• While they must agree on the next Local Urban Plan, communists and ecologists are opposed on the future of the gates of Paris, the height of housing to be built in Bruneseau and Bercy-Charenton or the preservation of the biodiversity of the small belt.
  • If the discussions do not succeed, the current text will continue to be law, but it is dated 2006 and deemed "obsolete" by environmentalists.
  • "We have the impression that they want to make us the PLU of at the same time: we display climate objectives but we build towers, we say that we want to protect biodiversity but we do not protect the small belt from the cuts of the SNCF. The account is not there, "protests the elected ecologist Emile Meunier, who promises not to vote the text as it stands.

Paris councillor Pierre-Yves Bournazel summed it up in one sentence last Thursday at a press conference: "The Local Urban Plan is the most important thing for a city." And this is the reason why, no doubt, this text arouses so much tension within the Parisian majority, not completely in harmony with the vision of the city of the coming years. Communists and ecologists disagree on the future of the gates of Paris and the ring road or the small belt. The town hall must soon convene an extraordinary council but the negotiations being at a standstill, the appointment is delayed.

Who will emerge as the winner of the tug-of-war? If the discussions do not succeed, the whole majority will lose, and in the first place the ecologists, since the text that will continue to take precedence will be the one that currently exists, which dates from 2006 and is considered "obsolete" by the ecologists, even if it has undergone several revisions in the meantime. As Nicolas Bonnet-Ouladj, president of the communist group at the Paris Council, summarizes: "If the ecologists do not vote for the PLU as it is, they are the ones who take a huge risk."



Porte de Montreuil, the project that divides

One of the points of tension for months concerns the Porte de Montreuil, and more generally, the future of the ring road. Environmentalists denounce a construction project that will, according to them, increase the heat island effect; the cutting of trees caused by this project, or the exposure to pollution of an additional number of people, since the project plans to create offices. The discussions seemed according to the ecologists to have resulted in the status quo, before the volte-face: "We had proposed not to inscribe anything on the Porte de Montreuil but in the end the supporters of this concrete urbanism came back to the charge so that it could say that we accept the project," complains Nathalie Maquoi, Vice-president of the Parisian ecologist group.

"The project has been delayed for a year, the inhabitants are angry and really fed up," says Jacques Baudrier, communist elected official and deputy in charge of public construction, who claims to have the support of the First Deputy: "Without the Porte de Montreuil, there will be no PLU." "We want to be able to build when it is cleaned up," adds Nicolas Bonnet-Ouladj, to which the ecologist vice-president replies: "It is today that we build, it is criminal. It is out of the question to say in addition that we will add populations"

To classify, or not, the small belt

Ecologists and communists are also sparring over the threshold of floor area from which a real estate project must include a part in the ground, in order to fight against the artificialization of soils. For the communists, this threshold must be determined at 250 m2, or, according to Jacques Baudrier, "80% of the plots in Paris". The ecologists would like this threshold to be lowered to 150 m2: "The threshold proposed by the communists changes the categorization of 40% of plots in Paris. This allows real estate developers to continue to concrete," denounces Nathalie Maquoi. "Keeping 1 or 2 square meters of open ground is not called green spaces. We must not impose the creation of bogus open ground but effective open ground," says Jacques Baudrier.

The third area of tension is the small railway belt, which environmentalists would like to classify as a green urban area. "There are 54 hectares of biodiversity. It must be a place where one can walk. The SNCF behaves today as it wants. We end up with cut trees as soon as she wants to replace a stud," criticizes Emile Meunier. On the contrary, the communists would like to keep "a possibility of reversibility" while opening up to local residents, explains Nicolas Bonnet-Ouladj.

50 m high, too much for environmentalists

Finally, the height of some towers, an eternal subject of debate within the majority, ticks the ecologists, who would like to limit buildings exceeding 37 m in height, and refuse the towers planned in Bruneseau and Bercy-Charenton. They seemed to have found a point of balance with the communists, before a new twist: "We were at a level of almost finishing of the text and patatras, tumble: we found ourselves with towers put where they had been abandoned," criticizes the elected ecologist Emile Meunier. "We cannot say that we make a PLU to raise the climate and at the same time be on the principles of the twentieth century: there is a huge ecological cost for the construction and operation of these towers," adds Nathalie Maquoi.

The Communists did not oppose these projects, which provided for public facilities and housing. "50 m seems reasonable, we can not talk about tall towers, and the law allows it. And below 50 m we cannot have a financial balance: we do not have enough inhabitants to do public service, "explains Nicolas Bonnet-Ouladj.

"The "PLU of at the same time"

"We have the impression that they want to make us the PLU of at the same time: we display climate objectives but we build towers, we say that we want to protect biodiversity but we do not protect the small belt from the cuts of the SNCF. The account is not there. We will not vote for the PLU as it stands. And we will table amendments on each of the points, "protests Emile Meunier.

On which side of the scale will the PLU tilt? "It's time to choose, and the choice must be the climate," says David Belliard, mobility assistant and environmental leader. For the moment, the First Deputy in charge of urban planning, Emmanuel Grégoire, seems to lean rather towards the communists, yet numerically less numerous in the Council of Paris. He refused for now to "comment on disagreements" but warns: "If we do not change, we keep the current PLU."

  • Paris
  • Ile
  • Town planning
  • Paris City Hall
  • Ecology
  • Climate