THE URBAN GEOHERITAGE OF CLERMONT-FERRAND: FROM INVENTORY TO MANAGEMENT

Main Article Content

Viktor Vereb
Benjamin van Wyk de Vries
Marie-Noëlle Guilbaud
Dávid Karátson

Abstract

In sprawling urban areas, geoheritage is suppressed into limited niches. Potential geosites are highly vulnerable and could disappear completely during construction, or their integrity could be irreversibly modified. Here, we create an inventory of urban geoheritage for Clermont-Ferrand in France, recording more than 50 sites using the French national workflow. The results of the quantitative assessment have been used to differentiate between geosites (high scientific value) and geodiversity sites (limited scientific significance, important additional values). Finally, we discuss some important considerations on urban geoconservation, such as geotouristic itineraries or customized management strategies for each site and the whole city.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

How to Cite
Vereb, V., van Wyk de Vries, B., Guilbaud, M.-N., & Karátson, D. (2020). THE URBAN GEOHERITAGE OF CLERMONT-FERRAND: FROM INVENTORY TO MANAGEMENT. Quaestiones Geographicae, 39(3), 5–31. https://doi.org/10.2478/quageo-2020-0020
Section
Articles

References

  1. ACAVIC [Association of the Old Cellars of Clermont], 2001. Les caves de la butte de Clermont: un monde à découvrir. ACAVIC, Clermont-Ferrand: 48 p.
  2. Blanzal, 1864. Plan de la ville de Clermont-Ferrand. Source: Bibliothèque nationale de France, GED-6048. Online: https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b8444988v (Ac cessed: 21 December 2019).
  3. Boivin P., Besson J.C., Briot D., Deniel C., Gourgaud A., La bazuy P., de Larouzière F.D., Langlois E., Livet M., Méd ard E., Merciecca C., Mergoil J., Miallier D., Morel J.M., Thouret J.C., Vernet G., 2017. Volcanology of the Chaîne des Puys. Parc Nat. Régional la Chaîne des Puys (Ed.), Cart. Fasc. 6e édition: 200 p.
  4. BRGM [Bureau de Recherches Géologiques et Minières], 2019. Cartes géologiques vectorisées et harmonisées à 1/50 000 du BRGM.
  5. Brilha J., 2016. Inventory and quantitative assessment of ge osites and geodiversity sites: a review. Geoheritage 8(2): 119–134. doi: 10.1007/s12371-014-0139-3.
  6. Brocx M., Semeniuk V., 2019. Building Stones Can Be of Geoheritage Significance. Geoheritage 11: 133–149. doi: 10.1007/s12371-017-0274-8.
  7. Brown G., Strickland-Munro J., Kobryn H., Moore S.A., 2017. Mixed methods participatory GIS: An evaluation of the validity of qualitative and quantitative mapping meth ods. Applied Geography 79: 153–166. doi: 10.1016/j.apge og.2016.12.015. Budapest 100, (n.d.).
  8. Budapest 100 civil urban festival. Online: http://budapest100.hu/en/rolunk/hatter/ (Accessed: 21 December 2019).
  9. Cooke R.U., 1976. Urban geomorphology. Geographical Jour nal 142: 59–65.
  10. CRAIG [Centre Régional Auvergne-Rhône-Alpes de l’Information Géographique], 2013. Modèle Numérique de Terrain (MNT) grille au pas de 5 m – Agglomération de Cler mont-Ferrand. Online: ftp://opendata.craig.fr/opendata/mnt/agglos/2013_clermont-ferrand_5m/ (Accessed: 21 December 2019).
  11. De Mulder F.J., 1993. Urban Geology in Europe: An Over view. Quaternary International, 20: 5–11. doi: 10.1016/1040- 6182(93)90032-B.
  12. De Wever P., le Nechet Y. & Cornée A., 2006. Vade-mecum pour l’inventaire du patrimoine géologique national. Mém. H.S. Soc. géol. Fr., 12: 162 p.
  13. De Wever P., Egoroff G., Cornée A., Lalanne A. (eds.), 2014. Géopatrimoine en France. – Mém. H.S. Soc. géol. Fr., 14: 180 p.
  14. De Wever P., Alterio I., Egoroff G., Cornée A., Bobrowsky P., Collin G., Duranthon F., Hill W., Lalanne A., Page K., 2015. Geoheritage, a National Inventory in France. Geo heritage 7: 205–247. doi: 10.1007/s12371-015-0151-2.
  15. Del Lama E.A., de La Corte B.D., Martins L., da Glória Mot ta Garcia M., Kazumi Dehira L., 2015. Urban geotourism and the old centre of São Paulo City, Brazil. Geoheritage 7: 147–164. doi:10.1007/s12371-014-0119-7.
  16. Del Monte M., Fredi P., Pica A., Vergari F., 2013. Geosites within Rome City center (Italy): a mixture of cultural and geomorphological heritage. Geografia Fisica e Dinamica Quaternaria 36: 241–257. doi: 10.4461/GFDQ.2013.36.0.
  17. Desmarest N., 1823. Carte générale ou tableau d’assemblage de la carte topographique et minéralogique d’une partie du départe ment du Puy-de-Dôme. Source: Bibliothèque nationale de France, département Cartes et plans, GE C-6757. Online: https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b530848935 (Ac cessed: 21 December 2019).
  18. Dunlop L., Larwood J.G., Burek C.V., 2018. Geodiversity Ac tion Plans – A Method to Facilitate, Structure, Inform and Record Action for Geodiversity. In: Reynard E., Brilha J. (Eds) Geoheritage: Assessment, Protection, and Management. Elsevier, Amsterdam: 53–65. doi: 10.1016/B978-0-12- 809531-7.00003-4.
  19. Erikstad L., Nakrem H.A., Markussen J.A., 2018. Protect ed Geosites in an Urban Area of Norway, Inventories, Values, and Management. Geoheritage 10: 219–229. doi: 10.1007/s12371-017-0223-6.
  20. GLA [Greater London Authority], 2009. London’s Foundations protecting the geodiversity of the capital: The London Plan (Spatial Development Strategy for Greater London), London Plan Implementation Report. London: 179 p.
  21. Glangeaud P., 1901. Monographie du volcan de Gravenoire, près de Clermont-Ferrand. Béranger, Paris.
  22. Harris A., van Wyk de Vries B., Latutrie B., Saubin E., Lan glois E., 2014. Lava invasion of urban areas at monogentic systems: Examples from the Chaine des Puys. AGU Fall Meeting, 15–19 December 2014, San Francisco (USA), V23B-4784.
  23. Huggenberger P., Epting J., Affolter A., Butscher C., Sc heidler S., Simovic Rota J., 2011. Hypotheses and Con cepts. In: Huggenberger P., Epting J. (Eds) Urban Geology. Springer, Basel: 15–51. doi: 10.1007/978-3-0348-0185-0_3.
  24. IGN [Institut national de l’information géographique et for estière], 2019. SCAN 25® Institut national de l’information géographique et forestière. Online: https://www.geoportail.gouv.fr/carte (Accessed: 21 December 2019).
  25. Juliot P., 1898. Plan de Clermont-Ferrand. Source: Bibliothèque nationale de France, GED-2991. Online: https://gallica. bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b8441821d (Accessed: 21 Decem ber 2019).
  26. La Jonchère É., Desbrulins F., 1739. Carte de la ville et des en virons de Clairmont-Ferrand capitale de la Haute et Basse Auvergne dediée a son Altesse Monseigneur le duc de Bouillon gouverneur de cette province. Source: Bibliothèque nation ale de France, département Cartes et plans, GE DD-2987 (1351, 1 B). Online: https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b530532601/f1.item (Accessed: 21 December 2019).
  27. Latutrie B., Andredakis B.I., De Groeve T., Harris A.J.L., Langlois E., van Wyk de Vries B., Saubin E., Bilotta G., Cappello A., Crisci G.M., D’Ambrosio D., Del Negro C., Favalli M., Fujita E., Iovine G., Kelfoun K., Rongo R., Spataro W., Tarquini S., Coppola D., Ganci G., Marchese F., Pergola N., Tramutoli V., 2015. Testing a geographical information system for damage and evacuation assess ment during an effusive volcanic crisis. Geological Society Special Publications, London, 426. doi:10.1144/SP426.19.
  28. Lima F.F., Brilha J.B., Salamuni E., 2010. Inventorying ge ological heritage in large territories: a methodological proposal applied to Brazil. Geoheritage 2(3–4): 91–99. doi: 10.1007/s12371-010-0014-9.
  29. Nisio S., Allevi M., Ciotoli G., Ferri G., Fiore R., Lanzini M., Roma M., Paolucci R., Stranieri I., Succhiarelli C., 2017. Carta della cavita sotterranee di Roma. ISPRA – CNR – IGAG – Roma Capitale – Ass. Centro Ricerche, 1p. Spe leo-Archeologiche Sotterranei di Roma – Ass. Culturale Roma Sotterranea – Roma Metropolitane – Pontificia Commissione di Archeologia Sacra – Dipartimento Na zionale di Protezione Civile – Roma Città Metropolitana.
  30. Pereira D., Marker B., Kramar S., Cooper B., Schouenborg B., 2015. Global Heritage Stone: Towards International Recognition of Building and Ornamental Stones; Geolog ical Society Special Publications London, 417. doi: 10.1144/ SP407.
  31. Petronis M.S., Garza D., van Wyk de Vries B., 2019. The Leaning Puy de Dôme (Auvergne, France) tilted by shal low intrusions. Volcanica 2(2): 161–186. doi: 10.30909/vol.02.02.161186.
  32. Pica A., Vergari F., Fredi P., Del Monte M., 2016. The Aeterna Urbs Geomorphological Heritage (Rome, Italy). Geoherit age 8(1): 31–42. doi: 10.1007/s12371-015-0150-3.
  33. Pica A., Reynard E., Grangier L., Kaiser C., Ghiraldi L., Per otti L., Del Monte M., 2018. GeoGuides, Urban Geotour ism Offer Powered by Mobile Application Technology. Geoheritage 10: 311–326. doi: 10.1007/s12371-017-0237-0.
  34. POP [Plateforme ouverte de patrimoine], 2019. Patrimoine ar chitecurel (Base Mérimée) filtered to Clermont-Ferrand. On line: https://www.pop.culture.gouv.fr/ (Accessed: 21 December 2019).
  35. Přikryl R., Török Á. (eds), 2010. Natural stone resources for his torical monuments. The Geological Society, London. 333. doi: 10.1144/SP333.
  36. Prosser C.D., Díaz-Martínez E., Larwood J.G., 2018. The Conservation of Geosites: Principles and Practice. In: Reynard E., Brilha J. (Eds) Geoheritage: Assessment, Protec tion, and Management. Elsevier, Amsterdam: 193–212. doi: 10.1016/B978-0-12-809531-7.00011-3.
  37. Reynard E., 2009. Geomorphosites: definitions and charac teristics. In: Reynard E., Coratza P., Regolini-Bissig G. (Eds) Geomorphosites. Pfeil, Munich: 9–20.
  38. Reynard E., Perret A., Bussard J., Grangier L., Martin S., 2016. Integrated approach for the inventory and management of geomorphological heritage at the regional scale. Geo heritage 8(1): 43–60. doi.org/10.1007/s12371-015-0153-0.
  39. Reynard E., Pica A., Coratza P., 2017. Urban geomorphologi cal heritage. An overview. Quaestiones Geographicae 36(3): 7–20. doi: 10.1515/quageo–2017–0022.
  40. Roche A., Vennin E., Bouton A., Olivier N., Wattinne A., Bundeleva I., Deconinck J.F., Virgone A., Gaucher E.C., Visschera P.T., 2018. Oligo-Miocene lacustrine microbial and metazoan buildups from the Limagne Basin (French Massif Central). Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palae oecology 504: 34–59. doi: 10.1016/j.palaeo.2018.05.001.
  41. Robinson E., 1982. A geological walk around the City of London – royal exchange to Aldgate. Proceedings of the Geologists Association 93: 225–246. doi: 10.1016/S0016-7878(82)80001-1.
  42. Thornbush M., 2015. Geography, urban geomorphology and sustainability. Area 47(4): 350–353. doi: 10.1111/ area.12218.
  43. UN DESA [United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs], 2018. 2018 Revision of the World Urbaniza tion Prospects. Population Division. Online: https://data. worldbank.org/indicator/SP.URB.TOTL.IN.ZS (Accessed 21 December 2019).
  44. UNESCO [United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cul tural Organization], 1998. Dossier d’inscriptions des chemins francaises de Saint-Jacques-de-Compostelle sur la liste du Patrimoine Mondial. Commission nationale française pour l’UNESCO : 229–238.
  45. van Wyk de Vries B., Vereb V., Karatson D., 2019. Geosite inventories in World Heritage sites: essential for protec tion and management. Geophysical Research Abstracts (21): EGU2019-3604, 2019.
  46. Vereb V., Meirinho P., Lima E., Nunes J.C., 2018a. Digital ly based monitoring process of geosites in Azores UNESCO Global Geopark: An open-source solution with ODK Collect, XLSForm and Enketo framework. In: Abstracts Book, 8th International Conference on UNESCO Global Geoparks: Geoparks and sustainable development: 245.
  47. Vereb V., van Wyk de Vries B., Karátson D., 2018b. Geo heritage is coming to town: preservation of geological features in an urban environment with the example of geomorphological mapping on Clermont-Ferrand. Geo physical Research Abstracts (20): EGU2018-11647.
  48. Zwoliński Z., Hildebrandt-Radke I., Mazurek M., Mako honienko M., 2017. Existing and proposed urban geo sites values resulting from geodiversity of Poznań City. Quaestiones Geographicae 36(3): 125–149. doi: 10.1515/quageo-2017-0031.