WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1820/96 by Nel van DIJK to the Commission. Construction of A51 motorway (France) through a conservation area
Date: 1996-07-05
Institutions: European Parliament, VAN DIJK
Subjects: France, environmental impact, impact study, motorway, protected area, rail transport, road building













EUR-Lex - 91996E1820 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E1820

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1820/96 by Nel van DIJK to the Commission. Construction of A51 motorway (France) through a conservation area  


Official Journal C 385 , 19/12/1996 P. 0047 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1820/96 by Nel van Dijk (V) to the Commission (5 July 1996)Subject: Construction of A51 motorway (France) through a conservation areaThe French government has begun with the construction of a stretch of motorway from Grenoble to Sisteron (A51). The main argument for building this motorway is that it will relieve congestion on the 'Autoroute du Soleil' (Lyon - Marseille), especially in the summer. The greater part of the route has still not however been finalized. The route will at all events go through a highly sensitive area of nature conservation (Le Trièves), where soil conditions will moreover pose extra problems for the construction work. It could well therefore be more sensible for the second stage of the route not to be constructed. But now that the first stage is already under construction, it will be virtually impossible for the second stage to be stopped.It would appear at all events that something has gone seriously wrong with the requirement to conduct an environmental impact assessment. The assessment provided appears to relate to a completely different area. It refers, for example, to beavers, even although no beavers whatsoever are to be found in the area concerned.1. Does the Commission share my view that the argument in terms of relieving pressure on the Autoroute du Soleil (A7) is invalid, since the width of that motorway is already being doubled?2. Does the Commission share my view that relieving pressure on the Autoroute du Soleil can best be achieved by improving rail connections and cutting back on road traffic in favour of the train?3. Does the Commission agree that environmental impact assessment submitted fails to comply with the requirements of Directive 85/337/EEC ((OJ L 175, 5 July 1985, p. 40. )) in that its substantive content appears to relate to a different area?4. Does the Commission consider it acceptable that a start should already have been made on the first stage of constructing the motorway even although no route has as yet been mapped out and no environmental impact assessment has been submitted for the second stage?Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission (18 September 1996)1. According to the information supplied to the Commission by the French authorities, the duplication of motorway A-7 has so far been neither planned nor contemplated. The A-51 is, however, included in the Community trans-European transport networks (roads section) list on the proposal of the French government which regards it as an essential link in the alternative North-South corridor (Dijon - Dôle - Bourg-en-Bresse - Grenoble - Sistéron - Aix-en-Provence) which would enable vehicles heading for Nice and Italy to rejoin motorway A-8 while avoiding the bottleneck at Aix-en-Provence.2. The French government has indicated its intention to build a new railway line between Valence and Marseille (TGV Méditerranée) over the next few years. That intended high speed line forms part of the Community's plans for the trans-European transport network (rail section). The declaration of public utility appeared in the French official journal of 2 June 1994 and work has already begun. It is envisaged that, in the longer term, part of the traffic (both goods and passenger) could be diverted from the roads to the railways.3. and 4. Under Council Directive 85/337/EEC on the assessment of the impact of certain public and private projects on the environment, no motorway projects may be authorized until a prior assessment has been made of any significant effects that those projects might have on the environment. That assessment must be made on the basis of suitable information provided by the principal customer and if needed supplemented by the authorities and the public affected by the project.It should, however, be noted that Directive 85/337/EEC is a procedural directive and it enables neither the appropriateness of a project nor the justification for an authorization decision to be assessed. Its provisions make it possible to require that any authorization decision should be preceded by an appropriate assessment of the significant effects of a project on the environment and by a public hearing.The Commission has been informed of the problems raised by the Honourable Member as part of the complaints recently laid before it concerning failure to comply with Directive 85/337/EEC. In part this concerns the route followed by the Grenoble - Col de Fau section of motorway A-51.5. The Commission is currently conducting a detailed examination of the documents provided in support of the complaint before contacting the French authorities in order to receive their comments on the grievances expressed by the plaintiffs.