Parliament restricts the right of associations to lodge complaints about residential construction projects
Parliament has decided to significantly restrict the right to lodge complaints with associations for smaller residential construction projects in the construction area. This decision is intended to relieve single-family home builders in particular from delays caused by complaints. Despite controversial discussions, it is clear that construction projects with a floor area of up to 400 square metres will remain unaffected by association complaints in future, which will have a far-reaching impact on construction practice.
On 11 September, the Council of States made a far-reaching decision: in future, associations will no longer be allowed to lodge complaints against smaller residential construction projects in building areas. This new regulation affects residential construction projects with a floor area of up to 400 square metres. With a clear majority of 30 votes to 14, parliament voted in favour of this measure, which has triggered a wave of relief, but also criticism, in the construction industry.
The new regulation, which is described as a “moderate restriction” of the right of appeal by associations, aims to reduce delays in the realisation of construction projects. This development is particularly important for property developers in times of increasing housing shortages. “The current right of appeal often acts as a brake on the creation of new living space,” explained Fabio Regazzi (centre/TI). “With this adjustment, we are reducing the power imbalance between small builders and national associations.”
Fewer objections to single-family homes
The new law means that smaller construction projects, such as single-family homes, can be realised more quickly and without costly objections in future. This applies in particular to projects within designated building zones. For many building owners, this means a reduction in bureaucratic hurdles and greater planning security.
Beat Rieder (centre/VS), President of the Committee for the Environment and Spatial Planning, emphasised the urgency of this amendment: “It is unacceptable that even the smallest construction projects are blocked for years by appeals.” The majority in parliament sees the amendment as an urgently needed measure to accelerate residential construction in Switzerland and meet the growing demand for living space.
Critics warn of undesirable developments
However, not all parliamentarians were satisfied with the decision. Simon Stocker (SP/SH) warned that the new law hits the wrong targets. “In many cases, it is not the associations but neighbours who file objections to small construction projects,” said Stocker. The regulation therefore does not always affect the right players.
Environmental organisations also expressed their concerns. Heidi Z’graggen (centre/UR) pointed out that the previous regulations of the Nature and Cultural Heritage Protection Act (NCHA) had an important preventative effect. She warned that the new regulations could create undesirable loopholes that would impair the quality of construction.
The central point of contention
Another point of discussion was the upper limit of the floor area. While the majority supported the limit of 400 square metres proposed by the National Council, a minority called for this to be lowered to 250 square metres. According to Simon Stocker, this area corresponds more to that of an average detached house. However, the motion failed to gain majority support.
The Federal Council was also in favour of the 400 square metre rule. Environment Minister Albert Rösti explained that this size would also allow for a detached house with a granny flat and would therefore meet the needs of building owners.
Restriction to important sites and water areas
Another controversial point in the bill concerned the exceptional cases in which association complaints are still possible. The Council of States decided that these are only permitted for construction projects in areas of national importance. The National Council had originally defined “important sites” as the benchmark. However, the stricter regulation of the Council of States was adopted by a majority, as was the cancellation of the possibility of appeals by associations in water areas, which led to further opposition.
Céline Vara (Greens/NE) sharply criticised the decision and warned of the ecological risks: “Building near bodies of water can have fatal consequences. Experts strongly advise against it, and yet this protection is being dangerously weakened by the new regulation.”
Harmonisation with the Environmental Protection Act
The amendment to the right of appeal for associations also takes place in the context of harmonisation with the Environmental Protection Act (EPA). While the Environmental Protection Act already recognises restrictions for complaints regarding major projects, the Nature and Cultural Heritage Protection Act was previously unrestricted in this respect. The new regulation aims to eliminate this discrepancy and standardise the handling of complaints.
A controversial but decisive step
The restriction of the right to lodge complaints with associations for smaller residential construction projects is a significant step that will have a lasting impact on both developers and the property sector. While some speak of an urgently needed reduction in bureaucratic hurdles, critics warn of possible undesirable developments and ecological risks. The bill will now be discussed again in the National Council – and the outcome of the final vote remains exciting.