Bizarre trial Thursday, November 26 before the administrative court of Rouen. In question: a huge project of four buildings, or 201 housing units, along the road to Paris. All in the hyper-complex context of the transition between the local urban plan of Franqueville-Saint-Pierre and the local inter-municipal urban plan (PLUi) adopted by the Metropolis of Rouen at the start of the year.
The dispute, filed by seven immediate residents, relates to the entire project but the public rapporteur rejects most of the means raised to retain only one: the number of parking spaces allocated to a senior residence. In the project validated by the municipality and presented by the promoter, there are only 33. However, for the public reporter, who relies on the PLUi, it would take 134!
–
Permit canceled or delay to adapt?
“The promoter, in his latest writings, evokes more of a hotel residence than a residence for seniors, but the fact remains that it is a residence intended to accommodate independent people and therefore susceptible to ‘have cars. ” And even if the urban plan allows in a derogatory way to provide only a number of parking spaces calculated according to real needs, the promoter “Does not provide information to verify that the 33 places are sufficient”.
Should the building permit be canceled? Since recent case law, administrative courts can suspend their ruling while waiting for building permits to be regularized according to the court’s prescriptions with a modification permit, which the public rapporteur is calling for.
Obviously Me Colliou, lawyer for residents, who had issued a dozen ways to challenge the building permit, does not agree with the rapporteur. « It’s a huge project. In many cases the dividing lines of the properties and the locations of the buildings do not comply with the local inter-municipal urban planning plan ”, she said in substance before also contesting the ecological footprint of the project. The PLUi provides for the replacement of felled trees in this sector: “At least 40 large trees, which will be felled, were not included in the promoter’s project. “ In view of the number of irregularities that the lawyer noted in the building permit, she asked for it to be canceled.
The court should deliver its deliberation within three weeks.
– – .
