REACTION. Opposite to the architects, the ESH was informed, on Friday, 23rd June 2017, Batiactu its intention to support an amendment simplifying this obligation. An approach to respond the president of the national Order of architects, Catherine Jacquot.
The procedure of selecting an architect by competition, recorded in the framework of the law on the CAPE, is poorly perceived by some social landlords, such as the USH and the ESH. The Federation of social enterprises for housing (ESH), we had confided his intention to defend the filing of an amendment to the future streamlining order to challenge the organisation of design contests for architects. (Read our article)
- Architectural competition : the social landlords will be subject to the obligation
- Social housing : the obligation of the architectural competition divides
The reaction of the latter was not long in coming. Catherine Jacquot, president of the CNOA, remember, this Monday, 26 June 2017, the social landlords of their responsibility as a developer of social housing, which is to “be a major actor of the quality of the urban environment, architectural environment of many citizens, and among them, those who are the poorest“. The president of the national Order of architects believes that “the architectural competition is the only procedure that allows you to choose the project most suited to their elected officials and builders in the public interest“.
The small operations, not concerned
If the reasons pushing social landlords to apply for a simplification are many, the president of the CNOA opposes these arguments. When, Didier Poussou, director of the office of the Fédération des ESH, explains that “a contest of architecture for 10 or 20 units does not make any economic sense“, she replies : “The architectural competition is obligatory above a threshold level of fees set by the european law and therefore does not concern the small operations of 10 or 20 units“.
Has the argument of the extended deadline of the transaction because of the competition procedure, Catherine Jacquot sees the obligation of the owner of“develop a program of quality” and see the project become “very quickly for a building permit“.
“As to the extra cost, yes, it is necessary to pay the teams not selected but the relevance of the choice of the project to meet the criteria of urban integration, architectural and environmental quality will then be a gain in overall cost of the operation“, she says also.
“The architects want that social landlords meet all their prerogatives as owners, Catherine Jacquot, president of the CNOA.
- Opposed to the architects, the ESH announce wearing an amendment
- “In some cases, the assistance of architect is inadequate,” Mr Louis (USH)
For Catherine Jacquot, “the USH and the ESH wish that social landlords become developers like the other“. However, she believes that by doing this : “they deny any specificity of their action, and place themselves on a field that gives weapons to those who would like to see them disappear as employer“. It also notes that “since 2010, the social landlords were no longer subjected to the obligation to contest, or what is it ? An architectural quality down and an increasing number of off plan !“. Catherine Jacquot believes that “the social landlords make the difference when they do not turn into buyers but they stand out for the quality of urban and architectural achievements“.
“The architects want that social landlords meet all their prerogatives as owners, because they are the only ones able to stop the degradation of the quality of the housing units is recognized when these are designed in VEFA“, argue-t-elle. “It is not to sacrifice quality to be competitive“, she said hoping that “whenever public money is used, the architectural design competition should be required for all masters of work, private and public“.