The commissioner-investigator challenges the Espace Lebon redevelopment project in Peymeinade

“They don’t know the subject”

Harsh words put forward by the investigating commissioner, but which find a certain resonance with the words of the association Peymeinade, Authentique et Préservée.

“What the investigating commissioner experienced, namely not being listened to by the municipality, is what we have experienced from the beginning. They do not master the subject”launches Nicolas Brun, the association’s co-chairman together with Marie Balestra.

The association also points to an attempt by the town hall to “hide” the investigation report.

“According to the text of CADA, an independent authority for relations between the public and the administrations, you were obliged to publish this edifying and appalling report as soon as it was received, immediate publication and this regardless of the type of investigation, or at least within 48 hours reasonable. You received the report on the 12th of August, you published it on the 9th of September, this is against the law and your own undertakings given on the decree for this investigation”, writes Marie Balestra in an open letter addressed to the municipality. Missive, in which she invites the mayor to “make the right decision and really deconstruct this Zac Lebon project. As a “good father” in the community, you should accept the conclusions of the commissioner of inquiry and take the opportunity to break the agreement that binds the municipality to Sagem and this without any form of compensation, since the downgrade is a suspensive clause that is not fulfilled and impossible. to meet within deadlines. This official report gives you the power to do so.”

“A Place of Gold”

Another point highlighted by the public inquiry, the conditions of access and use of the Rayons de Soleil decoration and service business. the”will be seriously compromised, if not impossible or dangerous during the works phase. Regardless of the measures taken, a properly prepared decommissioning project would not have avoided this question and would have provided answers that had been researched and agreed with the relevant owner. In this case, not only has the owner never been contacted by the municipality or the developer, but his requests for meetings for almost five months with the municipality remain in vain.

A version confirmed by the person in question, the owner of the shop Guillaume Hugues.

“We enjoy a golden location. When people leave the parking lot, they fall straight for our business. I pay the most expensive rent in the city precisely because I am well located very close to the parking lot. The mechanical devices will block the roads and visitors will be taken elsewhere. There will no longer be the same visibility”.

An accusation that Philippe Sainte-Rose Fanchine denies: “There will be no disruption.” There are actually two phases planned. “Under the first, a temporary parking lot will be built behind the Cauvin residence. So, while the Lebon car park, the current one, will be under construction, the temporary one will be used.”clarifies the mayor, although the temporary car park will only contain about 115 spaces, against 178 for the current Lebon car park.

If the mayor of Peymeinade maintains that the shop’s activity will not be disturbed, Guillaume Hugues is angry: “Visitors will not have access to the road. And at the exit of the temporary parking lot, they will no longer fall on us. This is the doom of our business”.

The owner fears a drop in turnover in his shop bought in 2019 for almost 100,000 euros. “I have a loan on my back, rent to pay and two employees, including my wife Dilyara”he regrets.

The dialog will open soon

Dialogue is difficult. Guillaume Hugues is really angry that the mayor did not receive him personally: “I asked for an audience, but I received no response, except that I might be accepted for the second phase. It will be too late. I wanted this noted by a bailiff and then I discovered there was a public inquiry. » The mayor of Peymeinade confirms that he has not received the merchant, but wants “open dialog”.

“I’m worried about the future, witnesses the trader. I make the bulk of my revenue in December, I obviously don’t know where I’m going. As for the conclusions of the investigator’s report, I expected that because the city doesn’t consider people’s opinions. What is the purpose of fighting for a project that is so divisive?”

Leave a Comment