The bill provides Grenelle drastically limit the construction of individual houses and small buildings with 1 to 3 levels.
It will bring down the construction of 400 000 annual housing less than 270 000.
It will significantly increase housing prices by imposing new building near downtown
and transport networks own site.
It sacrifices the diversity of habitat selection human ideology contrary to humanism.
* * *
This project should be delayed for at least six months and reworked.
Must adjourn the debate on the bill Grenelle II - Malthusian and draconian - to rework the perspective of a true green urbanism, freedom of choice of habitat and respect the diversity of modes of habitat desired by men.
The huge bill Grenelle II (230 pages, 104 articles, 110 decrees implementing planned) will change significantly, even drastically, the planning, urban planning, construction and daily life all the French.
It is marked by a very strong ideology of modernism planner near the Athens Charter. This modernism had won both fascist and communist regimes in the twentieth century. It had also attracted the leaders of the French planning in the years 1950/1980 and gave birth to the policy of large assemblies, ZUP, today ZUS. It's a shame to see this ideology back today.
The general principle agreed at the time was twofold:
1 - Getting people to live in large groups and large buildings will promote the social, reconciliations neighborhood, solidarity and mutual services. We know it's exactly the opposite has occurred and that the inhabitants of these areas interested in overwhelming majority, if not wholly leave them.
2 - Achieve economies of scale, high densities and large all are deemed cost less in HHT and public facilities.
All studies have since shown that this idea was totally false and an urban planning from 10 to 30 dwellings per hectare cost exactly the same equipment as prizes in a management planning to 70/100 dwellings per hectare , besides of course the cost of social nuisances of flats.
Bill Grenelle II reintroduced this ideology and the authoritarian mode of urban and socially deplorable giving legislative effect to a number of ideas as contrary to the criticism that big convention housing assembled by the UMP in 2007 and ideas Moderate and liberal
1 - The project Grenelle He wants to hunt for consumption "excess" of space construction. Who thinks that consumption is excessive? Depending on what criteria? Bill obviously did not answer this question and it will give the prefects to judge the space consumption. This is obviously contrary to any policy of decentralization.
Compared to the average density of large - about 80 per hectare - the small buildings of two to three floors still consume too much space, such as townhouses 25/30 hectare, such as small lots 10 to 30 per hectare, as, of course, the houses built on land independently isolated.
At least 40/50 dwellings per hectare, there will always be excessive consumption of land.
It is unbelievable that, while France was still quite largely rural with MPs elected in the townships and boroughs, the Parliament was not totally shocked by this kind of ideology. Especially since these texts were all designed by the Paris offices of the Ministry of Equipment, in reference to the Paris area but without taking into account what happens in 90% of our regions where housing demand is essentially an application of houses and, incidentally, a demand for small buildings to R 4 R 2 up with large gardens and green spaces.
2 - The project will focus Grenelle II construction along the lines of railways, subways, trams and public transport lanes.
These transport hardly exist in most major cities in France (40 at the most) and cover only a relatively small space. The most advanced cities do not count ten tram lines, but in general, three or four.
In addition, our green ideologues exclude this habitat concentrated on transportation highways, expressways, ring roads and other investments since the world has become inherently wrong.
If the project Grenelle is applied a little discipline, it will focus on new construction less than 10% of urban surfaces. We immediately see the impact on land prices, as well as the mode of planning. When the French complain about sharp increases experienced by new construction and land in the last eight years, the Round Table II offers further increase these prices in scarcer supply of land and building opportunities.
3 - The project will base the Grenelle II construction on the PLH (local Habitat) prepared by officials of cities and urban communities. PLH These are designed - and obligation - to define detailed plans of construction, type of dwelling, by way of financing, by price range, etc.. level, not only the town but common and even neighborhoods.
In an economy such as ours, which is mostly a market economy, these are totally unrealistic PLH they do not provide municipalization soil or nationalization, and the allocation of funding for all types per company and district ...
Very bureaucratic in nature, the PLH nests can be contentious because cities and governments may oppose many projects. But they could never impose the PLH inherently inconsistent with a liberal economy.
Conclusions
In economic crisis, France has lost 600 000 jobs and to lose at least another 150 000 in 2010, everything must be done to stabilize the housing and this enabled the French to choose their location and habitat type while respecting course planning rules of common sense.
The project Grenelle It is, in many cases, contrary to common sense, contrary to the experience of planning costs, contrary to market demand.
Housing construction dropped to 420 from 000 to 300 000 and the trend is now around 270 000 in the last three years.
The objective of 500 000 units per year was probably demagogic. Everyone agrees today rather around a target of 400 000.
Parliament Will he vote the Grenelle II risk of a further drop in construction but also a serious blow to our freedoms?
The wise course would be to listen a little more local one hand and the demand of the people on the other.
This requires adjourn by 4 or 5 months of this project review and rework it in a different spirit.
It will bring down the construction of 400 000 annual housing less than 270 000.
It will significantly increase housing prices by imposing new building near downtown
and transport networks own site.
It sacrifices the diversity of habitat selection human ideology contrary to humanism.
* * *
This project should be delayed for at least six months and reworked.
Must adjourn the debate on the bill Grenelle II - Malthusian and draconian - to rework the perspective of a true green urbanism, freedom of choice of habitat and respect the diversity of modes of habitat desired by men.
The huge bill Grenelle II (230 pages, 104 articles, 110 decrees implementing planned) will change significantly, even drastically, the planning, urban planning, construction and daily life all the French.
It is marked by a very strong ideology of modernism planner near the Athens Charter. This modernism had won both fascist and communist regimes in the twentieth century. It had also attracted the leaders of the French planning in the years 1950/1980 and gave birth to the policy of large assemblies, ZUP, today ZUS. It's a shame to see this ideology back today.
The general principle agreed at the time was twofold:
1 - Getting people to live in large groups and large buildings will promote the social, reconciliations neighborhood, solidarity and mutual services. We know it's exactly the opposite has occurred and that the inhabitants of these areas interested in overwhelming majority, if not wholly leave them.
2 - Achieve economies of scale, high densities and large all are deemed cost less in HHT and public facilities.
All studies have since shown that this idea was totally false and an urban planning from 10 to 30 dwellings per hectare cost exactly the same equipment as prizes in a management planning to 70/100 dwellings per hectare , besides of course the cost of social nuisances of flats.
Bill Grenelle II reintroduced this ideology and the authoritarian mode of urban and socially deplorable giving legislative effect to a number of ideas as contrary to the criticism that big convention housing assembled by the UMP in 2007 and ideas Moderate and liberal
1 - The project Grenelle He wants to hunt for consumption "excess" of space construction. Who thinks that consumption is excessive? Depending on what criteria? Bill obviously did not answer this question and it will give the prefects to judge the space consumption. This is obviously contrary to any policy of decentralization.
Compared to the average density of large - about 80 per hectare - the small buildings of two to three floors still consume too much space, such as townhouses 25/30 hectare, such as small lots 10 to 30 per hectare, as, of course, the houses built on land independently isolated.
At least 40/50 dwellings per hectare, there will always be excessive consumption of land.
It is unbelievable that, while France was still quite largely rural with MPs elected in the townships and boroughs, the Parliament was not totally shocked by this kind of ideology. Especially since these texts were all designed by the Paris offices of the Ministry of Equipment, in reference to the Paris area but without taking into account what happens in 90% of our regions where housing demand is essentially an application of houses and, incidentally, a demand for small buildings to R 4 R 2 up with large gardens and green spaces.
2 - The project will focus Grenelle II construction along the lines of railways, subways, trams and public transport lanes.
These transport hardly exist in most major cities in France (40 at the most) and cover only a relatively small space. The most advanced cities do not count ten tram lines, but in general, three or four.
In addition, our green ideologues exclude this habitat concentrated on transportation highways, expressways, ring roads and other investments since the world has become inherently wrong.
If the project Grenelle is applied a little discipline, it will focus on new construction less than 10% of urban surfaces. We immediately see the impact on land prices, as well as the mode of planning. When the French complain about sharp increases experienced by new construction and land in the last eight years, the Round Table II offers further increase these prices in scarcer supply of land and building opportunities.
3 - The project will base the Grenelle II construction on the PLH (local Habitat) prepared by officials of cities and urban communities. PLH These are designed - and obligation - to define detailed plans of construction, type of dwelling, by way of financing, by price range, etc.. level, not only the town but common and even neighborhoods.
In an economy such as ours, which is mostly a market economy, these are totally unrealistic PLH they do not provide municipalization soil or nationalization, and the allocation of funding for all types per company and district ...
Very bureaucratic in nature, the PLH nests can be contentious because cities and governments may oppose many projects. But they could never impose the PLH inherently inconsistent with a liberal economy.
Conclusions
In economic crisis, France has lost 600 000 jobs and to lose at least another 150 000 in 2010, everything must be done to stabilize the housing and this enabled the French to choose their location and habitat type while respecting course planning rules of common sense.
The project Grenelle It is, in many cases, contrary to common sense, contrary to the experience of planning costs, contrary to market demand.
Housing construction dropped to 420 from 000 to 300 000 and the trend is now around 270 000 in the last three years.
The objective of 500 000 units per year was probably demagogic. Everyone agrees today rather around a target of 400 000.
Parliament Will he vote the Grenelle II risk of a further drop in construction but also a serious blow to our freedoms?
The wise course would be to listen a little more local one hand and the demand of the people on the other.
This requires adjourn by 4 or 5 months of this project review and rework it in a different spirit.
0 commentaires to Round Table II: we must fight against the return of large buildings and