A previous article considered the structure of the planning system in the United Kingdom. This article outlines the basic planning structures in France.
France has a similar population to the UK, in excess of 50m, although its area is approximately four times that of England, some 540,000 square kilometres. Despite hasty post-war reconstruction and development, much of France remains rural in nature, with a number of free-standing settlements, more than 1m farms and in excess of 8% of its working population engaged in agriculture – four times the number in the UK. This rural character is the most significant factor in the attraction of tourists and many French politicians still stress the country’s rural origins. Rapid economic growth was accompanied by a natural population increase and in-migration from former colonies (particularly North Africa).
Unlike the UK, France has a written constitution. It also enforces a strict legal code. The senior court (conseil d’etat) stipulates legal guidelines and oversees 25 administrative tribunals (tribuneaux administratifs).
Government tiers and development plans
France, like the United Kingdom, has four tiers of government, but, unlike the UK, this includes a strong regional element. Although some power was devolved following decentralisation measures brought about by the acts of 1982 and 1983, France remains a highly centralised state with a focus in Paris. Eight metropoles d’equilibres were set up to reduce the effect of intense development pressure from the Paris region.
Napoleon devised the notion of communes, which have remained relatively intact – unlike many of the UK’s smaller towns and cities which were engulfed by continuing urbanisation. The Direction Departmentale de l’Equipement is the department responsible for development control and development plan formulation at the central level (assuming that an area does not have its own planning technicians). There are 22 regions in France, each of which is responsible for preparing a four-year strategic plan to fit in with the national plan.
The national plan is prepared by central government every five years, the last introduced in 1990, drawn up with advice from the regional councils. The national plan has three main themes; Habitat et Vie Social which channels funds into urban regeneration, national funds which are released to encourage hi-tech investment in preparation for increased European integration, and investments in education, training and retraining. The contract du plan between central government and the regions is the principal tool to secure regional funding.
A Commissaire de la Republique heads each of the 96 departments and frequently decides planning issues in the communes. More than 36,000 communes are controlled by the mayor (they range in size from less than a hundred to a few hundred thousand in population), who, although restricted by financial constraints, can exert considerable influence at local level.
Apart from the national plan and its related regional plans, there are two other types of development plan in France: city plans or schema directeur, most of which were prepared in the 1970s and used to be significant planning documents. In France there are no public inquiries, although the public are given a consultation period of one month. The courts rule over disputes involving planning approval and, as a result, France has no planning inspectorate. Since 1983 schema directeurs were no longer mandatory and, with few being currently prepared, those that remain are now largely out of date. Outside the larger conurbations their imminent future is uncertain.
The local plan (plan d’occupation des sols or POS) is prepared in accordance with the objectives of the schema directeur (where they are in operation). The POS is a zoning plan with strict rules of land use and building and is legally binding. To improve plan coverage (as POS are also non-mandatory since 1983) the preparation guidelines were modified.
A POS incorporates four key elements: a written document; accompanying graphics (plans and maps which might include area densities as well as land uses); detailed regulations (on zone delineation, for example); and notes relating these regulations (including information on each zone, heights, materials, densities, areas, infrastructure plot ratios and setting, for example).
Development control and plan preparation
The frequently updated code d’urbanism is a comprehensive text which contains the rules for the control of development. It is supplemented by other, more specific, codes relating, for example, to rural issues, the environment and housing. These and le code d’urbanism are clarified by the tribunaux administratifs and, ultimately, the conseil d’etat. Le code d’urbanism stipulates strict guidelines for plan contents which, once approved, are legally compelling. Before planning permission is applied for, a certificat d’urbanism is required. This is essentially an outline planning permission to assess the possibility of building on a parcel of land (a sort of feasibility study). To obtain planning permission in France a permis de construire is required which must conform both to nationally prescribed rules (regles nationales a urbanism or RNU) and the local plans. Nearly all construction works need a permis de construire. Other regulations also apply – for example, those relating to health and safety.
In France the POS and the RNU carry great weight. While in the UK the development plan is the primary factor, other material considerations can override its directions, ie each application is judged “on its merits”. In France ill-regard for the prescriptions of the POS or RNU is a straightforward reason for planning refusal.
Regional development is the responsibility of DATA (Delegation d’Amenagement du Territoire). This agency has the power to award grants for regional initiatives such as the regeneration of rundown areas (so-called zones of conversion or rehabilitation).
Plan preparation at the local level is initiated by the mayor or president of a group of communes (Etablissement Publique Cooperation Interconimunale or EPCI) as many are small in size. It has three major segments: conceptualisation, approval and adaptation. Technical aspects of preparation invariably will be delegated to a working group, agency or individual(s). The prefect or council will then assess the plan to ensure that it encapsulates the nationally demanded rules. Following an inquiry and a six-month acceptance period, the plan may be approved and, following decentralisation in 1983, the mayor now has the power to grant permis de construire. Where a plan does not exist (for example, because of financial reasons) the DDE or Ministry of Infrastructure, Transport and Planning, headed by the Commissaire de la Republique can prepare a plan and assume responsibility for development control. The DDE acts as a branch of the central state and will provide advice on understanding the code d’urbanism and will usually consider the financial implications of a plan’s proposals. Owing to the multiplicity of administrative procedures, administrative law courts resolve legal complexities.
Third parties and applicants have the right to appeal to the courts on administrative matters. Despite being a rather long process (decisions can take as much as three years) it is inexpensive and open to any aggrieved persons. The public, although consulted, are not directly involved in the appeal process.
Enforcement is automatically built into the system. After works have been carried out the applicant and his architect have to surrender a form declaring compliance with the permis de construire. Before the building can be used or sold an inspector from the DDE will decide whether to grant a certificate of conformity.
Two aspects of French planning also need brief reference: planning gain and partnerships. France has planning gain automatically built into its system. All developments incur both on- and off-site expenditures and are taxed to provide funds for such purposes (for example, to support cultural facilities). Partnerships with the private sector can be undertaken using two regenerative tools: zones d’amenagement concerte and zones d’amenagement differe. They can be used for land reclamation and infrastructure development purposes.
Conclusions
France has a strong national influence in planning via its legalistic provisions. These have been criticised for their intricacy which, it is alleged, causes inflexibility and delay. Although the devolution of power has raised the profile of local plans, the strength of planning controls means that authority remains firmly at the centre. Planning law hinders political flexibility, which lessens the achievements of the reforms. The sheer complexity of French planning documents makes them virtually unreadable to all but the professional planner – a user-friendly version for the public would simplify matters. It is also suggested that the standardised nature of the administrative routines inhibits innovative thinking and reduces the development options available, while the philosophy of meticulous guidelines is questionable in times of economic hardship. However, this does provide a degree of certainty for those involved in the development process.
France also displays the ability to forge effective public/private partnerships, enabling agencies to undertake major planning projects. State commitment to projects such as La Deefense has enabled large-scale developments, in partnership with the private sector, to be successful. This contrasts starkly with the British experience as exemplified by London Docklands and, in particular, Canary Wharf.
In France, in contrast with the UK, the public are conferred with rather than directly involved in the planning system.
The French planning career is dominated by the engineering and architectural disciplines. Other professions such as surveying and law make up the rest of the recruits. Few planners have a formal education in planning and it is largely taught at postgraduate level or as a final-year specialism. Comparisons between the French and British systems must take account of their inherent differences. France is much more rural in nature and has experienced a growth in many of its communes. Thus the need to follow the prescriptions of the POS is essential for continued sensitive growth in rural areas. In the UK there is a greater awareness of the need to be accountable to the electorate. The local plan, unlike the POS, is only one of the material considerations when assessing an application and is not in itself a legal text. Historically, France has retained its complex and legalistic structures.
In summary, France practises positive planning and, despite its administrative constraints, it has the ability to implement a strategy and produce the required outcomes. Although the French system is very different from that existing in the UK and the physical differences between the two countries are such that comparison is quite difficult, some recognition of the French experience is beneficial when considering the shortcomings of the system in the UK.
