Eoghan Murphy (Dublin Bay South, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I thank Deputy Barry Cowen for bringing forward the Bill which is timely. I welcome the opportunity to discuss and outline a number of important initiatives in the area. We can all broadly agree with and support the intention and objectives behind the measures proposed in the Bill which aims to facilitate and streamline the bringing back into use of existing vacant buildings for residential purposes. This type of constructive engagement which is solutions-driven is what citizens expect from us, as legislators, in tackling this crisis.

We all know that town and city centres contain a large amount of under-used building stock, with largely unused or under-used floors above many ground floor retail premises. There would be obvious benefits in returning these for residential use at a time of an acute supply shortage. With some upgrading and modification, they can be made ready for immediate use. Wider benefits include supporting the revitalisation of local town centres and making more efficient use of accommodation in serviced areas with existing amenities. We simply must make better use of the existing housing stock. We have to make better use of vacant buildings in urban areas, particularly empty upstairs units over ground floor premises such as shops and vacant offices that could be converted or used for residential purposes. Many of these properties remain under-used because restoring them to use can be complex and may come with a significant degree of uncertainty. Costs can be higher than expected for many reasons such as compliance with planning and building control standards, construction on difficult to access urban sites, engagement with adjoining owners, licences, permits and so on. Funding for such refurbishment can also be difficult to source owing to lender concerns with uncertainty and the possible unforeseen costs and risks involved in developing existing older buildings. We have identified the potential barriers to such re-use, particularly in the area of regulatory approvals and processes, such as planning and building control. In that context, I will discuss the specifics of the Bill before us and also highlight how the Government is already addressing and intends to address some of its key provisions. I will also take the opportunity to respond to some other elements of the Bill which need very careful consideration and about which I must indicate some reservations at this stage.

Section 2 of the Bill proposes amendments to the Building Control Act 1990 and provides that details of proposed works to existing buildings to convert them to residential units should be submitted to the local authority to decide if it can be considered under a new one-stop-shop application procedure. If considered suitable, it is then proposed that the works would be automatically exempted from statutory requirements for a fire safety certificate, a disability access certificate and a certificate of compliance on completion and from being recorded on the building register. In lieu of this, the local authority would issue a works permit verifying compliance with the building regulations, including a requirement for one or more site visits by an authorised person. It also recommends amendment of certain building regulations relating to structure, fire, sound, ventilation, stairs, energy efficiency and accessibility. I support the broad intention, but it is equally prudent that I raise some concerns about the proposals to alter the performance requirements of building regulations in respect of fire safety, structural safety and ventilation.

These are fundamental issues that protect the health and safety of people in and around buildings which is the primary purpose of building regulations. Any proposal to dilute the relevant standards for a particular subset of buildings must be weighed carefully against any potential risk to people's health and well-being. As I am sure the Deputy is fully aware, many incidents of building failures and severe non-compliance with building regulations have come to light in the past decade. The economic and personal consequences of these situations have been very significant. In response, new building control requirements were introduced by my Department in 2014 to address what were seen as the key deficits in the system by empowering competence and professionalism in construction projects and establishing a clear chain of responsibility that began with the owner. The new regulations require the owner to assign competent persons to design, build, inspect and certify the building works and the competent persons concerned, in turn, must account for their contribution through the lodgment of compliance documentation, inspection plans and statutory certificates. These measures have brought a new order and discipline to bear on construction projects. Therefore, I have reservations about the proposal to exempt works to develop existing buildings for residential use from these requirements without appropriate alternative arrangements that would maintain the integrity of the standards and process. The proposal could have an unintended impact on the quality and compliance of often complex works to existing buildings such as their conversion into multi-unit apartment type buildings. As we consider the proposals made in the Bill as the legislation is progressed, it is crucial that we ensure the appropriate balance is struck in seeking to facilitate the speedy redevelopment of vacant properties while ensuring quality and compliance with building regulations. I am confident that the appropriate balance can be found during the next stage in dealing with this legislation.

Certain works to existing buildings need to comply with the building regulations such as works that address fire safety, structural stability and so forth. My Department publishes technical guidance on compliance with the building regulations, but they are geared largely towards new buildings and, therefore, are unduly restrictive or impracticable to be applied to existing or historic buildings. Alternative approaches based on the principles set out in the technical guidance may be more relevant and proportionate and I have asked my officials to consider these matters.

A multi-disciplinary working group has been established by my Department which includes expertise in building regulations, fire safety in buildings, planning, design and heritage. The working group has been tasked with developing new guidance in order to provide clarity on what regulatory requirements should apply in these circumstances and to provide advice for both the construction industry and local authorities on how best to facilitate the re-use or development of under-used older buildings in the context of the regulatory requirements. I will fully consider recommendations made by the working group and should a need for flexibility through a relaxation of or dispensation from certain parts of the building regulations be identified, I will ensure there will be a facility to do this within the framework of the existing building control legislation. In addition, an online application system for fire safety certificates, disability access certificates and dispensation and relaxation is also being developed which will help to further streamline and speed up the certification process.

Sections 3 and 4 of the Bill propose amendments to the Planning and Development Act 2000. Section 3 relates to the exempted development provisions and proposes three new classes of exemptions, for works relating to the change of use of a building above ground floor level for residential use; the maintenance, improvement or alteration of an older structure for residential use; and the sub-division of any existing dwelling to provide two or more dwellings. The section proposes that these new exemptions would be subject to certain restrictions to be determined by me, as Minister, and the need, on a mandatory basis, to obtain a section 5 declaration from the relevant planning authority. A section 5 declaration confirms if certain works are exempted development or if they require planning permission.

Section 4 provides that the new one-stop-shop application procedure mentioned earlier in the Bill be used to expedite requests for section 5 declarations and that it be determined by a panel of "authorised persons". In the context of the proposed exemptions, it is worth noting that the Government has already committed in Rebuilding Ireland to reviewing planning legislation to allow the change of use of vacant commercial units into residential units without the need for planning permission. To give effect to this action, my Department has been redrafting proposed amending regulations that I propose to bring forward for Oireachtas approval by the end of October. Acknowledging that exempted development proposals can be provided for in regulations, as opposed to through primary legislative amendment, a positive resolution from both Houses of the Oireachtas is required before the proposed regulatory amendments can come into effect. Whereas the Oireachtas will have a chance to review and consider the proposed exempted development regulations shortly, it is worth pointing out at this stage that my proposals differ somewhat from those proposed in the Bill, particularly in the requirement that a section 5 declaration must be obtained. I will be proposing a more streamlined arrangement where a developer will immediately be able to avail of the exemption without the need to engage with and get confirmation from the planning authority. This will be ensured by providing clarity in the regulations on when and how the change of use exemption applies. Notwithstanding this approach, I have asked my officials to examine the proposals made in the Bill relating to change of use exemptions so as to inform, as appropriate, the finalisation of my own proposals later this month.

Another concern I must raise relates to the proposed exemption for the sub-division of one dwelling into two or more dwellings. This is particularly problematic as, in the first instance, it conflicts with existing provisions of the Planning Act.

The Act states that such development is a material change of use which requires appropriate consideration by a planning authority – through the planning application process – on the basis of protecting residential amenity and other critical planning considerations.

Similar to points I raised on the building control proposals, we must be careful of any unintended consequences, where removing appropriate and necessary planning controls could have a negative impact on the quality of the resulting housing, or undermine the proper planning and sustainability of a community. These provisions need to be carefully thought through.

In conclusion, I think we can all see the benefits of tapping into the potential of using the buildings and homes that lie vacant or under-used to add to the supply of housing much more quickly than building new units. We need to make good on that potential but in a balanced way, by removing unnecessary regulatory barriers and streamlining processes as much as possible, while still ensuring that we maintain and enforce important standards and provide good quality housing for people who will be living there.

Those are some of my initial comments on the Bill and I look forward to the discussions this evening. The Minister of State at the Department of Housing, Planning and Local Government, Deputy English, will contribute later in the debate, as will Deputy Bailey, who is chair of the Joint Committee on Housing, Planning and Local Government.

See this speech in context