Denis Naughten (Longford-Roscommon, Fine Gael)

I welcome the opportunity to speak on the Building Control Bill. This is an issue we all deal with on a daily basis. The area is a mess and cowboy builders give a bad name to everybody involved in the business. We regularly have to deal with situations where developers commence estates but never finish the job. The enforcement sections of the local authorities of which I have experience are inadequate to deal with the challenges they face with regard to developers who try to get around the regulations to avoid doing the required work.

There seems to be a total lack of communication between roads, planning and enforcement departments of local authorities. For example, bonds are deposited in planning departments and set aside in case the developer does not complete an estate. I know of a particular case where the bond deposited would not even complete the fencing around the estate. The estate was built on the banks of a river and needed specific fencing so that children could not access the river, but the bond left behind after the developer up and left would not even cover the cost of the fencing. There is something seriously wrong when planning authorities do not insist on a decent bond to ensure that if the developer does a runner we can get the works done. This is a regular problem. Although local authorities have become more conscious of developers not completing estates, the bonds appear to be wholly inadequate in ensuring that work is completed. As a result, the developer knows that if the council forecloses on the bond, it may cost him less than finishing the work.

While under the Planning and Development Act 2000 a local authority can refuse to consider any future applications from a particular developer, the local authority would have to go to court to implement it. That is unacceptable. Such a matter should be dealt with in the daily planning process. If a developer cannot finish one estate, an authority should not have to go to court to refuse planning permission to commence works on another estate.

There has been some progress on "taking in charge" under the Planning and Development Act 2000, but the efforts are inadequate. For example, I know of a number of estates where the local authority has argued that if it is forced to take charge of the estates, it will not do any work on them because of a lack of resources. We are back to square one again. If the local authority at any stage took any type of enforcement proceedings against a developer, they seem to get away scot free. The whole thing is a mess, leading to huge frustration among people living in what can only be described as war-torn estates. In one estate I know of, manhole covers were not provided, and footpaths were not put down. Clause 804 material was put down to serve as a footpath and driveway into the estate. It was left in such a state by the developer. It took years to get the local authority to step in and carry out the works there. This is the type of mess being dealt with around the country at the moment. The Government needs to consider this area again. I am glad we are strengthening enforcement, but it is pointless unless the enforcement offices of the local authority are properly resourced, which is not the case at the moment.

I ask the Minister of State to consider bringing together the legal expertise in various local authorities. Some local authorities have their own legal expertise while others employ a private solicitor. The issue of planning and development and enforcement of the regulations is complex, and we should look at shared legal services as this would be most effective. I find that even when files go to the county solicitor to be processed legally, it can take years to move them along, track people down or deal with the nuances in the legislation and so on. We consider this option in every other area and the Tánaiste and Minister for Health and Children, Deputy Harney, discusses it ad nauseum with regard to health services. A group of experts in a shared services facility controlled by the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government would be a positive development.

Before turning to the issue of housing densities I refer to the matter of disability access certificates in the context of this Bill. There are a number of houses, owned by local authorities, which would not meet the requirements of a disability access certificate. Many were constructed before relevant legislation came into force. However, in conjunction with grant aided work carried out on local authority houses, we should consider making buildings as accessible as possible. It may not be feasible with some buildings. This would save returning to the property on foot of a disabled person's grant and going through the process again. Accessibility works should be done when a property is being worked on anyway. I ask the Department to consider this.

My main reason for speaking on this Bill is housing densities, which are now unbelievable. In the county of Roscommon, which is very rural, the main growth is in the south. The fastest-growing area in the county is in the environs of Athlone. The residential density guidelines refer to greenfield sites in the vicinity of towns, stating that only eight to ten houses should be built per hectare. The document also indicates that when evaluations are being done on housing densities, a number of criteria should be taken into account, with the proximity to a town or city centre or available facilities being examples.

In my parish in the Bealnamulla and Monksland area, there is no public transport but massive apartment blocks are being built. These are turning into ghettos. Public amenities and public facilities are not being provided. There is not enough room in the estates to park all the vehicles of residents. The local authorities are nonetheless encouraging developers to put in more housing. It has gone out of control. There are incentives to build because of the development charges, the housing density guidelines and so on. I do not know how applicable these guidelines are today. They discuss open space and general landscaping. There is no public open space in this community, and the only portion of public open space is on the county boundary between Roscommon and Westmeath. The only amenities are a soccer and GAA pitch, which must cater for an ever-increasing community.

Another element which should be taken into consideration is the provision of footpaths and pedestrian access. There is not even a footpath from the County Roscommon side to the boundary with County Westmeath. With regard to traffic safety, roundabouts are not being put in. Crossroad junctions are being created with major housing estates on both sides of the road, there are no traffic lights, and people are taking their lives in their hands getting into and out of estates.

The guidelines also discuss the creation of area action plans. In County Roscommon, we are coming into the fifth year of our county development plan, and the first local area action plan is only now going on public display. The local authority does not have the engineering and technical staff available to ensure that these plans are developed, or that development is occurring in a structured and sensible manner.

Placing massive apartment blocks on greenfield sites away from town centres, without any public amenities or public transport put in place will create ghettos for tomorrow. One suggestion by Fine Gael for combating anti-social behaviour was that consultation should take place with the Garda Síochána in planning major housing estates. I have come across a couple of developments where planning permission has been granted for alleged green areas which no houses overlook and which are completely closed off to the public. I brought it to the attention of planners and they laughed at me. They do not regard the issue as relating to anti-social behaviour.

See this speech in context