The centre of Paris is set to become in effect a huge low traffic neighbourhood by the end of next year under an ambitious plan to remove through traffic from the heart of the French capital.
A consultation was launched this week on the initiative, outlined in an interview with Le Parisien by deputy mayor David Belliard, which will cover the entirety of the 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th arrondissements and, across the Seine on the Rive Gauche, parts of the 5th, 6th and 7th arrondisements, as shown in this graphic.
Anne Hidalgo veut interdire le trafic de transit dans le coeur historique de Paris pour encourager la marche et le vélo ?♂️?
➡️ Les riverains, les bus, les taxis, les artisans et les livreurs pourront continuer à se déplacer dans ce périmètre ???https://t.co/Tt7x2CZ41z pic.twitter.com/yqHejWaCjE
— Adrien Lelièvre (@Lelievre_Adrien) May 12, 2021
To draw an analogy from the UK capital, the zone is similar in size to one running from Oxford Circus to St Paul’s Cathedral and from the British Museum to the Houses of Parliament.
Not all motor traffic will be banned from the centre of Paris – local residents will have access, as will buses, taxis, tradesmen, professionals and delivery vehicles needing access to the city centre, although no decision has yet been made on whether tourist coaches will be exempt.
The plan is the latest move by Mayor Anne Hidalgo to transform Paris, with a focus on encouraging cycling and walking and making the city more liveable and reduce air and noise pollution, and according to Belliard, of the 180,000 motor vehicles that currently use the zone each day, 100,000 cross it without stopping.
The zone would cover around 7 per cent of the area of the city, and asked whether it might spread further in the future, Balliard said that Parisians would have an opportunity to make their views heard on that as part of the consultation.
“The creation of this peaceful zone is an important block in our policy of transforming public space to give more space to pedestrians, bicycles, buses and nature,” he said.
“It is in addition to the creation of ‘streets to schools’, to our bicycle plan and to our desire to cut surface parking spaces by half.”
The zone would be marked out by road signage and markings, while city staff would also carry out checks at the entrances to it, said Baillard, adding that steps would also be taken to protect small businesses and prevent them from being driven out by the higher rents that often accompany streets being pedestrianised.
27 thoughts on “Centre of Paris to become a huge low traffic neighbourhood”
I’m not even French and I
I’m not even French and I want to upvote this story 🙂
Take that Kensington & Chelsea!
I don’t know quite how the
I don’t know quite how the local administration of Paris works, but that might be a key difference: it’s governed as a city rather than a concatenation of competing parishes (or boroughs as Londoners like to call them).
Noice!
Noice! That’s what I consider levelling up.
So when will we get any progressive policies or are we a nation of car-obsessives?
hawkinspeter wrote:
I’m guessing that that is a rhetorical question and this reply is entirely redundant.
In fairness, London does have
In fairness, London does have private motorist-deterring congestion and emissions charges, and some pretty good cycling infrastructure. Quite a lot of LTNs and new infrastructure during the pandemic too. There aren’t many private cars in the heart of the city – taxis, buses and good vehicles are another matter but Paris is permitting them too.
Which isn’t to say it couldn’t be better (not least in K&C, mentioned below) but it’s not pandering to “car obsessives” (I don’t think most Londoners own one anyway and ownership was falling in the past couple of decades).
The problems are the provinces, as we Metropolian Elitists say.
Now it’s our turn to shout “
Now it’s our turn to shout “”Ah could ask eem, but ah think e already got one” from the battlements (ref Monty Python & Holy Grail, typing that accent isn’t easy). Britain is one big LTN as through traffic to and from Europe has been hugely reduced.
Yay Brexit. They told us it would take a while for the benefits to become clear.
“Ah could ask eem, but ah
“Ah could ask eem, but ah think e already got one”
Such quotations suggest that there are other sad old knackers on here with the ability to quote from MP. I am not alone! I am not a number, I am a free man!
Yay Brexit. They told us it would take a while for the benefits to become clear.
True, true!
I was surprised the other day
I was surprised the other day when a co-worker recognised my phone text alert – the word “Information” from The Prisoner.
In your organisation, who is
In your organisation, who is Number 1?
Duncann wrote:
Questions are a burden to others; answers are a prison for oneself.
That wasn’t the answer I
That wasn’t the answer I expected.
Anyway.
Be seeing you.
Fascinating wee sentence in
Fascinating wee sentence in there. Bit of a terminal blast to the anti-LTN idiots.
“Steps would also be taken to protect small businesses and prevent them from being driven out by the higher rents that often accompany streets being pedestrianised.”
Hmmm – that says any of these schemes are GOOD for local businesses?
growingvegtables wrote:
I was living in France before, during and after the construction of the Millau Viaduct. When the project was announced all the local businesses were up in arms saying that they would loose all the through traffic and business that it brought. There were huge protests. What actually happened was Millau was transformed from being a huge traffic jam which no one, myself included, liked to drive though and couldn’t get out of the place fast enough, into the beautiful tourist town at the gateway to the Gorges du Tarn that it is. Tourism to Millau boomed. The viaduct is the best thing that ever happed to Millau businesses.
iandusud wrote:
It’s the only reason I visited the town.
Not that I’m saying that was the best thing that ever happened to Millau…
Likewise – bloody brilliant
Likewise – bloody brilliant piece of engineering and design. Pretty sure I’d have just filtered through the town otherwise thinking ‘what a lot of lorries’.
Indeed. And moreover, as the
Indeed. And moreover, as the benefits of a non-motorised milieu become self-sustaining, the rude intrusion of motor vehicles under whatever excuse will become less and less tolerated. In so far as viable alternatives exist, pressure will mount until they are adopted. Taxi firms might be the first to have to adapt.
Vive la France.
Vive la France.
Cities are for people, not noisy, stinking two-tonne metal boxes. If only we could see this sort of leadership in the UK.
No doubt the car-obsessive,
No doubt the car-obsessive, cycle-hating Brexiteers will look upon this as another valid reason for leaving the EU. Another?
IME I’ve found both
IME I’ve found both brexiteers and remainers to be rabid anti cycling and LTN development.
I wouldn’t mind, but some of
I wouldn’t mind, but some of Michel Barnier’s recently pronouncements on immigration would make Tommy Robinson blush.
The EU are way behind government generally in terms of the environment. What’s important in this country is that the Greens don’t make the old mistake of allying with socialists – there is broad societal support for green initiatives, and it cannot be used by watermelons as a trojan horse to bring in deeply unpopular left wing ideas. Green has to mean Green.
Two points.
Two points.
“What’s important in this country is that the Greens don’t make the old mistake of allying with socialists” I would agree with you if we had some form of proportional representation. Unfortunately we don’t.
“there is broad societal support for green initiatives” … as long as it doesn’t negatively impact us personally.
Nigel Garrage wrote:
Oh mate. I remember what a filthy place the UK was in the 1970s. We were known as the dirty man of Europe. EU membership obliged us to clean up our shitty beaches and stop dumping sewage in the rivers.
That’s all going to change now, of course.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/sep/25/england-rivers-polluted-beyond-legal-limits
Eton Rifle wrote:
I remember it. But the
I remember it. But the country was being run by labour for most of the seventies. Something that all the tory haters on this website shouldn’t forget.
Dingaling wrote:
A lot of the 70s were taken up by dealing with the 5h1t the tories left behind. I love it when tories imagine that everything they do happens in a vacuum.
However, most govts over the past century have been tory, and the chaos and mayhem they produce is staggering. And in any case “but look over there, Socialism!” is not an acceptable response to criticism for the vast corruption, racism, iniquity, and environmental vandalism that the tories perpetrate through direct action or wilful negligence.
The tories are in power now, have been for the past 11 years, and for best part of 20 years through the 80s and 90s. They are who we criticise now, for their current and past actions, because saying “it’s socialism’s fault” frankly is laughable.
50 years ago…
50 years ago…
How does the EU’s current record on the environment compare?
Rich_cb wrote:
What since we left?
I dare say it’s hardly changed, but judging by the example that the attempt to ban neonicotinoids was obstructed by Cameron’s govt I doubt that we are a sad loss environmentally speaking.
It’s quite funny to see brexiters criticise EU policy conveniently forgetting that UK was a prime-mover and perfectly capable of getting its way, and did much of the time. But apparently nasty EU was bullying poor Little Britain
Another thing that brexiters seem to be unable to comprehend is that environmental issues are bigger than the UK, and any unilateral action worthy as it is (eg live animal exports) is much less effective than had we remained and driven policy throughout the EU.
Time and time again UK govts, mostly tory but not exclusively, have been in the position to drive through meaningful environmental policy both home and in the EU, but consistently failed, not “cos EU”, but due to dereliction of duty on govts part in favour of short term gains for the few that will ultimately be paid for by all of our children and grandchildren.
Since leaving, that dereliction will continue and probably accelerate, for at least this parliament – we didn’t leave it behind in “the Deal”.