Sites & Cités remarquables de France advocates "for a structural, differentiated and sustainable approach to housing in historic city centers and Remarkable Heritage Sites"

This situation is no longer simply a temporary imbalance, but a structural tension between available supply, production capacity, and evolving social and territorial needs. In this context, Sites & Cités remarquables de France offers a contextualized analysis of the announced measures, particularly in light of the specific characteristics of historic buildings and heritage centers.

The housing situation in France remains marked by worrying indicators. Analyses by various associations highlight the extent of inadequate housing, which affects 4 million people, while the volume of vacant dwellings, at nearly 3,7 million (a third of which have been vacant for more than two years), constitutes a major paradox in a context of shortage.

This vacancy is particularly concentrated in the old centers of the Remarkable Heritage Sites (SPR), where it reaches levels twice as high as the national average.

The Government's stated objectives, notably the production of two million homes by 2030 and the acceleration of energy renovation policies, necessarily appear ambitious given the needs. However, achieving them requires a careful adaptation of tools and standards to the realities of the existing housing stock, particularly when it comes to older buildings subject to specific structural and technical issues and stringent heritage requirements.

Thus, in line with the motion addressed to the President of the Republic in 2024, Sites & Cités reaffirms that putting 100.000 to 200.000 homes back on the market in Remarkable Heritage Sites (SPR) is a major lever to meet housing needs without artificializing the land.

For this housing plan to be effective and operational, concrete adaptations to public policies are necessary:

An adaptation of Energy Performance Diagnoses

The relaxation of energy performance certificate (EPC) regulations, allowing the rental of F or G-rated properties subject to a commitment to renovation work within three years for detached houses and five years for condominiums, is a pragmatic response to a deadlock. This measure implicitly reflects the current market's inability to simultaneously absorb the scale of renovation needs and the pressure of rental demand. By preventing a massive exodus of housing from the market, it mitigates the immediate risk of exacerbating the crisis, particularly in high-demand areas.

However, this provision raises questions about its legal implementation and operational effectiveness. Indeed, contrary to public, even official, statements, no prohibition on renting is linked to the substandard condition of the dwelling, regardless of the cause, whether related to the Energy Performance Certificate (EPC) or not. While the landlord is obligated to provide decent housing, the only sanction rests with the tenant's actions, within the framework of a private law lease, ultimately before a judge, except for potential checks related to the payment of housing allowance or the issuance of a rental permit. Therefore, how can this commitment to carry out the necessary work within the allotted timeframe be legally formalized? Is it a condition of the lease? From what point is this timeframe calculated, and what is its deadline? What about existing leases? What are the consequences in the event of a change of ownership or a change of tenant? What means are there to monitor compliance with this obligation? The completion of the work should not be grounds for lease termination, as this would constitute a double penalty for the tenant.

Finally, in a co-ownership where the decision to carry out work impacting the common areas (which is necessary to obtain a significant energy saving) depends on the co-owners' association and not on the co-owner alone, how can a co-owner who is also a landlord commit to carrying out the necessary work within a period of 5 years?

The lack of enhanced support, both in terms of engineering and financing, could lead to a mere postponement of regulatory compliance, but also to a further weakening of tenants' situations. The question of what happens next remains entirely open: what will happen after the deadlines expire if the conditions for carrying out the work have not been significantly improved? In a context of persistent rental pressure, there is a real risk of seeing the same imbalances recur. Therefore, this measure could appear as a temporary solution, the effectiveness of which will depend on its legal soundness and the ability of public authorities to create an environment conducive to renovation, based in particular on appropriate tax incentives, so-called "green" financing, and operational support for landlords.

These questions must be considered in light of the objectives set by the Climate and Resilience Law, which mandates an ambitious trajectory for transforming the housing stock. While these objectives are entirely legitimate given the climate challenges, their implementation raises significant difficulties, particularly in older buildings where many dwellings have an energy performance rating of F or G.

Beyond the proposed reform, Sites & Cités emphasizes the need to create a specific Energy Performance Certificate (EPC) for older buildings, or at the very least, to provide the necessary flexibility already mentioned in the French Building and Housing Code (CCH)[1], which explicitly allows for exemptions from high-performance energy renovation requirements for buildings subject to architectural or heritage constraints. Indeed, the energy dogmatism that imposes the same calculation methods on traditional buildings as on "modern" constructions made of composite materials, under the pretext of avoiding a two-tiered system, is a major obstacle to rehabilitation.

Let us finally assume that in order to promote the overall rehabilitation of buildings constructed with traditional materials, it is necessary to adapt the DPEs to their technical, physical and heritage characteristics: a complete diagnosis, which is not limited to energy improvement work alone but includes the treatment of any pathologies, whether health-related and/or structural.

Evolution of the "Jeanbrun" tax system

The necessary evolution of the so-called "Jeanbrun" tax scheme, with the extension of eligibility to detached houses in older buildings, can be seen as a positive sign. However, this concept needs clarification regarding "detached properties" (townhouses, etc.) that structure the urban fabric of older neighborhoods.

But the expected changes to the "Jeanbrun" mainly concerned the relaxation of the DPE label levels for rehabilitation operations.

Indeed, operators have repeatedly alerted public authorities to the difficulty of achieving energy efficiency ratings of A and B in older multi-family housing, a mandatory condition for eligibility for the scheme. Technical constraints, condominium configurations, and heritage requirements often make these objectives unattainable given the economic viability of the projects, and potentially incompatible with the preservation of the buildings. For these reasons, articles L111-1 (17 bis), 173-2, and R112-18 of the French Construction and Housing Code (CCH), in particular, provide for the adaptation of energy renovation requirements for buildings of heritage interest. Therefore, these concerns should be taken into account in the conditions for accessing the "Jeanbrun" tax incentive scheme for older buildings.

It appears essential to move beyond a logic of marginal adaptation of devices designed for new buildings, in order to build a specific framework fully adapted to the realities of old buildings, integrating its constraints but also its potentialities.

Finally, it must be acknowledged that, with this system, property taxation continues to favor new-build projects, which are far more attractive than those involving existing properties. Furthermore, it still clearly benefits high-income investors, as the higher the marginal tax bracket, the greater the savings. To stimulate rehabilitation projects in historic city centers, property taxation should be much more proactive, also targeting private landlords with more modest incomes who wish to invest in a smaller number of units, as well as owner-occupiers who acquire and renovate a property as their primary residence. Finally, it should be primarily targeted at the most disadvantaged heritage areas, by harmonizing eligibility criteria with all other forms of assistance (Anah, Action Logement, etc.).

Towards an ANRU 3 program

The announcement of a new program by the National Agency for Urban Renewal for the period 2030-2040, with a particular focus on medium-sized cities (20%), represents a significant step forward. It reflects a growing awareness of the challenges of revitalizing city centers. However, to fully address the identified needs, this program would benefit from explicitly integrating historic city centers and the specific issues of heritage urban fabrics. Strengthening public engineering expertise, the capacity to support complex rehabilitation projects, and securing appropriate funding appear to be essential conditions for the success of this initiative.

Sites & Cités hopes that an "ANRU of old town centre" programme can then be created in order to support the structural and sustainable rehabilitation of dense and protected urban fabrics.

In light of these factors, the government announcements reflect a genuine awareness of the scale of the challenges ahead. Their effectiveness, however, will depend on their ability to be integrated into a comprehensive approach that links housing production, the rehabilitation of existing housing stock, and the adaptation of tools to local realities. The objectives pursued are, quite rightly, ambitious given the housing needs, but they cannot be achieved without a substantial shift in public policies regarding older buildings.

The territories supported by Sites & Cités Remarquables de France are, in this respect, ready to become leading operational partners. They offer significant potential for mobilizing existing housing stock, provided that the necessary financial, fiscal, and technical levers are fully activated. Only then can the response to the housing crisis be effective, sustainable, and respectful of territorial balance.

[1] See articles L 111-1 (17bis) L173 – 2 and R 112-18 which explicitly provide for exemptions to the obligations of high-performance energy renovation for buildings subject to architectural or heritage constraints

Illustrative image of the article via Depositphotos.com.