Tommy Broughan (Dublin North East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I wish to share time with Deputy Seán Kenny.

Priory Hall is a residential complex of 187 units on the new main street linking Clongriffin and Belmayne in Dublin 13 in the vast new north fringe residential district in Dublin North-East. The estate originally had a mixture of private purchasers, private tenants, city council tenants and residents who moved in through the city council's rental accommodation and affordable housing schemes.

I have raised the critical fire safety and building standard problems and disasters of Priory Hall at least a dozen times in this and the previous Dáil in various ways, including on the Order of Business. Our fire chief, Hugh O'Neill, served a fire safety notice under the Fire Safety Acts on Coalport Ltd., which built Priory Hall, on 4 September 2009. In this notice, the north and south blocks of Priory Hall, which comprises the entire estate, were described as a "potentially dangerous building" and the fire chief ordered an urgent programme of fire safety remedial measures for the estate to make it safe to live in. In December 2009, Dublin City Council moved its own tenants out for their own safety.

In April last at the Dublin District Court, a director of Coalport Ltd., Mr. Tom McFeely, received a six-month suspended sentence and a maximum €3,000 fine and his former partner, Mr. Laurence O'Mahoney, received a one-month suspended sentence and a €1,000 fine for fire safety notice offences at Priory Hall. However, we do not know what conditions, if any, were attached to these suspended sentences or whether Dublin City Council and, in turn, the Minister of State's Department have monitored compliance. Coalport Ltd. and Mr. McFeely, the developer, have also been referred to the courts regarding breaches of the planning law at Priory Hall. The latest such referral occurred on 14 June. Given the serious breaches concerned, can the Minister of State provide residents with a full update on current and future planning enforcement proceedings?

Many outstanding questions relating to Priory Hall need to be addressed by the city council and the Minister of State. The excellent residents' committee led by Ms Sinéad Power and others have still not been told what works have been completed and certified on the building to ensure that it finally complies with all fire safety regulations and building standards and they still do not know if they are safe at night and living in a safe building. Concerns have also been expressed by many residents about the quality of the works being carried out.

I understand that Dublin City Council has undertaken an investigation into the alleged breaches of the Building Control Acts at Priory Hall through a company called Hayes Higgins Partnership but we still do not have a report from it. The residents of Priory Hall want to know why Dublin City Council did not insist that the developers in question put a bond in place which could now be used for all remediation and completion works at the complex. They are deeply frustrated and I hope the Minister of State will ensure Dublin City Council will get to grips with this. He knows the area well and he is welcome to visit us in Dublin North-East.

Seán Kenny (Dublin North East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I support what my colleague said. The city council recently commissioned Hayes Higgins Partnership, consulting engineers, to carry out an investigation into defects in the construction of Priory Hall. This investigation is complete and I call on the council to publish the report by Hayes Higgins Partnership in the public interest. The case against Mr. McFeely and Mr. O'Mahoney for breaches of fire regulations was heard in the District Court on 4 April. Mr. McFeely received a €3,000 fine and a six-month suspended sentence and Mr. O'Mahoney received a €1,000 fine and a one-month suspended sentence. Since then there has been a spate of fires in the dumping area used by the building company, which is an unsecured area situated behind hoarding at the back of the development. I am advised by constituents that there were three fires in total, two of which Dublin Fire Brigade and the Garda attended and one which residents put out themselves. Two members of the residents' committee advised me that they reported the last fire incident to Coolock Garda station.

Dublin City Council's chief fire officer directed that both underground car parks in the development be taken out of use in December 2009 due to flooding. The car parks remain closed to date, with the result that there is a high volume of vehicles on the road outside the apartment blocks, many of which are parked in front of the hoarding that fronts the builder's dumping area, thus compounding the risk of any fire spreading and of explosions from the vehicles' petrol tanks. My grave concern is that if the hoarding was to catch fire again, the fire could spread to the north and south blocks of the development and the petrol could ignite the fire further. We would be faced with casualties that could be avoided.

I asked Dublin City Council whether the three fires in April constituted a breach of the developers' suspended sentences and I was advised by the council's law agent that any complaints on possible breaches should be communicated to the superintendent of the local Garda station. On 16 June, I wrote to the Garda superintendent in Coolock, asking him to investigate the position in Priory Hall with a view bring the matter back before the court if the fires constitute breaches of the suspended sentences, as I believe they do. It would seem to me that if the position remains the same in this development, it is only a matter of time before there is a serious incident. I ask the Minister to intervene with Dublin City Council to have this absolute nightmare for residents, which has been going on for years, brought to a conclusion.

Willie Penrose (Longford-Westmeath, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government would like to thank Deputy Broughan and Deputy Kenny for raising this important matter. I know they have long-standing interests in this ongoing issue.

The Government is acutely aware of the difficult and distressing situations faced by many homeowners and tenants today, who through no fault of their own, are dealing with the consequences of unfinished estates, pyrite problems and other building defects. Specific responsibility for the planning and delivery of the north fringe development rests with the local authorities involved, namely, Dublin City Council and Fingal County Council.

The North Fringe framework development plan, which was prepared by Dublin City Council in 2000, sets out the objectives for the area, the site context and the urban design framework. The plan emphasises the need for a quality bus service and the provision of community facilities, including schools, a library, sports facilities and public spaces, which will serve the anticipated 30,000 people who will ultimately live in the area.

Planning permissions in the north fringe have been granted in line with the framework plan. Under planning legislation, the decision on whether to grant a planning application, with or without conditions, is a matter for the relevant planning authority in the first instance, in this case Dublin City Council, and for An Bord Pleanála in the case of an appeal. I understand that planning permission for mixed use development was granted by the Council on 19 November 2003, subject to a number of conditions. It is clearly the responsibility of the developer to implement planning permission and to comply with any conditions attaching to that permission.

Enforcement of planning control is a matter for the council which can take action, inter alia, where the terms of a permission have not been met. I understand that there are ongoing legal proceedings being taken by Dublin City Council regarding compliance with this permission. I have no role in the matter.

In addition, the national building regulations set out the legal requirements for the design and construction of new buildings, including houses, extensions and material alterations and certain changes of use of existing buildings. The related technical guidance documents provide technical guidance on how to comply with the regulations. Compliance with the regulations is the responsibility of the owner or builder of a building. Enforcement of the regulations is the responsibility of the 37 local building control authorities, which are empowered to carry out inspections and initiate enforcement proceedings, where considered necessary. Where building defects occur, their remediation is a matter for the parties concerned, namely the building owner, the relevant developer and the builder's insurers, in line with any contractual arrangements agreed between the parties. The general position regarding the use of pyrite in house construction has been set out comprehensively in replies to previous parliamentary questions, most recently on 26 May 2011.

The remediation of homes affected by pyrite is also a matter for the parties concerned, and enforcement is essentially a civil matter. I understand that following civil proceedings regarding homes affected by pyrite in north Dublin, a final settlement was reached and a trust fund established by the developer concerned. In the case of James Elliott Construction Limited v Irish Asphalt Limited, the judgment issued on 25 May 2011 found Irish Asphalt Limited liable for the supply of defective filler material which was not fit for purpose.

Since taking up office, the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government has clearly signalled that consumer protection in the area of quality construction of new dwellings is a priority matter. In this regard, the Minister is currently considering proposals to reform the building control system. These proposals include the introduction of mandatory certificates of compliance by builders and designers of buildings demonstrating that the statutory requirements of the building regulations have been met; more efficient pooling of building control staff and resources across the local authority sector to ensure more effective and meaningful oversight of building activity; standardised approaches and common protocols to ensure nationwide consistency in the administration of building control functions; and measures for the support and further development of the building control function nationwide.

The Minister is determined to strengthen the building control system in order to ensure that problems currently being experienced are not repeated. The Deputies raised a number of important issues this evening, and I will request the Minister to raise them with Dublin City Council and ascertain the current position.