Paris Set to Quadruple in Size

[M II A II R II K]

Why the Expansion of Paris Is a Pretty Big Deal


Jul 29, 2013

By Feargus O'Sullivan



Read More: http://www.theatlanticcities.com/pol...big-deal/6345/

Following a vote in Parliament earlier this month, the city of Paris looks set — after years and years of discussions — to join with its hinterland in 2016 and become part of a huge new urban authority, one with roughly three times its current population and four times its current land area. Dubbed the "Métropole du Grand Paris," this new city authority will break down the rigid barrier between the city of Paris and what are referred to as its suburbs, despite their often being more densely populated than many American downtowns.

- To understand why, look at the metropolis' current intricate political structure. What’s officially known as Paris is in fact a small part of the city’s wider metro area, a dense kernel within a huge nut. This area’s boundaries were fixed back in 1860 and run broadly along the lines of 19th century fortifications, hence the common name Paris Intra-muros – "Paris within the walls." While 2.2 million people live here, most of the Paris metro area’s 12 million inhabitants live further out in one of seven separate départements – not boroughs but fully independent units. These départements cooperate of course, but the many different authorities still make the planning of housing and transport intricate and time consuming. The city’s power mosaic also helps perpetuate a divide between "true" Parisians and suburbanites, with the former often resented by the latter because they’re believed to get the lion’s share of resources.

- For some, however, the current Grand Paris plan is anti-democratic, its ruling body a "technocratic monster." It’s not hard to see why these sorts of sentiments are bubbling up – residents were not given a vote on the plan, while the new body will be centrally appointed, not elected, until at least 2020. Equally, many detractors feel the plan is half-hearted, a watered-down version of proposals floated and shot down under President Sarkozy. Much of the metro area still remains outside the new boundaries, in the wider Paris region known as the Grande Couronne (though if the plan is successful this area might be joined up, too). In the meantime, some experts have expressed fears about the creation of a "two speed Paris" [French language link] where the poor are pushed yet farther out. Others have asked why the area couldn’t be enlarged to contain Paris’ airports, its many peripheral new towns or its key science park and tech university at Saclay.

- As a modernizing move, the plan is still a major step forward. Over the past few decades, Paris has been gradually accruing a European reputation as a city somewhat left behind, divided and institutionally old-fashioned. With similar plans in the works for the Marseille and Lyon metro areas – and radical new laws shaking up the rental market – French urbanism is riding a wave of new ideas. Paris is being swept along too, becoming a laboratory to explore problems that many big cities face. At the very least, its future looks interesting.

.....

[chris08876]

Seems like there doing what the Chinese do. Consolidate all of the suburbs into a giant prefecture.

[Crawford]

I'm pretty sure the article title, and premise, is a bit misleading.

There's a new central authority, but the current city of Paris isn't being dissolved, and merged into a new super-city (say Toronto/Montreal-style). Rather, there's a greatly strengthened regional framework. The city of Paris remains, and the communes remain.

Or am I missing something? I don't speak French, so can't really confirm. Any French forumers know the deal?

[inSaeculaSaeculorum]

Yeah I was under the impression there was some kind of annexation going on where the city's political boundaries would significantly be expanded. But it appears a new governing body is set to make decisions for the whole metro kind of like a county or something.

[MonkeyRonin]

Originally Posted by Crawford

There's a new central authority, but the current city of Paris isn't being dissolved, and merged into a new super-city (say Toronto/Montreal-style). Rather, there's a greatly strengthened regional framework. The city of Paris remains, and the communes remain.

That would be Metro Toronto, pre-1998 style, or like Greater London today (but not Montreal at any point), with municipal/borough governments in charge of local affairs (zoning, maintenance, miscellaneous by-laws), and a metropolitan government overseeing issues pertaining to the region (transportation, police, regional planning, etc). Which I would say is about the ideal - the appropriate level of government deals with the issues most relevant to and best dealt with by them.

Whereas as we've seen in Canada, amalgamation of a city with its suburbs into a unitary municipal government is not successful. It tends to weigh the interests of the region towards those of the suburbs, local concerns are often neglected (or turned into wedge issues - y'know, "how dare they spend money in a different part of town than the one I live in!"), and politicians ultimately have to pander to the lowest common denominator. And thus you get leaders like Rob Ford.

[LMich]

Originally Posted by Crawford

I'm pretty sure the article title, and premise, is a bit misleading.

There's a new central authority, but the current city of Paris isn't being dissolved, and merged into a new super-city (say Toronto/Montreal-style). Rather, there's a greatly strengthened regional framework. The city of Paris remains, and the communes remain.

Or am I missing something? I don't speak French, so can't really confirm. Any French forumers know the deal?

Bingo. This isn't a dissolution or annexation, or any such thing. We're talking about adding another layer of government, a regional authority that will only take some of the municipal competencies away from the communes.

I think it really kind of depends on the city which kind of local government makes sense. To me, a unitary authority (a result of a merge/dissolution) usually makes the most sense when you have a physically small urban footprint with urban communities/neighborhoods that have grown contiguously and historical and feel a part of the city center. A regional authority makes more sense with a multi-nodular urban area, or an area where individual parts of the urban area grew with their own identities and with a history of their own local governments apart from the city center before they grew into one another.

[Pretext]

It's about time Paris did expand it's urban area beyond central Paris, the way it is currently configured makes it is very difficult to offer any real comparison with other cities and especially American ones which often have much bigger city areas and vast metro areas.

[MolsonExport]

Originally Posted by MonkeyRonin

That would be Metro Toronto, pre-1998 style, or like Greater London today (but not Montreal at any point), with municipal/borough governments in charge of local affairs (zoning, maintenance, miscellaneous by-laws), and a metropolitan government overseeing issues pertaining to the region (transportation, police, regional planning, etc). Which I would say is about the ideal - the appropriate level of government deals with the issues most relevant to and best dealt with by them.

Whereas as we've seen in Canada, amalgamation of a city with its suburbs into a unitary municipal government is not successful. It tends to weigh the interests of the region towards those of the suburbs, local concerns are often neglected (or turned into wedge issues - y'know, "how dare they spend money in a different part of town than the one I live in!"), and politicians ultimately have to pander to the lowest common denominator. And thus you get leaders like Rob Ford.

My thoughts exactly. Also, unions bargain towards the highest rates that existed among the previous jurisdictions (e.g., Fire, Police of periphery areas wanting salary/benefits commensurate with their peers in the central areas), yet services tend to plummet to the lowest common denominator. Sometimes, bigger is not better. Rob Ford is very huge, but he basically is little more than a giant pile of shit.

[Pretext]

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

My thoughts exactly. Also, unions bargain towards the highest rates that existed among the previous jurisdictions (e.g., Fire, Police of periphery areas wanting salary/benefits commensurate with their peers in the central areas), yet services tend to plummet to the lowest common denominator. Sometimes, bigger is not better. Rob Ford is very huge, but he basically is little more than a giant pile of shit.

The French do things differently to many countries with services being run on national and local levels, in terms of the Paris Fire Brigade it is part of the French Military and the 8,000 Paris fire fighters are Sappers (Military Engineers), whilst the Police have also traditionally mainly been run along both national with some local police services, the the 145,000 officers of the Police Nationale (formerly called the Sûreté) and the 103,000 officers of the National Gendarmerie being run along national lines and the 18,000 officers of the Municipal Police police are mainly the responsibility of town Mayors and are administered by some 3,500 local authorities.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paris_Fire_Brigade

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_National_Police

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Gendarmerie

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Munici...e_%28France%29

In terms of Parisian ambulances, they are provided by the fire service or private ambulance services with or without a physician-led car provision from SMUR (Service Mobile d'Urgence et Reanimation - literally translated as Mobile Emergency and Resuscitation Service) which are 'mobile intensive care units' (MICU) that have one or more physicians on board. The "reds" (fire service) operate ambulances with 3 or 4 staff members on board, the "whites" (private companies and hospitals) with 2 or 3 staff members on board. Both teams, "reds" and "whites," have basically the same first aid-based medical training; the "reds," as they handle road accidents as well, are also trained in taking care of heavily wounded persons, extraction of wounded out of wrecks, etc. Consequently, under the SAMU system in France, there are a number of different providers of emergency medical services, offering different levels of care, and dispatched for different types of condition

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergen...ices_in_France

French healthcare is universal and relies on a mixture of public and private providers, and like Law Enforcement the Emergency Services do not rely heavily on city jurisdictions or union demands. Indeed French Emergency Services and Hospitals (Health Services) are ranked amongst the best in the world.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care_in_France

Other countries such as America and Canada have national units such as the FBI or RCMP, however they are not generally military forces and are nowhere near as large and comprehensive as the French National Units, who are uniformed and have specialist riot and other units such as the Compagnies Républicaines de Sécurité (CRS) or Mobile Gendarmerie.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compagn...%A9curit%C3%A9

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile_Gendarmerie

[Minato Ku]

Originally Posted by Crawford

I'm pretty sure the article title, and premise, is a bit misleading.

There's a new central authority, but the current city of Paris isn't being dissolved, and merged into a new super-city (say Toronto/Montreal-style). Rather, there's a greatly strengthened regional framework. The city of Paris remains, and the communes remain.

Or am I missing something? I don't speak French, so can't really confirm. Any French forumers know the deal?

Exactly, Paris and the three inner ring departement will have an EPCI (Établissement public de coopération intercommunale, Public authority for cooperation between communes).

Paris is the only major city in France to not be part of an inter-municipal structure. This could change if the law is adopted.
Weirder enough, there are several inter-municipal autorities in suburbs.
The inter-municipal autorities inside the new EPCI of Paris will be dissolved.

Paris will not be any a stend alone case in France. It will be inside an EPCI called a Metropole.

Metropole is the inter-municipal autority with over 500,000 inhabitants (Paris, Lyon, Marseille, Lille, Toulouse, Bordeaux, Nice).
They have more power than the other type of inter-municipal autorities, they have both competences delegated by the member municipalities and also competences assigned to departments and regions.

Originally Posted by MonkeyRonin

That would be Metro Toronto, pre-1998 style, or like Greater London today (but not Montreal at any point), with municipal/borough governments in charge of local affairs (zoning, maintenance, miscellaneous by-laws), and a metropolitan government overseeing issues pertaining to the region (transportation, police, regional planning, etc). Which I would say is about the ideal - the appropriate level of government deals with the issues most relevant to and best dealt with by them.

The new Metropole de Paris will be in charge of the development, zoning...
Communes will loose quite a lot of power.

Paris region (Ile de France) was already in charge of the transportation, I don't think it will change.

We do have some municipal police but they have limited power.
It is the national police that carry the average function of the Police in urban area and the National Police is managed on both National and Departemental level.
Note that Paris and the inner ring departements have already a single agency since 2009, the Prefecture of Police of Paris
Préfecture de Police is also on charge of the fire brigade.

I hope that New Brisavoine will see this thread, he will explain it better than I.

[Minato Ku]

In the past, we made two big mistakes that have contributed to widening the division between the City of Paris and its suburbs.

-The abolition of Seine department and its division among four new departments in 1968.
The former Seine departement included the City of Paris and much of the inner suburbs.

-The creation of a Major for the City of Paris in 1977.
I am not against the idea of a mayor for Paris but this mayor should have been for a larger area.

The creation of the Metropole de Paris is a big step but it is far from sufficient.
I would have liked an abolition of the actual City of Paris (and its mayor) and the Departments.

[Pretext]

Originally Posted by Minato Ku

We do have some municipal police but they have limited power.
It is the national police that carry the average function of the Police in urban area and the National Police is managed on both National and Departemental level.

Note that Paris and the inner ring departements have already a single agency since 2009, the Prefecture of Police of Paris
Préfecture de Police is also on charge of the fire brigade.

So any change will not have an adverse effect on either policing or vital services.

[Jaborandi]

Originally Posted by MonkeyRonin

And thus you get leaders like Rob Ford.

Rob Ford is a leader???

[Minato Ku]

Originally Posted by Pretext

So any change will not have an adverse effect on either policing or vital services.

The only area where this change will really have an effect is the urban planning and development.
Communes will no longer have the full power on zoning, construction permit.
It is a larger authority that will take those powers.

The commune have already very few power on emergencies, limited power on educations, their major power is the urban development.
But with the new EPCI of Metropole de Paris, the communes will lose this authority, they will become quite powerless.

You may imagine that the mayors are mostly against this project.

[Chase Unperson]

What I find interesting is they comment that it will increase the area by a factor of 4 and the population by a factor of 3. That would mean about 6.5 million people living in an area of 165 square miles. I doubt NYC has that many people living in 165 square miles, or maybe it does, but in any case Paris is a beast of a city.

I always compare SF to Paris as they are each about 40something square miles. We all know how busy and dense SF can seem but think about it, you would have to basically triple the population of SF to achieve Paris.

[Minato Ku]

Originally Posted by Chase Unperson

What I find interesting is they comment that it will increase the area by a factor of 4 and the population by a factor of 3. That would mean about 6.5 million people living in an area of 165 square miles. I doubt NYC has that many people living in 165 square miles, or maybe it does, but in any case Paris is a beast of a city.

It is an error.
The size of Paris and Petite Couronne departements (75, 92, 93, 94) is more than 7 times larger than the City of Paris.
The size is 294.2 sq mi with 6,666,103 inhabitants in 2010.

It is not denser than New York City.

We know that Metropole de Paris will be larger than Paris and Petite Couronne but we don't know how much.
If I am not wrong all the EPCI with a municipality inside Paris and Petite Couronne (even if the rest is not outside) will be dissolved inside Metropole de Paris.

We could also have the case of municipalities or inter-municipal autorities inside Paris urban area that may want to be part of Metropole de Paris.

[LeeWilson]

Originally Posted by Jaborandi

Rob Ford is a leader???

Well he's certainly leading Toronto somewhere!

[Innsertnamehere]

It just so happens that place is a 6ft hole.

[ardecila]

Interesting. This is really the function that state governments should be performing in the US, but instead they're dramatically weighted towards rural areas.

[chris08876]

Why Paris is about to quadruple in size

By Tyler Falk | August 1, 2013 http://www.smartplanet.com/blog/bull...-in-size/25557
========================
Sure the world has some fast-growing cities, but an established city like Paris quadrupling in size? What’s going on? Feargus O’Sullivan at The Atlantic Cities has the story:

Following a vote in Parliament earlier this month, the city of Paris looks set — after years and years of discussions — to join with its hinterland in 2016 and become part of a huge new urban authority, one with roughly three times its current population and four times its current land area. Dubbed the “Métropole du Grand Paris,” this new city authority will break down the rigid barrier between the city of Paris and what are referred to as its suburbs, despite their often being more densely populated than many American downtowns.

Basically, Paris is quadrupling in size by redefining urban boundaries not by adding a bunch of new people. But why go through the trouble? The idea is that the districts surrounding Paris will no longer plan and make decisions in a bubble, but work together to make strategic decisions — in other words, regional planning.


=============================