Multi-faceted obligations in the Italian practice

Non–negotiable and negotiated obligations are both in use in the Italian planning system, although throughout the years there has been a variation in their quantity and in the emphasis on their justification. Initially, the accent was placed on recapturing the increased value of private land from public actions and decisions. The focus then evolved realistically into the active support for infrastructures and urban facilities in the development area and in the city itself. In the boom years of the 1960s and 1970s the improvement in the quality of urban life and the compensation for the existing severe social inequalities were the main aims in the Italian planning. At national level, mandatory charges (urbanization fees) for basic infrastructures were introduced in the development plans, along with non-negotiable obligations (mainly land for public uses) for ‘community benefits’, named standard urbanistici. These regulations – which effectively produced a betterment in the urban welfare - have been recently enforced by an equalization mechanism, named perequazione, grounded in the general plan, that in principle distributes a series of development rights to all pieces of land in the urban ring so that all developers may enjoy the same private benefits and pay the same fees. One of the aims is to acquire part of the value generated by urban growth from property owners and convert it into social uses (social housing included). The transition from urban growth to urban renovation, which increased land prices, and the reduction of economic resources for both building and managing public facilities strongly affected municipalities. Consequently, the planning system shifted towards a ‘planning by agreement’ approach in the 1990s, and regional laws began to allow for a set of negotiated obligations so as to face the responsibilities of municipal financial autonomy. Developed locally, in the absence of national guidelines and control, negotiable obligations often ignore planning procedures and result in an unsatisfactory balance of public costs and private advantages. In this paper, I intend to highlight good practices, in Milano and Bologna, where the planning rules themselves provide negotiable obligations of various features ranging from increased contributions for urban equipment, incentive mechanisms to produce social and affordable housing, and bonuses supporting sustainable projects, including energy saving initiatives.