**7. Case Study**

The proposed model was applied to two public buildings in the City of Pescara (Italy): a former school building and a complex of office buildings. In one case the model proved predictive, defining the valorisation strategy eventually adopted by the municipal administration; the second, although not yet developed by the public decision-maker, has nevertheless earned the consent of the population residing in the district and could be incorporated by the public administration (Figure 5).

### *7.1. Former School Building in Via Lago di Borgiano, Pescara*

This property, owned by the Municipality of Pescara, is located in Via Lago di Borgiano, near the former GTM garage. The site is situated in a public housing district between the Via Tiburtina Valeria and the so-called *asse attrezzato* urban highway. The building is currently home to various associations (some present under a regular free loan agreement, others illegally). One wing of the building is used as a kitchen serving the cafeterias of the neighbourhood's schools. Together, the associations and kitchen activity occupy roughly 85% of the available spaces. The costs of kitchen utilities are paid by the kitchen manager, while the utility costs of the associations are paid by the Municipality. The property is zoned D1 OMI. The indices are as follows: IVU = 0.07; IUT = 0.40; ITM = 0.71.

**Figure 5.** Reference scenarios: (**a**) former school in Via Lago di Borgiano; (**b**) offices in Via Tirino.

The model tends toward Scenario C—in this context, it is possible to hypothesize concession projects for the enhancement of social services or activities, given the location of the property in an area with a scarce offering of services, though capable of generating attractiveness and interests. The suitability of the proposal was confirmed by the neighbourhood's citizens. When interviewed about the possible solutions to be implemented, they confirmed the need for spaces and services for children, currently lacking in this densely populated area. In this scenario, a procedure could be activated to legalise occupancy, reorganise the areas assigned to the various associations, and promote, even though free lease agreements or reduced fees, the concession of spaces suitable for the construction of play areas or after-school services for children.

### *7.2. O*ffi*ces in Via Tirino, Pescara*

These properties are located on the ground floor of two adjacent blocks of flats in Via Tirino, near the G. d'Annunzio University campus. Constructed around the year 2000, they were sold to the Municipality of Pescara as part of an agreement with the builder. To date, they are partially unoccupied (the premises were once leased to the Pescara's ASL Health Authority) and partially occupied, under a regular contract, by the Misericordia di Pescara Srl company. The property is zoned C4 OMI. The indices are as follows: IVU = 0.42; IUT = 0.25; ITM = 0.85.

The model tends toward Scenario A: in this context, activities focused on selling the asset without proceeding with its valorisation are suggested, including a direct auction.

As confirmation of the hypothesis proposed by the model, it should be noted that the two buildings have already been included in Municipality of Pescara's Alienations and Valorisations Plan; the current idea is to sell the property to the university.

### **8. Conclusions**

The Protocol and the model of choice represent a possible approach to the technical formalisation of the process, though without overriding the role of politics in decision making. Current literature offers no approaches of a global nature, but only experiments and case studies for individual properties or specific building types, such as barracks [38,39], buildings of historical and/or cultural value [40–43] or railway stations [4,44].

The thick sediment of regulations accumulated over the past 30 years represents an obstacle to the analysis of the problem and the search for solutions. Instead of an organic corpus, it is more a of set of contingent approaches, proposed case-by-case by the legislator to confront urgent budgetary questions or remedy the failures of previous valorisation policies.

Given the conditions described above, only the most structured Institutions, with an adequate administrative apparatus, and to some degrees more farsighted and capable, can confront and govern the complex procedures underlying these processes. It is also true, however, that over the past 10 years, the technical equipment and human resources available to public administrations have proven insufficient: continuous spending cuts and turnover freezes have not allowed public bodies to modernise and hire new (and better trained) staff, or to acquire innovative tools capable of favouring better asset management (for example, property and facility management systems or more complex BIM systems).

This situation reaches its apex in the small municipalities that represent the vast majority in Italy: small towns, or those with a population of less than 5000 inhabitants, account for 69.83% of the total. The protocol elaborated and described here was imagined above all for these realties, precisely because, though they may suffer from an important or total lack of resources and means, they are not without legitimate needs and ambitions.

The purpose of the model of choice provided by the protocol is to guide political actors toward choices based on objective elements that, hopefully, should facilitate the identification of the most appropriate strategies. The validity of the model should be tested in a broad range of cases, beyond the comforting experiments carried out and proposed in this paper.

**Author Contributions:** Conceptualization, S.C. and D.S.; methodology, S.C. and D.S.; resources, S.C. and D.S.; data curation, S.C. and D.S.; writing—original draft preparation, S.C. and D.S.; writing—review and editing, S.C. and D.S. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

**Funding:** This research received no external funding.

**Conflicts of Interest:** The authors declare no conflict of interest.
