Barely authorized by a decree last November 5 from the prefect of Dordogne, the new Beynac diversion project is already under attack. “We are reaching heights in this matter with the State which validates a waste of public money and a breach of the rule of law which is truly scandalous”, comments Raphaëlle Jeannel, lawyer for the Huglo Leplage law firm, which announces that it is filing a appeal to the administrative court on behalf of Philippe d'Eaubonne, president of the association for the protection of the Dordogne valley and the company Newell Entreprises (owner of the Château de Fayrac).
Greenwashing on the circumvention?
“I obviously expected it,” replies Germinal Peiro, the president of the department, leader of the project, “the opponents are always the same, lords of Dordogne. And it does not surprise me that he continues against the advice of the vast majority of Périgourdins. » He highlights the results of the public inquiry which he describes as very favorable and says he is calm in a completely revised file. “We moved from a road project in Beynac to an environmental project over a much larger sector, with the reopening of the station, the installation of electric shuttles, etc. “, he argues.
“We are talking about the same structures: two bridges, a road and a rail bridge: the same ones that were previously banned,” says Master Raphaëlle Jeannel. This is just a greening of the project. » But for the department, justice itself validated the complete novelty of this project by not preventing consultation, in July 2023, as requested by opponents.
Condemned for failure to demolish and allowed to rebuild?
“For five years, the Department has refused to execute court decisions on the restoration of the site,” points out Maître Raphaëlle Jeannel. He was ordered to pay two million euros in respect of these fines, which continue to run. » They were paid according to the community which took the matter to the administrative court to argue that they were no longer relevant, after the recent environmental authorization order. The contradiction has not escaped the opponents who deplore this gap between the court decisions and those of the prefect, who represents the State. “The new project is authorized by the State, guarantor of the proper functioning of justice and respect for its decisions, and it includes the use of the bridge piers and the road whose demolition was ordered by the courts. »
Convinced of having provided answers to the first version, the department is moving forward with the planting of 27,000 plants, the creation of habitat for bats and the creation of an “ecological cordon” all along the road. Opponents defend an area rich in biodiversity (amphibians, European otters) and heritage (golden triangle of Périgord), endangered by a forty-year-old concrete project “which no longer goes in the direction of 'history “.
But “completing the project is less damaging to the environment than demolishing it,” concludes Germinal Peiro.
