In 119 pages of reasoning on the Via Stresa tower, the Milan court rules out intent and negligence and acknowledges deep interpretative uncertainty in the rules. The ruling also shows the gap between what was paid in 2018 to monetise planning standards and what would be paid today. What changes for anyone valuing land in Milan.
On 11 September the Milan court filed the reasoning behind the ruling with which, on 16 June, judge Paola Braggion acquitted the eight defendants in the Torre Milano trial, concerning the residential tower in Via Stresa: 24 floors, over 80 metres high, already occupied. Developers, the certifying designer and former city officials were charged with building violations and unlawful subdivision; prosecutor Marina Petruzzella had sought eight convictions and confiscation of the building. The acquittal formula was that the act does not constitute a crime.
It is the first ruling on the merits among the cases opened by prosecutors into Milan's planning practices. The next first-instance verdict should concern the Via Fauché site. Prosecutors had said they would decide on an appeal after reading the reasoning.
What the ruling says
The core issue was the building permit. The tower was built under a certified notice of works with an undertaking, as a renovation, replacing two demolished buildings. Prosecutors argued it was new construction requiring a building permit preceded by an implementation plan with an agreement and a full calculation of public services.
The court finds the objective elements of the charges present but rules out intent and negligence. The city's practice, endorsed by its legal office since 2002, restated in a circular until 2023 and upheld for years by administrative courts, allowed that project with that permit. Only recently have criminal, administrative and constitutional case law offered different readings of what counts as renovation. The judge describes strong interpretative uncertainty and finds no evidence of a criminal agreement between developers, professionals and officials.
For some twenty years in Milan, a practice did the job of a rule.
The monetisation numbers
The reasoning includes an economic detail relevant to anyone valuing land in the city. For Torre Milano the developer paid €537,646 to monetise planning standards, the sum paid instead of transferring land for parks, parking and services. The 2018 rate in the Carbonari-Maggiolina area was €306.16 per square metre, derived from 1997 tables indexed to inflation under a 2003 method, with adjustments in 2010 and 2014.
In 2024 the city changed method. According to the court, the new tables doubled or tripled the amounts: for the same area, 2025 values range from €923.77 to €1,055.74 per square metre.
Prosecutors calculated that, as new construction, the area to be monetised would have risen to about 6,300 square metres and, at a reconstructed value of about €740, the payment would have approached €4.7 million, over €4.1 million more than was paid. The court does not attribute the gap to officials, who applied the 2018 parameters. Urbanisation charges, €403,719 primary and €640,359 secondary, were paid in full, as for new construction.
What changes for land
The ruling closes the criminal case for the defendants. The conditions of 2018 do not return.
On 23 February 2024 the city had already adopted new guidelines reflecting the stricter interpretation, and they remain the reference for current projects. Demolition and rebuilding with very different heights and volumes now goes through an implementation plan, with longer timelines and monetisation based on tables two or three times higher.
For land valuation there are two consequences. The first is financial. Standards costs, a minor line in a 2018 development appraisal, can now shift residual land value significantly, in proportion to the services a project must provide. Anyone who bought land at previous-cycle prices and has not started works carries a value built on outdated costs.
The second concerns due diligence. For years, compliance of a Milan permit was checked against what the city offices accepted. Via Stresa shows that a practice, however established and upheld by administrative courts, does not protect against a change in interpretation, and that the cost can fall on whoever arrived last. The committee of affected home buyers speaks of mortgages paid on undelivered homes and double rents. According to the builders' association Assimpredil Ance, at the end of July three sites were still under seizure and about ten under investigation.
The new valuation yardstick
The Braggion ruling reduces criminal risk for operators who followed the city's rules and leaves the new structure of costs and procedures intact. The value of Milan's development land now depends on two quantities that were almost neutral in appraisals until 2023: the permit under which building can actually proceed, and the recalculated price of the public services the project must provide.