LA TRIBUNE – The local bioclimatic urban planning plan (PLUb) was definitively presented yesterday by the majority of Anne Hidalgo who defends an office-housing balance. Do you share this philosophy knowing that the employees of your business leaders can no longer find housing?
MARIE-SOPHIE CLAVERIE NGO KY – We must not oppose offices and housing. Offices are square meters dedicated to employment. Today, housing represents around 95 million m² of the built surface area in Paris and offices only 20 million m².
What is the right mix for a world capital like Paris? By wanting to impose new constraints, we weaken both the employment dynamics of offices and the activities of shops, restaurants and performance halls or sports halls located nearby.
Employee housing is the unthought of this PLUb. However, we had proposed solutions: develop intermediate housing (22,000 intermediate housing units today in Paris compared to 220,000 social housing units), build a real concerted policy for housing at the level of the Greater Paris metropolis or accept more construction of buildings in height.
What do you think of the new “pastillage” map, that is to say the list of buildings likely to be converted into social housing or green spaces? Six months ago, you questioned the Paris town hall about the large number of them.
Despite some marginal developments, more than 800 buildings in Paris are still affected by pastillage. These are considerable volumes and disconnected from the technical and financial capacities of the City of Paris, especially when we note that only 30 to 35% of the buildings listed in the current PLU have actually been transformed into housing over the last twenty years.
A patch on an office building is a sword of Damocles because the threat that the building will be transformed is permanent. The company will therefore no longer undertake renovation work. And investors risk investing in office buildings located in other metropolises with obvious consequences for employment. 2 million m² of “pelletized” offices mean nearly 100,000 jobs are threatened in Paris. 20 square meters of office space corresponds to one job.
There no longer seems to be any question of a constructability bonus on which you are banking to ensure the economic balance of building transformation operations. Will the criteria* allowing the elevation allow you to resolve the financial equation?
The members of the economic collective that we have formed have continued to remind people for two years and at each meeting with elected officials and City services of the importance of the existing constructability bonus. The State also unsuccessfully requested his reinstatement. The City has chosen to remove this device provided for by the Town Planning Code to facilitate exemplary construction from an environmental or energy point of view.
What is proposed in the next PLU therefore puts an end to the equation between the financial balance of projects and the imperative of transition to respond to new climate challenges. Imposing new constraints in a world capital like Paris precisely amounts to calling into question the good balance between housing, offices, businesses, administrations, cultural, health and sports establishments.
This is why we are asking Paris advisors to integrate a global, social, environmental and economic impact study into the PLUb. In the discussions we were able to have, the municipal majority was in favor of it and had even proposed introducing a review clause which would correct the negative effects of the bioclimatic PLU.
* To raise their buildings and therefore build housing, the project must tick at least one of these nine boxes: free spaces for construction, greening of buildings, reuse of rainwater, social diversity, the diversity of functions, entertainment on the ground floor, energy performance, work on summer comfort or even the reduction of the carbon footprint.
