MARIGOT--Former President of the Collectivité Alain Richardson said recently, before Thursday’s protest, that the urban zoning plan PLU reeks of national policy, and does not defend the interests of St. Martin and its population.
Giving his observations on the controversial document that has raised the concerns of so many people, he said in the present PLU there is not a substantially greater amount of land destined for urbanisation compared to what was planned 15 years ago.
“But the population is growing naturally, not counting undocumented immigration, and if you have the same volume of constructible space as existed before, what are you going to do about housing and economic development to create jobs? You cannot protect and preserve at the cost of this important necessity.
“I feel there is some kind of philosophy of super protection, because a lot of properties that used to be constructible have been reversed. In the PLU there isn’t much more destined for construction and whatever there is, is not in step with the natural population growth and that’s a real concern.”
He said the St. Martin dream of owning your own piece of land or house is not a sign of wealth, but a cultural trait, something ingrained in the DNA of all St. Martiners.
“That’s not very French. The French mentality on housing is to have a roof over your head and spend a lifetime paying rent. The spatial planning for St. Martin should have been much more valued than it has been. By not having more zones open for construction, coupled with greater demand, the price of property is going to escalate. It’s already so expensive that the average family can’t afford it. This is not only an inflationary setting, but counter-productive to the St. Martin dream.”
Richardson said in 2012 when the Collectivité had the competence for urban planning, construction and housing, there was possibility to continue with the national urban code or decide to re-write its own code.
“What should have been done when the urban code was adopted in 2014 was to change the whole concept of that spatial planning and move away from the national concept of the PLU. It was politically stupid and administratively foolish to maintain the same legislation that governs the planning of the country. Because you are sticking to the national concept, even though you had the competency, and could have changed the name from PLU to Plan Territorial d’Urbanisme (PTU), or another name.”
He added the influence of the State and the mindset of the State’s civil servants is dangerous for St. Martin.
“We are using language the State has set in place, and the State’s concept is not the one that can be applicable in St. Martin. It was a strategic mistake to keep the legal setting of urban planning under the umbrella of the PLU.”
Another huge mistake, he said, is for the PLU to divide lots in Lowlands into ten and introduce social housing, which will destroy the image of St. Martin being a real upscale destination.
“Again it’s because France is behind the PLU and not St. Martin.”
