Teleo. The administrative court of Toulouse rejected four requests against the urban cable car
By Quentin Marais
Published on
The verdict is in. Tuesday, December 13, 2022, the Administrative Court of Toulouse a rejected four applications directed against the urban cable car, Teleo.
Who went to court?
Several groups had seized the instance: a company insurance, a association and a union of co-owners. The latter took action to file “four collective petitions seeking the annulment of administrative decisions that allowed development of the southern urban cable car”. This is, as a reminder, entry into service on May 14, 2022, after its inauguration the day before.
What were the four requests?
The administrative court of Toulouse recalls that the first contested decision is the one “having approved compatibility from the local intermunicipal urban planning and housing plan (PLUi-H) to the project”. The second is directed against ” the decree of the prefect of the Haute-Garonne suspended prohibiting the destruction of protected animal species”.
The plaintiffs also attacked “the deliberation by which the trade union committee of Tisséo Communities approved Téléo’s project statement”. Finally, the last subject of contention concerned the decree establishing an easement overflight public utility.
Why did the court reject them?
How does the Toulouse administrative court explain its four rejections? For the first decision, he first recalls that the “PLUi-H was canceled by the court by a judgment of March 19, 2021”. As for the opposition to this deliberation on the compatibility of this plan “it was dismissed as inadmissible alleging the lateness of two of the applicants and the lack of standing of the third”.
The second request, therefore directed against the prefect, “was deemed inadmissible for lack of interest in acting by each of the participants”. Regarding the third, the administrative court considers that “the environmental impact of Téléo and its level of sound impact are lower to the other modes of transport studied.
Finally, faced with the ultimate attack, the court judges that “given the wording of the applicable texts of the Transport Code, an order establishing a public utility overflight easement could only turn out to be the footprint in m² and not in m3“.
Was this article helpful to you? Know that you can follow Actu Toulouse in space My News . In one click, after registration, you will find all the news of your favorite cities and brands.