"It's a shame to lose this..." In Mulhouse, residents of two large towers that the town hall wants to demolish are refusing to sell their apartments and leave the premises.
The Plein Ciel towers, 72 metres and 24 floors each, dominate the priority district of Coteaux, emblematic of the "large complexes" built in the 1960s on the outskirts of cities.
Today, the Alsatian city and the social landlord CDC Habitat are buying up, one by one, the apartments in these co-ownerships, 282 dwellings in total, with the idea of demolishing the buildings and changing the face of the neighborhood.
As of December 31, CDC Habitat had already purchased 114 of them.
Their main argument is the risk of fire, which requires colossal work.
But some of the residents, mostly retired, refuse to leave, finding the cheque offered for their accommodation to be very insufficient.
"It's not with the 43.000 euros that they want to give us that we're going to find anything!" exclaims Béatrice Janton, who with her husband paid 75.000 euros 21 years ago for a four-room apartment. Not to mention the work undertaken since then.
"We redid everything, and now, like thank you..."
Tears come to her eyes.
"We were happy here. We had nice neighbors, an incredible environment. We won't find that again," says this 69-year-old former textile worker.
From her 14th-floor balcony, she looks out over the Vosges mountains beyond the apartment blocks. "It's a shame to lose that," she sighs.
"At a low price"
The case is the subject of a legal battle.
The city and CDC Habitat are highlighting a judgment by the Mulhouse judicial court. This found the inability of the condominium trustee to meet its obligations in terms of fire and allowed the appointment of a provisional administration in favour of the demolition project.
The co-owners, for their part, won their case before the administrative court of Strasbourg, which determined that the law on high-rise buildings, which imposes unaffordable works, does not apply in the case of the Plein Ciel towers, since it dates from after their construction.
"The point of law raised by the administrative court does not in any way say that the towers are not dangerous," retorts the deputy mayor in charge of housing, Alain Couchot. "Of course, we understand the difficulty and anger of the residents, but the law does not allow us to deviate from the safety of the residents," adds the Horizons elected official.
"It's a joke!" protests Roland Denier, a former truck driver who has lived there since 1986. "There's never been any fire problems in the building," adds his wife Nicole.
"This is an exemplary case at the national level," says Bruno Kern, lawyer for the mobilized owners. "An example of the use of unenforceable standards to force modest co-owners to sell their apartments at a low price and put them out, then to demolish the towers, while hand on heart, we say we are doing this for security reasons."
"It's a good excuse, but hey, the tower isn't dilapidated," says Marlène Hassler, 88, a former caretaker of the building where she has lived since 1973. Accept the offer? "Never in a million years!"
"People think: 'she can go to a nursing home'. I don't want to! And I can't afford it," defends this elegant lady.
Impoverishment
Several owners are said to be willing to sell, but not at the price offered, which buyers say corresponds to the market price established by Domaines de France, a state service.
These accommodations "were high-end at the time," recalls Christian Pfister, former president of the union council of tower 1, who led the mobilization.
Then, as in many large complexes, the middle classes left and the neighborhood became impoverished.
"It is unfortunately a fact that apartments have depreciated," explains the housing assistant.
On January 27, the Mulhouse urban area launched a procedure that should allow the expropriation of the last inhabitants. Those who cannot find new housing on their own will receive rehousing proposals, CDC Habitat promises.
