We are constantly denouncing the under-protection of French heritage, particularly in Paris, an observation recently echoed by the Minister of Culture herself (see article). This under-protection can be illustrated once again by a very specific case: the Lion Fountain in the Place Félix Éboué (ill. 1), which was formerly known as the Place Daumesnil.
Designed by Gabriel Davioud and adorned with water-spitting bronze lions by Henri-Alfred Jacquemart (ill. 2), one of the best animal sculptors of the 19th century, this monument was originally designed for the Place de la République, which was then known as the Place du Château-d’Eau during the Second Empire (the fountain is also known as the Fontaine du Château-d’Eau). Completed in 1874, it was quickly moved to the Place Daumesnil in the 1880s.
-
- 1. Gabriel Davioud (1824-1881) and Henri-Alfred Jacquemart (1824-1896)
Fountain of Lions
Paris, place Daumesnil-Félix Éboué
Photo: Teofilo (CC BY-SA 2.0) - See the image in its page
There is no doubting its artistic interest, or the anomaly of its lack of protection. Designed by the same Davioud and also featuring sculptures (the two dragons) by Jacquemart, the Fontaine Saint-Michel has been inscribed since 1926; the Fontaine du Châtelet, also by Davioud and Jacquemart (with Boizot), has been inscribed since 1925; the Fontaine de l’Observatoire, also by Davioud (with Carpeaux and other sculptors, but without Jacquemart) has also been inscribed since 1926... In short, these other fountains are protected (and should be classified), but for some reason the one in the Place Félix Éboué is not.
-
- 2. Gabriel Davioud (1824-1881) and Henri-Alfred Jacquemart (1824-1896)
Fountain of Lions (detail)
Paris, place Daumesnil-Félix Éboué
Photo: Teofilo (CC BY-SA 2.0) - See the image in its page
If this had been the case, it would have been more difficult for the City of Paris to carry out its current redevelopment project, and even this is not certain. In fact, as the square (ill. 3) is within the protected perimeter of the Saint-Esprit church, this work required the opinion - with assent, it should be remembered - of the ABF (Architecte des Bâtiments de France). We’ll never know what he really thought. In fact, at the end of the two months during which he could give his opinion, he refrained from doing so. And since no opinion means a favourable one, the town was able to start the work, which has already involved removing two planted beds and rebuilding the underground networks. We will soon be getting down to the nitty-gritty of the project, which will involve radically redesigning the site. This will involve transforming the square not into a roundabout, which is its nature, but, as is now customary in Paris, into a ‘horseshoe’ (ill. 4) that will shift car traffic to one side only (to the north), reserving the other side for bicycles, on the model of the Place de la République and the Place de la Bastille.
-
- 3. The Place Daumesnil-Félix Éboué today (not even then, since the two massifs to the west have already been destroyed).
Photo: Google Maps - See the image in its page
-
- 4. City of Paris project for the
place Daumesnil-Félix Éboué
We note in particular that
trees are planted indiscriminately - See the image in its page
We won’t go into some of the issues that local residents are concerned about here (pedestrian safety poorly guaranteed by foreseeable traffic chaos similar to the situation at Place de la Bastille, noise pollution from the side that will see all the car traffic pass through, etc.), so we’ll just concentrate on aesthetics and urban planning.
As everywhere else, there is talk of planting new trees. And that would be possible, if the whole thing were designed by an urban planner and a landscapist. But it’s the City of Paris departments that are doing everything in-house, based on the plans of two cyclists’ associations. You only have to compare the plan they proposed at the start of the ‘consultation’ process and the plan finally adopted to see that they are very similar.
This is the end of the symmetry of the square, which is an essential point of urban planning in general and of ‘Haussmannian’ urban planning in particular; the views will be obstructed by the trees planted without any consideration for the fountain, whose view will be masked; there will be no urban or landscape composition. Neither the lawns nor the trees are symmetrical. It’s as if we’re looking at a rough draft drawn up by amateurs.
The association of residents living near the Place Daumesnil-Félix Éboué is not content to protest against this development, and rightly so, and to take it to court (although we know that it is likely that a ruling on the merits will not be handed down until after the work has been completed). She is proposing a counter-project, which she does not claim should be implemented as it stands, but which could serve as a basis for work to be taken up by professionals, architects, town planners and/or landscapers.
When Anne Hidalgo presented the project for the area around Notre-Dame (see article), she praised projects that were ‘consensual’ and ‘unencumbered by controversy’. She would be well advised to implement this excellent idea everywhere.