harbour year 2013 to Venice begins indicating a recrudescence of the conflict port-city



To Venice the president of the Harbour Authority and the mayor agrees on one thing: that the port must be transferred to out of the Venetian lagoon. However they dissent on which harbour activities to transfer: the first citizen would want to carry all offshore the landings place for the great ships, or at least to the greater possible distance from the delicate Venetian ecosystem, while Paolo Costa considers indispensable to allow with the cruise ships to reach the city to the aim not to lose precious a tourist traffic is economically that as instrument of promotion of Venice.

Today, in occasion of the inauguration of harbour year 2013, the president of the Harbour Authority of Venice has restated the necessity to realize the project of the height port, than the agency he has introduced in 2010 with the objective to construct a harbour platform in deep waters to situate to about eight miles nautical from the mouth of port of Malamocco and to which to make to land the oil traffics and container ( on 23 September 2010). "Lagoon nautical accessibility - Paolo Costa has remembered - has not superable limits that vitiate every possible hypothesis of development of its portualità online with the tendencies of the shipping world-wide. By virtue of its backdrops to -12 meters, in fact - it has explained - the port of Venice can be equipped today in order to accommodate ships in a position to transporting until a maximum of 7.000 teu". Coast has evidenced as the receptive ability for portacontainer to this cargo ability would have been sufficient in 1997, "not more today - it has emphasized - and least of all tomorrow when the seas of the container are furrowed by ships until 18.000 teu, already in exercise, to which ships from 22.000 teu will come abreast soon, under construction.
A perspective that does not put market single Venice outside, but almost all the Italian portualità, if estimated on the three parameters: of nautical accessibility, of the operating spaces in port and infrastructures of connection with the harbour markets back to serve".

"Paradoxicalally - it has continued the president of the Harbour Authority - the "necessity" to exceed the tie of nautical accessibility of the internal Lagunari channels is being transformed in the "virtue" to guarantee with a harbour platform of height, the offshore one, necessary nautical accessibility, that it joins to and it values the abundant you space to earth of Marghera, but not only, and the rich street, railway infrastructure equipment and of inland navigation that the Venetian area already offers. The idea to conjugate the Venetian harbour development on offshore-onshore coupling, than until yesterday could appear as a utopico project - it has found Coast - is anticipated today as one of the roads that Italy can and must follow in order to equip itself of "strongly innovative harbour cars" that sun can allow with our Country to compete with the remainder of the European portualità".

Coast has restated also the conviction that the new port of height will be able to work in symbiosis with the other harbour landings place of the Adriatic north and that all the ports will be able to draw yield from the new opportunities offered from the offshore harbour platform. According to Coast, in fact, it is "a project that gets fired up in the picture of complementary adaptations in course in the other ports NAPA (Trieste, Koper and Rijeka) as well as to Ravenna", declaration with which the president of the Harbour Authority has thrown again an exhortation to Ravenna so that he reconsiders its perplexities about the height port, perplexities that had induced the port of call ravennate to exit from the born association NAPA in order to reunite the ports of the northern Adriatic.

"Venice - Paolo Costa has rimarcato - does not have alternatives to a project proposed for giving concreteness to previewed how much from the special law and originally declined to the principle of the single environmental safeguard, whereby was imagined to move away the oil traffics and to loosen the pressure of more and more large ships on the Malamocco-Marghera channel, but become the hinge of realistic politics of commercial harbour development of Venice and the high Adriatic. A project that, as famous, I found on the fusion of two administrative procedures (that entrusted to the Magistrate to Waters of offshore Venice for necessary for the ouster of the oil traffic from the lagoon and that of Harbour Authority of Venice for the creation of a pier container and a port shelter in height) that it has returned both most credible ones also for the obvious economies of scale".

If the vision of the mayor of Venice collimates with that of Coast regarding oil tankers and portacontainer, it diverges absolutely for the cruise ships. Already in the praises turned by Giorgio Orsoni to the president of the Harbour Authority for the results reached from the port intuisce as the mayor seems to inculpate Paolo Costa not to comprise the requirements and the urgencies of the city, but only those merely sector and commercial of the port: "I cannot not take note with satisfaction - mayor Orsoni has congratulated itself - of as the port of Venice is currently well managed in its technical member".

The mayor but has entered quickly in the alive one of the controversies tied to the arrival of the cruise ships that have been primed after the shipwreck of Costa Concordia to Isola del Giglio and the next normative provision (decree Clini-Passera) with which the government in charge last year has prevented to the great ships to approach themselves national the protected areas and sensitive sites from the environmental point of view, between which the lagoon of Venice. "All we know - Orsoni has asserted - that exists a problem of strategic development of the port of Venice, exploded in these months with the topic of the so-called "great ships" and of their passage in San Marco Basin". According to the mayor, "it is the tip of the iceberg of deeper and complex a problem that we cannot elude".

"It is stupidly simplistic and reductive - it has observed Giorgio Orsoni - to bring back the issue of the access of the "great ships" to a argument between mayor and president of the port, or, better, to mine presumed bad character. With the president we have shared and we share the idea of the social development also of this city and all and the two traguardiamo common good. The truth is that against the prohibition of sanctioned passage from I interministerial decree, is from more than a year waiting for its performance, and now solutions considered from many incompatible ones with the maintenance of the lagoon balance are shown, in a gasping run-up to a remedy, as if the ships beyond the 300 meters had been introduced suddenly today to the port mouth. And the problem is faced as if it were ineluctable that naval gigantism must soggiogare all the lagoon and the same city.

"That this is lowered by the Harbour Committee - has continued Orsoni - is completely comprehensible since is assembly of bearers of particular interests in which the Municipality has already had way to express its contrarietà. This that is not comprehensible - has accused the mayor - it is that an instrumental agency of the State, which the local authorities participate, that he has the task to plan the development of the port, make promoter of initiatives in conflict with the choices of general planning, and he has not known to anticipate the times, previewing the problems that gigantism of the cruise ships would have place to the lagoon. If it has been arrived to a emergenziale provision as that Clini-Passera, it means evidently that it has not been looked at enough far away. Now the digging of a channel cannot be placed as only remedy, that it would return operating the prohibition, if goes well, between two years perhaps, when the cruise ships even arrive to four hundred meters of length and beyond, and without to consider the effect on the accesses to the lagoon that will determine the entrance according to Mose. A remedy worse of badly assumed in logic to make oneself to guide from the events and in that not to dominate them with an aware programming".

For mayor it is necessary, indeed right, than the port make a step behind: "the administration - it has emphasized - cannot and it does not want to accept chosen that they prefigure a development not governabile infinity and of accessibility of the port by any boat and expects - this yes, I emphasize it with force - than the port is adapted to own addresses of territorial politics, managing compatible industrial plans with the place, the lagoon, the city. We do not forget in fact that the lagoon is part integrating of the city. Any action that interests the lagoon is action that interests also the city. Meanwhile suitable industrial plans to guarantee - and I want to emphasize it with force - occupation and economic development, inverting a logic up to now continuation of supine acceptance of any demand for I use of the port. In the emergency humility is had to face, also in transitory way, and partially, even chosen demonstrate yourself since operating in these days quickly, perhaps not online with a sure organizational model that evidently has been revealed mistaken, if we have arrived to I decree emergenziale”.

Orsoni has concluded declaring itself “in close agreement with who it supports that on this argument “it does not have to be joked with the fire”. The invitation - it has specified - goes evidently turned to which, churning the occupational blackmail, they close the eyes of forehead to a situation of extreme environmental gravity, deriving from a lack of aware planning and farsightedness on what it would have happened in the harbour activity, that it took into consideration the impact that the new naval means would have had on the lagoon atmosphere. And if someone has made investments without to hold account of this situation, it charges it to if same, and it does not think to unload on the municipal administration the lack of a corrected industrial planning of the port. A thing - it has restated - is sure: I decree imposes an immediate solution. This solution we expect we are found in the immediate one and for it we are disposed to work all with maximum loyalty and collaboration”.

“Everyone of we - it has replied the president of the Harbour Authority - must make its part and the problem of the great ships - it has agreed Coast - is only the tip of the iceberg of a wider basic issue, than - however it has found - it does not have to be but made captive of a smaller problem”. “It can be given - it has added Coast - that we have waked up ourselves late on this topic, but we have made it all, because the same things are written in all today enforced documents. And there is difference between sitting down and discussing and to say that nothing does not go well: all in agreement that the ships not child's step in front of San Marco. The true problem is the coordination between the various subjects that must decide”. Coast has remembered that the projects in order to avoid the transit of the great ships in front of Venice will have to be introduced next the 25 July ( on 13 June 2013): “we - he has specified - could not that to confirm that of the digging of the Contort-Sant'Angelo channel, that is born from an idea of the professor Of Alpaos, but we are opened to all, putting but in clearly the two unavoidable objectives: not to put in crisis also a single place of work and the fact that nobody can save the crocieristica putting in crisis the remainder of the port”.