It is certainly the case that he did not always succeed in that. Claudine Houbart explains the reasons for this with reference to certain case studies that are particularly revealing. Contrary to what had been planned for the renovation of the Grand-Béguinage à Louvain, where Lemaire had had carte blanche, other examples show that he was in fact “frustrated in his design”. Such was the case with the renovation of the Rue des Brasseurs, in Namur, where he was in charge of the preliminary study. Interestingly the same thing happened with the Sainte-Anne block, which adjoined the Place du Grand Sablon in Brussels. Houbart went into detail regarding that project.

“Up until the end of the 1950s”, Houbart said, “the centre of the capital, already marked by the large cleanup projects of the 19th century, became the object of a modernizing frenzy which transformed old neighbourhoods into permanent construction sites, without one responsible voice being raised against the promoters and public agencies responsible for a disaster, in which much valuable heritage was lost.” The term “Brusselization” entered the language of architecture professionals. Wikipedia even defines it as “a term used by urbanists to refer to the urban upheavals of a city given over to promoters to the detriment of the character of the daily life of the inhabitants, which is then described as the necessary “modernization” of the city.” You don’t say.

In the late 1960s, people’s attitudes changed, thankfully. The trauma caused by cases of destruction such as that of the Maison du Peuple by Victor Horta, in 1965, set off a strong counter-reaction, thanks especially to the creation of two organizations for the defence of cities which were very different as regards their arguments and their methods, but which aimed at the same objective, that of saving the tradition-laden areas of the city. One was “Quartier des Arts” (Raymond Lemaire was their principal expert), begun in 1967, followed by the “Workshop for research and urban action” (ARAU), begun in 1969.

Beginning at this period, Raymond Lemaire would start to contribute to the movement that questioned the methods of urban renewal or renovation that were adopted by the “Services techniques” of the City of Brussels with regard to the oldest neighbourhoods of the historic centre. As the expert analyst for the “Quartier des Arts” association, he was given responsibility for several studies aimed at the adoption of “special plans for design and construction” (known as PPA) for the city blocks of great historical interest such as the Sainte-Anne block, which from 1970 on would be the first urban renovation project directed by Lemaire in Brussels.

Îlot Sainte-Anne: failure!

“This important example allows us to look at the work of Raymond Lemaire in a critical and nuanced way,” said Houbart. “The renovation of this îlot came at a key moment in the recent history of Brussels urbanism, but its renovation project only ended up, after more than 15 years of negotiations, with a very partial realization that was quite different from the initial objectives, which included setting a high value on existing buildings, and contemporary reinterpretation on the other hand. Lemaire was in fact confronted with divergent interests on the part of many actors both public and private, hampered by administrative tools that were poorly adapted to such a project, and subject to the unwavering negative judgment of his detractors.