Employers' Confederation Objects to Advancing Architecture Bill in Its Current Form

The Employers' Confederation of Latvia (LDDK), an organisation representing employers' interests, objects to moving the draft Architecture Law forward in its current form. It argues that the bill's restrictions and new administrative requirements for the construction process have not been properly assessed in terms of proportionality and economic impact. The concerns affect the construction sector and businesses that plan or commission building projects.

LDDK accepts that the bill's goal is justified: to promote a high-quality, sustainable architectural environment that serves the public interest. However, it says the need to expand the powers of professional self-governance, introduce new restrictions on commercial activity and require mandatory architecture competitions for certain construction projects has not been sufficiently demonstrated. It also notes that no assessment has been made of whether these problems could be handled under existing rules on spatial planning, construction and oversight of professional activity.

Mandatory competitions and the city architect's opinion

The sharpest criticism targets the obligation to hold mandatory architecture, landscape architecture and urban planning competitions in certain cases. LDDK states that organising a single architecture competition costs a private client more than 38,000 euros, and that possible project delays and rising investment costs must also be taken into account.

The confederation is also concerned about a provision that would make a city architect's opinion binding on the municipal building authority. In its view, the bill does not clearly define the criteria for issuing such an opinion, its deadlines or its place in the construction process, which could create legal uncertainty.

Limits on the term "architects' office"

LDDK also opposes the plan to restrict use of the term "architects' office". The bill sets requirements for a company's share structure and would require the consent of the Latvian Association of Certified Architects. The organisation says this could restrict competition and make it harder to attract investment.

LDDK further points to possible risks linked to the planned scope of the Association's powers, the disciplinary liability rules and the bill's transitional provisions, which in some cases could affect businesses' legitimate expectations.

The organisation urges the committee to require a full legal and economic assessment of the bill, including the opinion of the Competition Council on the proposed competition restrictions and the powers of professional self-governance.