The interest of the legal action lies sometimes in picking out details of the dossier and looking underneath the surface.
Jean Le Delezir was right, the locals were right we were right the architect of Batiments de France said it in much harsher terms and wrote to the mayor: the demolition must not go on.
“The proposed demolitionwould therefore be an irremediable loss to the heritage of the community where ancient buildings are already poorly represented and could well be likely to have an adverse effect on the surroundings of a protected building “(chateau).

What interest has the mayor got in giving permission for demolition? This is the man who in earlier times suggested to a resident who was not happy with a concrete town to do like him and not live in Courseulles.
This is the man who proclaims the attraction for tourists the village of artists and the town’s famous cultural policy.
More so than town planning it is the way of using it which causes the problems.
Since the 70s has not recovered fromits effects.
The result:
The ugliness of the buildings
The concentration of second homes in specific areas
The sabotage of the environment, the quality of life and of the town’s heritage.

The PLU could have given us a second chance but this demolition (Massieu de Clerval) shows that the chosen way is that of uncontrolled business.
A true housing policy should serve the community interest
and respect the environment.

The building of a new area at the entrance to Courseulles and that of the unused land on the Avenue de la Liberation will be two good occasions to follow this principle. It is a question of municipal will.

About the planning permission see the article http://www.infocourseulles.fr/articles.php?lng=fr&pg=79 “Contre attaque”
On the method similarly see the article http://wwwinfocourseulles.fr/articles.php?lng=fr&pg=333 Town or estate agency?

Pascale Carpente Jano Eynard April 2006-05-01