By Accommodation Times News Service
The association organised a meeting to discuss the issue. Its members signed a protest letter which will be sent to the civic chief
The BMC’s decision to grade architects on the basis of their past performance has not got down too well with them. Protesting the civic body’s decision, an association of architects from the city stated that it will challenge the decision before the appropriate authority.
The association organised a meeting to discuss the issue. Its members signed a protest letter which will be sent to the civic chief.
The BMC had decided to rank builders and architects on the basis of completed projects and share information in the public domain to help property buyers make an informed choice while choosing a home. At present, buyers go by public perception purchasing property. They have little option but to accept the builders’ and architects’ claims about their past projects. Neither is there any mechanism to show them if all rules are followed during construction.
The need for grading was felt after it was noticed that in the past, some builders avoided criminal action despite committing serious violations, but then crowed that they are known for completing their work on time after following all legal procedures.
Recently, BMC informed the architects association that it will categorize them on the basis of proven track record, performance and ability.
PEATA (Practicing Engineers, Architects and Town planners Associations) members condemned the proposal as it is “absolutely unjustified and dangerous for careers of professionals”. They will now seek help from the Council of Architecture. Architects said that if builders commit a fault, they should not be held responsible. “Only the Council of Architecture can decide about it,” said Shirish Sukhatme of PEATA.
Last year, a BMC probe had shown more than 6,000 building proposal files had gone missing from their records. Officials suspected violations in all projects where builders and architects committed violations during construction, but could not prove it.