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

9. To ask the Minister for Environment, Community and Local Government his plans to initiate any legislative reforms to address the continued difficulties which exist to the taking in charge of estates where outstanding issues have not been addressed; if his attention has been drawn to the fact that with construction activity increasing the need for these measures has never been greater; if he proposes to tackle the problems caused by extended permissions making it impossible for estates to be taken in charge; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [3610/15]

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

We are constantly told that the biggest investment people individually will make will be the purchase of a home, yet there is very little consumer protection for purchasers. Construction is beginning to ramp up again, yet many of the defects and deficiencies in the planning system in regard to taking estates in change, bonds and matters such as that, have not been addressed and are not contained in the planning and development (No. 1) Bill and the planning and development (No. 2) Bill, one of which is at the stage of pre-legislative scrutiny before a committee.

Paudie Coffey (Waterford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

My Department is currently reviewing, in the context of the forthcoming planning and development (No. 2) Bill, the provisions in section 180 of the Planning and Development Act 2000, as amended, relating to the taking in charge of housing estates with a view to improving and streamlining the taking in charge procedures. A particular focus of the review will be the time limits for the taking in charge of housing estates. My Department will consult with planning authorities in this regard.

Consideration will be given in this context to any amendments to the taking in charge procedures required to streamline the arrangements with regard to water services infrastructure, but I would emphasise that there is no barrier to taking in charge of estates as a result of the establishment of Irish Water. This was clarified again in circular 5/14 to local authorities issued by my Department in November 2014.

With regard to the extension of duration of planning permissions, section 42 of the Planning Act provides that the duration of a planning permission may be extended for up to five years where substantial works relating to the permitted development have been carried out during the period of the original planning permission, or where substantial works have not been carried out because there were considerations of a commercial, economic or technical nature beyond the control of the holder of the planning permission which substantially mitigated against either the commencement of development or the carrying out of substantial works during the period of the original planning permission.

A facility to obtain a second extension of duration of planning permission was rescinded in 2010. I am not aware of any particular problems with the current provisions regarding the extension of duration of planning permissions. However, if the Deputy wishes to write to me with specific examples, I would be happy to have my officials examine them.

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

I welcome the fact that the Minister of State is open to changing section 180. I had sought that in a provision in legislation that was not opposed and I had hoped to see it included in the planning and development (No. 2) Bill. For a person who lives in a housing estate who wants to petition to have the estate taken in charge, the extension of duration means that it cannot happen before 17 years have expired. That includes the period of seven years after the planning permission has expired plus another five years. There is where the 17 years is arrived at, which is outrageous. That is where there has been an extension of duration. I can give the Minister of State some examples of that.

It is one of the areas where there is a legacy issue. It is not only a legacy issue of this crash, but a legacy issue from the previous crash. It was one of the dominant issues I deal with right through the 1990s when there was more consumer protection for a bag of crisps than there was for a person purchasing a house where a developer had not complied with the planning permission. Now that we are at the point of recommencing development and particularly now that the property tax has been introduced, people ask what are they getting for it if their estate cannot be taken in charge when the developer has not completed the road or the landscaping and other related issues. If there is a management company involved, it adds to the individual costs for householders. It is important that we address the issues from the home owner's perspective. There is plenty of protection for the developer. The local authority is assumed to be the guardian of the home owner, but I can tell the Minister of State that is not how I have found it to be. Some of it has to do with the resourcing of local authorities.

Paudie Coffey (Waterford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Deputy is right to point out that there are many legacy issues. We are all witnessing those in our own constituencies. However, ultimately, the developer has responsibility and should not be left off the hook. The local authority has enforcement powers to ensure that a developer is pursued to ensure that full planning compliance and conditions are adhered to.

The Deputy is aware that a planning authority is required to initiate the taking in charge of an estate in two scenarios. The first is where the estate is properly finished and it is at the request of the developer or a majority of the owners of the houses. The second is where the estate is not finished properly in accordance with the planning permission and enforcement proceedings have not been commenced within seven years of the expiration of the permission authorising the development at the request of the majority of the owners.

What that means is that where a local authority has not been proactive in enforcement and pursuing the developer, the majority of the owners can then petition a local authority to take the estate in charge. I recognise from where the Deputy is coming. The planning (No. 2) Bill, which will come before the Oireachtas and has been published, will provide further opportunity for engagement with Deputy Murphy and other Deputies, as well as the joint committee.

I wish to reassure Deputies that the new building regulations and inspection regimes and the requirement for certification and standards will, I hope, mean we will not see any further legacy issues in any new Bills to which the Deputy refers.

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

The last time I checked, 19,000 houses in County Kildare had not been taken in charge. Some of the cases in housing estates went back 20 years. There is an issue, on which I hope we can all be at one. There are issues relating to bonds and bonds expiring. Bonds have a seven year duration and are not in perpetuity. When a local authority can take an estate in charge, it will take in charge a liability when developers are still involved. We need to strip out the offenders and reward good behaviour in the kind of legislative provisions that are being put in place.

I welcome the fact that the Minister will be open to some of the proposed changes at a pre-legislative stage in the planning (No. 2) Bill because it is critically important that we are not still talking about this in 20 years' time. I will not be here in 20 years' time. This does not involve just the recent crash; there are legacy issues that go back to the last crash. We cannot allow that to happen.

Paudie Coffey (Waterford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I acknowledge many of the concerns the Deputy has outlined. I reiterate that the planning authorities, which are local authorities, have responsibilities with regard to ensuring planning compliance within their respective planning areas. There are legacy issues with regard to unfinished estates, bonds and other matters. Some of them are the result of obvious economic reasons such as developers going bust, which have other implications for homeowners. Local authorities have to ensure that they are on top of the planning permissions they grant and that they are proactive in enforcement where problems arise. We need to ensure the problem is not exacerbated.

There is an opportunity in the planning (No. 2) Bill to examine the taking in charge process. Protocols and procedures are already in place and if they are adhered to in the way they are intended we should not see the problems arising to which the Deputy referred. I look forward to further engagement on this issue.