementation of the recently approved Operational Reclamation Plan; in summary it seems appropriate to highlight that the project in question represents an undoubted advantage in terms of risks for human health which will be less exposed to risks once the safety works have been completed also on the portion of lot A" . It is with that alleged "advantage" for human health that the opposition does not agree at all. The findings, in fact, are a real alarm: «In this regard, it is noted that the results of the so-called "site-specific" health and environmental risk analysis carried out for potential users of the area, both workers and customers, are NOT present , according to the main routes of exposure, i.e. surface soil, deep soil, outdoor air, indoor air, underground water and the methods of exposure, i.e. ingestion of drinking water, ingestion of soil, dermal contact, inhalation of vapors and particulates, even in depending on the fact that the primary source of contamination will remain in situ ".

The waste remains there

The statement is very weighty: the «primary source of contamination will remain in situ» that is, all the polluting elements will be buried, but will remain there forever. The consequence is clear: «For this reason it is NOT possible to evaluate the impact on the environmental factor called “population and human health ”. The risks for the environment are a decisive chapter of the observations of the Floris company: « With regards to the typology of “ permanent safety" envisaged in the project, i.e. the encapsulation with "capping" of the waste in situ, the impact on human health CANNOT be assessed in relation to the degree of mobility and persistence in the various environmental matrices of the waste foreseen on the site, even in relation to the fact that, as no hydraulic barrier is foreseen, the groundwater will continue to circulate freely and interact permanently with the "waste matrix" .

Aquifers at risk

Not so veiled accusations compared to a potential pollution of the aquifers themselves given that the "poisons" from the former steelworks will be "covered" on the surface, but will remain unprotected towards the subsoil, with all the resulting risks. And the reasons for the choice to leave that "waste buried" are explained by the technicians of the company that signed the indictment: « on the Ex Fas site, instead of proceeding with the desired "reclamation" of the site, with the consequent removal of the buried waste, we opted for an undoubtedly cheaper solution, namely "permanent safety" and therefore NOT removing the waste but creating an impermeable barrier on the ground called "capping". The "permanent safety measures", therefore, is NOT the "reclamation" of the site and for this reason the uses and human permanence must be carefully evaluated ".

The exact opposite

There's more: in the first project version, the one approved in 2015, it was decided not to demolish the existing structure precisely to " optimize the reclamation processes without the activation of new routes or new potential pollutants in situ and ex Yes you ". Now, however, the exact opposite is claimed. The recall of the observations, then, accuses the significant contradiction between the project approved in 2015 with the "restoration" of those industrial warehouses from the last century and the new "strategy" of razing everything to the ground.

From “archaeology” to nothing

In the 2015 project approval documents, the Region had endorsed the decision not to demolish that "industrial heritage" to respond to " the planning direction of maintaining the historical testimony of the places, generating a more significant landscape impact ". All forgotten and omitted. Now only an esplanade remains on that site, with many mysteries about that "forgotten" industrial waste down there and an airport that risks ending up in chaos, with emergency and rescue routes transformed into commercial lanes. Yet another chapter in the "modern" history of the old steel mill. With denials transformed into "extravagant" authorizations.

(2.continued)

© Riproduzione riservata