Nine public meetings brought over four hundred people to offer proposals and voice their concerns. The major themes that emerged concerned the mass assault of tourists on Venice, the need for environmental mitigations and the proposed connections with public transportation, including the problem of moto ondoso and already crowded water traffic.
By Mitia Chiarin
15 June 2023
Yesterday was the final public debate about the new 2037 Masterplan for Marco Polo Airport, which calls for an investment of 2 billion euro for a new structure meant to double the number of passengers. Thus concluded the debate phase called for by law, about a project that has put SAVE (the company that owns the airport) in dialogue with the area, local bodies, associations and committees. Many sparks have flown: first with the committees that are critical of the plan; then with the Brugnaro administration, which has asked for more time to give an official opinion and has also asked for the completion of the mitigations left unfinished from the preceding masterplan.
There were nine meetings, with 413 people present (140 in person, 273 online). There were two sessions with the Venice city council. As many as 39 observations submitted by parties, committees, professional groups and organizations, all visible on the website for the process. 165 questions were gathered from the public and responded to during the public meetings, all now aggregated in one of the appendixes to the report. Opinions, criticisms, and proposals are now all included in the documents.
Two main themes emerged. On one hand, the need for a public direction against the ills cause by overtourism in Venice. The increase in passengers called for in the masterplan, from 11 million to 20 million, has caused fears of new setbacks for the historical city, and therefore the need clearly emerges, explained the coordinator of the public debate, Andrea Pillon, for an institutional body between the government, SAVE and tourism operators to govern the phenomenon and not suffer from it. SAVE has repeatedly said that the fault does not lie only with the airport, claiming that out of 10 travelers that arrive at Marco Polo, 4 go to Venice, while the other 6 are destined for other parts of Veneto, and pointing out that the 20 million passengers foreseen include arrivals and departures. However, as coordinator Andrea Pillon pointed out, the issue links all the interventions and makes clear the need for an institutional governance of the management of tourism that also includes the airport.
Then there is the major issue of mitigating the impact of an airport that will increase the number of flights and will create a cargo facility; build two service areas with vertiports (for helicopters and other vertical take-off aircraft); evaluate a reorganization of parking that will decrease only if they manage to convince travelers to not use cars but other means of transportation. Noise, pollution, parking, traffic, and water connections with Venice and the islands all raised criticisms and proposals.
For example, there was a proposal to connect the airport to the Municipal tram that currently stops at Favaro after the city stopped investing in that technology. It’s a matter of just 4 km. SAVE was asked to encourage its creation, and the company, which did not reject the idea, explained that a meeting with the Municipality is required. This is not easy these days, after the clash over the entry fee. The tram could be a valid addition to the train for the airport. Construction is nearing but the loop has caused division, with many criticisms directed at RFI and raining down on SAVE. The cargo facility and the two vertiport areas have caused fears over the increase in nocturnal flights or about take-off areas too close to inhabited areas. Citizens have asked for protection and for the resumption of periodic meetings for debate, obtaining an immediate ‘yes’ from SAVE. People urged a big investment in green space, with more trees, protection of the lagoon shores and of biodiversity.
Some proposals were unusual, such as that of using the large agri-voltaic park that SAVE wants to build in front of the airport to build an energy community and give immediate benefits to the citizens. Many citizens asked that the airport consider itself part of the territory and not a foreign “body”. And then there is the need for better quality mitigation. Why doesn’t SAVE finance the purchase of the tower of Tessera or the enhancement of the Altino archaeological museum? Or why not share its water system with the city in the outer reaches of the countryside of Tessera and Ca’Noghera to combat drought?
Then there is the important issue of quality jobs at Marco Polo, which would require going beyond lowest price and temporary contracts. City councilor Marco Gasparinetti stressed that “We need to apply the national Collective Contract for jobs in air transport to all of the security workers, a fundamental aspect to guarantee to employees”, in agreement with Mina Partesotto of the FLAI (Federation of Italian Airport Workers). “Workers are asked to show up at 3 AM, for 1,200 euro net, without Saturdays or Sundays off. They should have 11 hours off in between one shift and the other, but most of the time it’s only 8. Paychecks? They’ve been the same since 2013”. So, neither are surprised at the lack of personnel. “Of course, with conditions like these” they agree. In fact, there is a shortage of around 370 security workers between Venice and Treviso.
City councilor Giovanni Andrea Martini, in a public statement, connected the SAVE masterplan to “all the urban transformations being planned on the mainland and on the Lagoon shores – from the Bosco dello Sport to the Airport, from the new Montioron terminal to the excavations of the lagoon canals to allow the big cruise ships to pass – because it is clear that they cannot each be considered on their own. When we put them all together then we can understand the impact they will have on the territory”.
Source: La Nuova di Venezia e Mestre/Facebook (Martini)
Campaign For A Living Venice 