taking the temperature of the commune

During the last 2 weeks the entire line of trees separating the field diagonally across from our house, where five houses have recently been built, has been felled. Do the future owners really want to enjoy the view of us that we now have of them, the gaping hole destroying the charm of the road alongside the stream and allowing clear views into their properties? I feel like chaining myself to the two conifers that remain. So, when our monthly communal bulletin announces a public meeting to discuss the Plan Local d'Urbanisation I hotfoot along.

It was educational. About 50 die-hard Vaulnaviards turned out, with me amongst the youngest. The background to the plan is a) changing demography with an aging commune wanting to attract a more balanced blend of age-groups for a sustainable future, b) increased demand for smaller houses (because of eg fragmenting families), and c) a desire to limit how fast the countryside is built on by denser housing planning. NIMBYist that I am, I was in good company. At times the mayor, leading the meeting, was inaudible as a row of hecklers behind me shouted over him about how no one should be allowed to disturb the deer that graze around their houses. Curiously, though, there seemed to be as many people concerned that their current construction permits might be revoked in the face of the bigger development plan than people concerned about urbanisation per se.

Some of the principles were worthy: trying to forge better communcal links by reinvigorating the (non-existent) village centre. But is this a realistic objective given the increasingly commuter profile of the population? The dominance of retirees in the meeting was a clear indication of the irrelevance of "community" to the incomers. For most, their house is their castle, and neighbours tolerated only if separated by a thick laurel hedge.

I left feeling uneasy. Whilst Juan and I don't live in either of the areas in the village chosen for the main development push (5.5 new houses per 1000 of population = 7 per year and 65 over the 10-year period of the plan) it may ultimately depend on the willingness of villagers in those areas to sell their land for building. If they are reluctant (and who wouldn't be) individual plots already granted permission will be prioritised and we stand to look on as green gaps between the houses (and ultra protected agricultural land) fill in. Ah well, 'twas ever thus.