Local authorities, particularly metropolitan areas, are currently faced with a scarcity of available land on their territory, leading to exacerbated competition between its various possible uses. What is perceived today as an obstacle to economic development could, on the contrary, be seen as an opportunity to make better use of land, more sparingly, more cooperatively, and better meeting the needs and challenges of the region and its inhabitants.
Several recent situations have made the European metropolis of Lille aware of the need for greater coordination between MEL departments (economic development, housing, energy, mobility, etc.) on the use of the (last) available land. What form of dialogue and coordination should be instituted to promote a more cross-functional, integrated vision? How can we establish mutual vigilance between departments on possible synergies, to optimize the use of land?
The pre-test survey highlighted the need to inform decision-making on land use:
- In a context of strong land pressure, the visions and projected uses for these plots by the various departments are often not very explicit and are a source of tension. However, it is important for the Management Committee to be able to prepare a collective proposal for the elected representatives, especially as they are sometimes approached directly by developers or other local players, which can have the effect of short-circuiting the work of the departments if it is not sufficiently negotiated upstream.
- Economic development departments” find it difficult to prioritize desired uses: their prospects are more volatile and difficult to secure (companies have shorter decision-making timescales and are more dependent on the economic and political context); mayors and elected representatives tend to favor uses such as housing or transport, which attract families or improve the supply of public services, over industrial networking.
- Lastly, although certain plots of land in the Local Urban Plan are earmarked for economic activity, this remains “open to interpretation”; they do not necessarily benefit companies in liaison with the Economic Development department (the installation of a bio-mass heating plant, for example, may be considered as economic land).
Replaying the arbitration process on the future of a brownfield site
In concrete terms, we worked with MEL’s Research & Development (R&D) department to run two workshops to “replay” with the departments concerned (transition, energy/climate, planning, land strategy, economy) the arbitration process on the future of a brownfield site, and produce joint specifications for optimizing the land and prefiguring a forum for dialogue on the future use of MEL land.
During these workshops, we produced and tested two tools:
- A “compass” card game to clarify each department’s vision for a plot of land, and overcome the feeling that “not everyone has their cards on the table”. It enabled everyone to decentralize and share their approach, thus easing tensions between departments.
- A cross-referenced table of each department’s expectations of a plot of land, to identify possible synergies between them. This could be pre-filled in either by the departments or by the planning department, so as to become an object of exchange.
These workshops highlighted the pivotal role of the planning department, which will be responsible for integrating and coordinating these tools and this new land use negotiation body.
The test highlighted the potential for changes in its role and working practices:
- Develop a more systemic approach: the department, which carries out or supports studies on metropolitan land, holds the past and future history of parcels. It regularly works with the various departments, in parallel/bilaterally, to share this information. Acting as the initiator of these collective sessions is a less technical, more time-efficient way of working, but one that requires new know-how and organizational methods.
- Adopt the role of facilitator, to prepare and lead these collective sessions, mobilize departments, develop tools, and identify the right timing for this forum.
The next stage, for the Planning and R& D departments, is to develop the compass maps to better adapt them to the MEL context (identifying the regulatory dimensions of the rest, adapting the vocabulary, etc.); rework the format of the workshops and tools so that they can be run autonomously by the department and fit in better with their work habits; identify and formalize the evolution of their role and posture; mobilize the Housing and Transport departments, absent from the first workshops. More broadly, the approach highlighted the need to model the usage process from the identification of available land to the decision to use it.
For the department in charge of economic development, the experiment highlighted the need to clarify its real estate strategy; indeed, while every member of the department has detailed knowledge of the needs of the companies he or she meets, there is currently no function to capitalize on and centralize this knowledge. Recruitment to the department at the end of 2025 should meet this need.