Catherine Murphy (Kildare North, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 97: To ask the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government the role which management companies should play in maintaining housing estates with specific reference to sewers, water mains, public lighting, roads and footpaths; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [30549/05]

Dick Roche (Wicklow, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Management companies operate at present for the majority of apartment developments, for certain other higher density developments, particularly those with a mix of designs, but very rarely for a very small number of standard housing developments. Generally speaking, the role of management companies is to maintain the common property, including buildings, sewers, water pipes, public lighting, roads and footpaths in such estates.

Once housing developments are taken in charge, it is the local authority's responsibility to maintain public infrastructure such as roads, footpaths, sewers, water mains and public lighting. The existence of a management company should not override the legal obligation on developers to complete estates, and, where required by the planning permission, to maintain estates until they are taken in charge. Local authorities are obliged under section 180 of the Planning and Development Act 2000 to begin the procedures to take in charge the public services of housing estates once these are completed to a satisfactory standard, where they are requested to do so by the developer or a majority of the residents of the housing development. This legal obligation is unaffected by the existence or otherwise of a management company. In individual instances, of course, house owners may prefer that the responsibility for all services in their estate remains vested in the management company, which they control.

Section 34 of the Planning and Development Act 2000 introduced a number of provisions designed to ensure all housing estates were finished as soon as possible, maintained to a satisfactory standard for the benefit of the people living in them and taken in charge by local authorities. The section enables planning authorities to require adequate security to be provided by developers and to require estates to be finished within a reasonably short period. In addition, section 34 recognised the common practice of establishing management companies, control of which is transferred to the owners of the housing units, to maintain or manage residential developments.

Additional information not given on the floor of the House.

Along with the requirement on local authorities to take estates in charge under section 180 of the Act, these provisions should ensure that the historical problem of people living in unfinished or poorly managed housing estates for years will not occur in future.

These new provisions of planning legislation are framework ones and individual planning authorities must make their own judgment, based on local circumstances and policies, about how and to what extent to use them in particular cases. These provisions should not be used, however, to transfer responsibility for public infrastructure in housing estates to the residents. I am confident good solutions can be developed in this way and that these solutions should be most appropriately addressed at local authority level.

Catherine Murphy (Kildare North, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Minister was just getting to the most interesting part of his reply but I imagine it was contained in the reply to the Adjournment Debate matter I raised several weeks ago. I have been surprised by the apparent lack of knowledge in the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government about what is happening on the ground. Many local authorities now have a standard clause that requires mandatory membership of a management company, not just in a mixed or apartment only development but in traditional housing estates. In fact, it is registered in the Land Registry Office against the folio of the particular house. Will the Minister indicate whether that practice has any legal authority? In the absence of such legal authority, will he instruct the local authorities to cease this practice because it is giving people who have paid non-refundable deposits no choice but to sign up? I understand tens of thousands of people are affected by this practice. The Dublin local authorities and those on the fringes of Dublin are engaging in it also. There can be a gap of years between the time all the houses are completed and the estate is taken in charge. My understanding of the Planning and Development Act 2000 is that the seven years only kicks in five years after the planning permission has run out. That means people could pay up to €1,000 a year for 12 years, which is a sizeable amount and the equivalent of another month's mortgage in a year. A local authority could not prosecute a parking offence through the court unless it had the legal authority to do so, whether by way of a by-law or the road traffic laws. In the same way, local authorities are acting outside the law in this respect and the Minster must address that problem.

Dick Roche (Wicklow, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I fully appreciate the Deputy's concerns about this matter and would share her concerns if the arrangements provided in the Act were being misinterpreted, misapplied or applied in a way that would provide an onerous responsibility on home owners. The provisions in the planning legislation are framework ones and individual planning authorities must make their own judgment based on local circumstances and policies about how or to what extent they implement them in a particular case. These provisions should not be used, however, to transfer responsibility for public infrastructure in housing estates to residents and cause the type of difficulties the Deputy has in mind.

I am familiar with the case Deputy Murphy mentioned, which arises from Kildare County Council's policy on management companies. I asked my Department to contact the council and inquire about the position. The council assures me that it does not attach planning conditions relating to management companies to conventional housing schemes, that is, those with primarily private gardens and so forth, and that it attaches conditions to apartment developments.

The problem the Deputy has touched on is evolving. I would discourage the placing of onerous responsibilities on home owners by local authorities. That is not the intention of that section of the Act. The intention is to protect home owners and to expedite the process of taking estates in charge. It is not meant as a means for local authorities to side-step their responsibilities or try to pass them on to residents.

Catherine Murphy (Kildare North, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The documentation I passed on to the Minister of State related to a house-only development and a mixed development, not apartments. That is evidence of what is happening.