| dc.description.abstract | This study examines the equalisation as an alternative planning method to the
zoning, and at the same time as a strategic objective for the public administration.
In the absence of a legislative framework, either national or regional, there is not a
reference model for equalisation which it is, thus, subject to plural and flexible
interpretations. In this context, the praetorian law substitutes the legislator, and
legitimizing municipal techniques and plans.
The equalisation technique is not free from the discretionary power of the
municipality, in accordance with territorial, functional and legislative autonomy.
The research aims to identify which are the limits and the evaluation and operating
parameters of territorial planning, particularly in relation to the result to be achieved:
the substantial equality between the owners, allowing a balanced development of the
city services. Preliminary objective is to allocate the rules regulating equalisation in
the right normative sources.
The legal vacuum is eroded from the "bottom" by the joint public-private exercise of
planning in a view of power contractualisation. It is the local public administration
which should bind itself, preparing its "own" rules. Detected the functional and
hierarchical inadequacy of the rules contained in local urban planning, it is the
municipal statute, as sub-prime legislative source, within its competences, which can
ensure the required warranties to private property, through the provision of upstream
rules , which contain technical, economic and quality standards to be applied to the
municipal equalisation method.
The proposed legal framework has a double effect, on one hand, it creates a planning
method with stable rules, on the other, it provides more guarantees to the private
sector in the "vertical" relationship with he local authority, owner of conformative
power of property. [edited by Author] | it_IT |
