Simplification of urban planning law: what the Huwart bill could change
The housing crisis and the accumulation of regulations have put pressure on the entire planning chain: local authorities, operators, landlords, and individuals. In this context, the bill introduced by MP Harold Huwart aims to do nothing less than "unblock" planning law and accelerate production in the housing sector.
After an initial adoption in the National Assembly (May 15, 2025) and then in the Senate (June 17, 2025), an agreement was reached in the joint committee (July 3, 2025) and the compromise version was adopted by the Senate on July 9, 2025. At the time of writing, the final vote in the Assembly is still awaited.
Beyond the timetable, the intention is clear: to streamline procedures, reduce delays, and give territories operational leeway. The text is part of a broader sequence of reforms affecting urban planning and housing, against a backdrop of falling construction starts and pressing needs (nearly 2.5 million households waiting for social housing).
The approach is intended to be pragmatic: correcting the legal blockages identified and equipping communities to relaunch blocked projects.
1) Tightened and streamlined urban planning procedures
The proposed law reorganizes the ways in which urban planning documents are developed.
It reduces the procedures for modifying PLU/PLUi and SCoT to just two families: revision for structural changes and a common law modification for the rest, in order to avoid the systematic use of overly cumbersome procedures. It also provides for exemption from environmental assessment when the modification is limited to correcting a material error or reducing an urban/urbanization zone, and extends public participation by electronic means (PPVE) to streamline consultation.
Still in this logic of simplification, when the perimeters coincide, SCoT and PLUi can be merged into a single document , which pools the development costs and stabilizes the hierarchy of local standards.
Furthermore, certain decisions derogating from the PLU(i) would require the agreement of the mayor, reaffirming the decisive role of the municipality in the arbitration of certain projects.
Finally, on the land side, the text allows direct membership of municipalities in EPFs (including State ones) and extends the duration of tax exemption for carrying to give breathing space to land acquisition and recycling strategies.
2) Concrete mechanisms for producing housing
On the operational front, the main measure is the creation of a multi-site development permit : a single permit can cover non-contiguous land units, with the possibility of integrating plots to be renatured. With this mechanism, the idea is to accelerate fragmented operations without multiplying files or juxtaposing procedures.
The text also facilitates production in economic activity zones (ZAE) and authorizes, on a case-by-case basis, exemptions from the PLU when the building ban hinders clear housing needs, including outside the so-called “tense” municipalities.
Another point expected by project owners: the raising or limited transformation of a regularly constructed building could no longer be refused solely on the grounds of its non-compliance with the new rules introduced subsequently. Changes of use in natural, agricultural or forestry zones (NAF) are relaxed, to encourage the conversion of existing buildings.
The text also adapts for ten years the regime of social hotel residences (RHVS) and creates residences for employment purposes , in order to temporarily house mobile workers, seasonal workers, students or apprentices, with regulated rents and mobility leases.
In the same spirit, exemptions from town planning rules applicable to certain major projects (particularly industrial or energy projects) would be extended to 20 years, to secure long investment schedules.
Finally, the period for the acquisition of “ownerless property” by communities would be reduced from 30 to 15 years, being applicable to successions opened from January 1, 2027, to mobilize more quickly the diffuse land.
3) Photovoltaic canopies in car parks: towards a relaxation
The APER law of March 10, 2023 requires outdoor parking areas larger than 1,500 m² to be equipped with photovoltaic canopies over at least half of the surface area, according to a staggered schedule from 2026 to 2028.
Huwart proposal relaxes this framework, by providing the possibility of mixing shade structures and vegetation (trees with a large canopy), with a floor of 35% of half of the surface area necessarily covered by shade structures, and opening up to a mix of energies (for example, with the combination of photovoltaic and geothermal energy).
The timetable is adjusted for parking lots of 1,500 to 10,000 m², with a possible report until January 1, 2030 to ensure a resilient supply.
4) Litigation and fight against dilatory actions
The text is not limited to town planning acts: it includes a litigation component aimed at clarifying the interest in acting , securing the substitution of grounds by the judge and, more generally, speeding up the processing of appeals to limit delaying strategies.
For housing projects, reducing lead times and procedural oversight should improve the predictability of operations. This is a key issue for social landlords and developers.
5) What would be the practical effects of this reform? (three use cases)
For a municipality : the merger of SCoT/PLUi with identical scope and direct membership in an EPF significantly simplifies governance and land strategy. In the short term, a community can prioritize a simple modification (rather than a revision) to correct a material error and open a sector more quickly to a mixed program, while using the PPVE for more agile consultation.
For a private operator : the multi-site development permit avoids the multiplication of applications on dispersed tenements, and the securing of limited elevations/transformations could remove valuable blockages on existing buildings. The supervised exemptions to the PLU, validated by the mayor, can also facilitate operations in economic areas where the demand for housing is high (reindustrialization, tourist or university areas).
For an individual : an extension or conversion project, which was properly authorized at the outset, gains legal certainty in the face of changing rules. In NAF zones, the room for maneuver regarding changes of use is a useful signal, without exempting them from the required environmental and agricultural audits.
6) How can our firm support you in these changes?
For communities and operators, the challenge will not only be to understand these new systems, but also to prioritize them and activate them at the most opportune time for their project.
Support from a lawyer specializing in urban planning law like Maître de Poulpiquet will allow you to:
- to audit urban planning documents (choice between modification and revision, opportunity for a SCoT/PLUi merger, compatibilities to monitor);
- to orchestrate the consultation (PPVE) and to frame the exemptions from the PLU with the local executive
- to secure authorizations requested (multi-site permits, elevations, changes of use) and thus anticipate litigation risks
- to structure the land (membership/partnership with an EPF, portage, ownerless properties) and to adapt operations to include “energy clauses” linked to the solarization of parking lots.
In conclusion
Huwart proposal does not necessarily claim to reinvent planning law, but it does seek to unblock identified obstacles, by reorganizing procedures, opening targeted exemptions and providing concrete solutions to the players in this sector.
Actual effectiveness will ultimately depend on regulatory implementation, the ability of stakeholders to take hold of it and, of course, the vote definitively expected in the National Assembly.
While awaiting these confirmations, local authorities, developers, and landlords have every interest in mapping their projects in light of these new levers. Maître de Poulpiquet ‘s firm will assist you with these changes, in order to adapt and secure your current and future projects in the face of these various reforms.
Back