beijing- october 25 th - 30 th, 2004 pierre mayet stratégies et projets territoriaux urban forum...

Beijing- October 25th - 30th, 2004Pierre MayetStratégies et Projets Territoriaux

Urban ForumUrban Forum

The French experience of Urban Growth and Planning

Beijing - October 25th - 30th, 2004

Pierre MayetStratégies et Projets Territoriaux

The initial challenges faced by France

Part I

Paris area



First challenge : a urban growth driven by rural emigration and immigration

Around 1950, France was the only European western country with an essentially rural population : it is therefore the only western European country to have been recently confronted with a strong wave of urban growth driven by rural emigration and also by immigration of various origins from across Europe and North Africa (especially after 1962)

The challenges were centred around two main issues :

• Needs for housing constructions

• Urban infrastructures : transport, water distribution, telecom, electricity, etc…

First Challenge



The challenges were initially met by

Two main answers

A financial instrument

• For subsidised housing construction

The savings of the Saving Banks, centralised in a single state owned bank (the “ Caisse of Dépots et Consignation”) were used to finance a significant portion of subsidised housing

• The same state owned bank financed the main urban infrastructures needs (roads network etc…) by establishing an operator in each city

A legal instrument (“Public Utility Areas”) which were created to identify the developable land which enabled the construction of large projects of several thousand housing units on city outskirts



Widening the challenges’ scope (1)

The emergence of new priorities, in particular transportation and traffic flow, required a new governmental organisation in order to cope with the notion of global development

First reform

• Combining two ministries of Public Works and of Construction (and Urban Planning)

• Into a single large (and powerful) Ministry of Public Works (Ministère de l’Equipement) in charge of : - Urban planning

- Housing- Transportation

• Such reform has a direct impact at the departmental level (100 departments) by the creation of multidisciplinary “study group” to conduct urban planning studies

Second reform : definition of urban planning : two documents

• Each city has to establish a city planning and development plan

• For each city a “land use plan” that stipulates the urban planning rules applied to buildings via building permits. The “land use plan” has to comply with the overall outline of the city planning and development plan



The urban planning rules applied to buildings via building permits the “land use plan”. The “land use plan” has to comply with the overall outline of the city planning and development plan

Both documents should be established after an examination conducted by local commission including :

• Governmental administration• Elected officials from Municipalities• As well as representative from various organisation

( formerly, few planning and development plans were drafted at the Ministry’s level)

Between 1972 and 1976, the near totality of the country’s large agglomerations (in France, over 100.000 inhabitants) had established a city planning which in most cases has remained in effect to this day. More than 80.000 has devised “land use plans”.

Widening the challenges’ scope (2)



Establishment of inter-communal planning powers (1)

A city commission was established at the National level (6th plan : 1970-1975)

• Comprised of group of Mayors (large, small cities, recent suburban cities…)

• Which proposed a major political reform : inter communal urban planning

In addition

• New laws set up efficient land reservation procedures for constructing land reserves for future urban growth

• Special organisations were established to operationally handle large projects like :

• “la Défense” : New Paris business district

• “New Cities”: Urban planning agencies which include professional and multidisciplinary teams



Establishment of inter-communal planning powers (2)

A corporate tax

• Called « transportation financing » ensures most of the financing required to develop the public transportation networks

• Such financing was administered by “agglomeration transportation organisation authorities” with political power to decide orientations, ensure financing and exercise control over the company delegated to manage the network

Remark : for the transportation sector and water sector (treatment and distribution) the “delegated management of public services” (Public Private Partnership) is widely used.

Conclusion Part I

By combining : - Special financial instruments (state owned bank and specific taxes) - A strong centralized administration - Special laws (“land use plans” etc…)

The main urgent challenges were met



The decentralization reform and the emergence of planning responsibilities

Part II

Bergerac



A new social and environmental challenge

The solutions to such a new challenge are more difficult to implement because of the strong social and economical connotation :

Increasing cities strata of the population (and electorate) are sensitive to environmental topics and preservation issues

Unemployment, urban violence are one of the main characteristic of the new urban environment

Faced with this new challenge the responses are not always satisfactory despite a strong commitment of the government :

A new Minister : Minister of social cohesion with a new Agency : “National urban renewable agency” mobilising exceptional resources.

This enable recourse to demolishing housing to reduce the density of occupation, improve facilities and create green areas

Part II



Cities “regrouping” :

On one hand, the projects initiated 30 years ago, such as New Cities (around already large agglomeration) have reached maturity. It is now possible to put an end to the special set ups created so that New Cities become cities like any other.

The public urban planning agency are being dissolved and municipalities are taking the relay.

On the other hand, serious social problems of urban renewal could not be solved by cities alone. Therefore :

• Two laws (1994 and 1999) reactivate the inter communal grouping policy at the agglomeration level by creating different levels of agglomeration communities. The near totality of the large agglomeration are now grouped together (about 150) and their responsibilities include “comprehensive territorial plans”, local housing plans and urban transport plans.

Part II



Part II

“Municipalities Regrouping”

Urban Communities Municipalities Communities

- Number- Municipalities

regrouped- Total population- Total budget

14355

6.2 millionEuro 6.4 billion

1552.632

19.7 millionEuro 12.4 billion

2.28628.403

24.5 million

(Law) (1999) (1992 - 1999)

3 levels of Administrative Agencies (with their own budget)

Responsibilities

1 - Mandatory

2 - Optional

- Economical, social and cultural development

- City planning- Public services (water, sanitation,

transport)

none

- Economical development- City planning, housing

- Water sanitation- Waste, parking- Cultured equipment

- Economical development- City planning

- Housing- Cultural equipment- Water, sanitation, waste

management

Total population « regrouped » : 50.4 millions (90 %); Number of municipalities involved : 31.390; Number of « communities »: 2.455

Agglomeration Communities(1994)



Conclusion part II

The inter communal groupings has several positive results :

Generally efficient for public transportation : it is now a matter of controlling automobile traffic (greenhouse gas emission, noise, waste)

In a certain number of cities innovative and imaginative achievement of large urban projects

In all the cities, a concern for cautions and highly qualified control of financial commitments for all investments and urban service management

In general, they have significantly reinforced resources in professional skills for the design, steering, execution or contracting the projects

In that respect, they largely use different forms of public-private partnership, especially in the form of delegating public services to private operators



Four illustrations of different urban approaches

Part III

La Défense



1st Case : the city planning and development plan for the Paris area




The objective : keep centrality from being concentrated on Paris alone

1965 : “City planning and development plan” for the Paris area which provides the construction of secondary centres on the periphery :

“The new cities”

The new cities have become cities just like the others :

• They have attracted : - businesses (new industrial zones)

- universities

- research centres

- services

• They benefit from : - transportation networks

- attractive housing




The responsibility of the “new cities” is now integrated into the Île de France Region (around Paris) regrouping 11 millions inhabitants and 1.281 municipalities

Region Île de France 2004 budget

Total budget = Euro 2.9 billion ( = Rmb 30 billion )

• Schools 24 %

• Employment (Economic development, research, training) 19%

• Urban transport 27 %

• Social solidarity 9 %

• Environment 6 %

• Regional administration 4.5 %

• Debt service 10.5 %



2nd Case : “La Défense” business centre



2nd Case : “La Défense” business centre

The objective : Regroup close to Paris but outside the main centre a new business area

Success : - 3.600 companies (150.000 managers)

- 20.000 inhabitants

The phase of first offices renewal has started in order to continue to offer the best solutions on the market

Main features : - An administrative agency : “public urban planning agency”

- Large scope project = 2.300.000 m2 of floor area

- A singular urban landscape : the Great Arch on the axis of Arc of Triumph and Le Louvre Museum

La Défense



3rd Case : Cergy Pontoise

Cergy Pontoise



3rd Case : Cergy Pontoise

From a “New city” which is now a “city like any other” (located about 35 kilometres north west of Paris, around 200.000 inhabitants)

Whose main features are :

• Excellent balance between housing and employment

• Highly diversified forms of housing within strongly differentiated neighbourhoods

• Extensive quality green area on the hills overlooking a curve on the Oise river

• Numerous facilities including a new University and a Natural Art School

To the inclusion into an agglomeration community

The public urban planning is closed :

• It handed over all its responsibilities and assets to the Urban Community

• Which is developing an active housing policy and economic development



4th Case : Mantes

Mantes La Jolie



4th Case : Mantes

The old (historical) city which did not want to be a “New City”

Mantes is a (rare) case of municipality which, in 1965, did not want to be included in the administrative organisation of a “New City”

This opposition to a centralised decision process was manly driven by the fact that Mantes was, at that time, benefiting from the presence of two main automobile companies (Renault and Peugeot)

However, the economic crisis of the 1970s led to significant reduction of manpower and an unemployment crisis severely hit the sector with a considerable proportion of this population being descendants of immigration : Mantes, and one of its quarter, has become a symbol of the urban crisis



Assessing the quasi disaster the, the mayor asked the Minister of Infrastructure to create a Urban Planning Agency with all the resources in human competence and financial subsidies the government could provide

The situation is improving but, in same respect, one can say that Mantes by refusing to become a “New City” and benefit from a long term urban planning has wasted 30 years

The “New” Mantes is catching up with its neighbour Cergy Pontoise by achieving the same balance between residential housing and employments

4th Case : Mantes



One illustration of municipalities water public service regrouping

Part IV

Usine de Méry Sur OIse



1

“Water Syndicate of Ile de France”

SEDIF area




The water production and distribution in the region around Paris :

“Water Syndicate of Île de France” (SEDIF)

Main features :

• Administrative water authority which serves :

• 4 million people

• In 144 Municipalities around Paris

• Production capacity : 3 plants 1.6 million m3/day

• Network length : 8.690 Km

• SEDIF is France biggest water distribution

The public authority is administrated by a council composed by elected representatives of Municipalities

Veolia Water has been delegated the management of the treatment and water distribution




SEDIF budget 2002

Euro : millionRmb : million

Resources Use of proceeds

Total

Sales (water)

Other resources

Debt (new)

Subsidies

Euro Rmb Euro Rmb

500

125

13

2

360 OPEX

CAPEX

Debt Service

Reserves

(maintenance)

110

57

73

260

500

(57)

5.219 5.219

3.758

1.305

136

21

1149

595

762

2715(595)




The main tasks delegated to Veolia by the 140 Municipalities represented in the SEDIF

Production

• The quality of the water in the 3 rivers Seine, Marne and Oise (source of 94% of the raw water) varies widely because of its water :

• It is exposed to chronic risks of accidental pollution due to the expansion of agriculture, industry and transportation

• It is therefore vital for SEDIF’s water production plants to use efficient reliable processes

• The quality of the water distributed is constantly improved by using new technologies including : - Rapid filtration / nano filtration

- Ozonation

- Activated carbon

- biological

(The membrane technology used gives an even pure water than traditional processes)




Distribution / Maintenance budget : Euro 35 millions (annual)

• Network renewal = 34 km per year

• Connections = 6000 per year

Distribution / New connections budget : Euro 15 millions (annual)

SEDIF, today, remains Europe’s first water service both from quantitative and qualitative viewpoint, while keeping control over developments firmly in the hands of the civic leaders



Conclusion

50 years of urban planning in France were characterised by two main periods according to the challenges faced and by an important recourse to the public private partnership

Two main periods During the first 30 years, after world war two, the main challenge was to build new infrastructures:

housing, transport, access to basic services. Such challenge was met by :

A concentration of private savings into specialised state owned financial institutions (in certain respect the equivalent of CDB)

A concentration of specialised administrative powers supported by :•Specialised legislations•A powerful minister•Regional specialised administrative agencies

The second period witnessed the emergence of a new urban social crisis which could not be coped only through a centralised organisation but by giving to the municipalities more responsibilities regarding urban planning and access to public services



Conclusion

It appeared however that such responsibilities could not be efficiently exercised within the existing limits of the present administration territorial network. Efficient economic development and public services are requiring a larger scope of decision process and financial solidarity which led to regroup those specific responsibilities into new administrative decentralised entities. Urban planning responsibilities are now, in France, for a large part decentralised

The principle of public service delegation has been widely supporting the decentralisation trend. Moreover, the regrouping of municipalities, has been accompanied by a parallel trend which consists in regrouping into specialised “syndicates of municipalities” different public services (mainly water treatment and distribution) in order to achieve, through a better optimisation of technical and financial resources, a more efficient utilization of public resources



Each country has its own historical philosophy regarding the relationship between the state and the municipalities. Undoubtedly France has been, during many centuries, influenced by a “philosophy of tight centralisation” which, in period of acute challenges (or crisis), can prove to be a globally efficient approach. However, when social and environmental issues are at stake, having the decision process and the financial means closer to the “end users” (through municipalities) should help to find solutions which are socially and environmentally more acceptable, but keeping in mind, that the fundamental issue remains not to waste public money by developing uneconomic projects

Conclusion

Beijing- October 25th - 30th, 2004Pierre MayetStratégies et Projets Territoriaux

Thank you for your attentionThank you for your attention

beijing- october 25 th - 30 th, 2004 pierre mayet stratégies et projets territoriaux urban forum...

Documents

water service

pure water

water distributiontitre

raw water

administrative water

sedifs water production

france sedif budget

france sedifmain features