andMr. M. Cosgrave asked the Minister for the Environment if he will review the planning legislation in order that when planning applications are made, account may be taken of the previous record of developers in previous developments having regard to the amount of unfinished estates in the country.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Planning Legislation.
1.
Mr. L.T. Cosgrave
Under the Planning Acts, applications for permission to develop land, and appeals to An Bord Pleanála, must be considered and determined on the basis of physical planning criteria. Moreover, where permission is granted, the permission attaches to the land and not to the person who applied for the permission. The status or previous record of an applicant for permission could not, therefore, be made a material consideration in determining a planning application without changes in fundamental features of the planning system.
In so far as the problem of unfinished estates is concerned, I am satisfied that existing planning law, if used effectively, should ensure that serious problems do not arise. The acts expressly provide for the attaching of conditions to planning permissions requiring security for the satisfactory completion of development. Detailed guidelines have been issued to planning authorities by my Department in relation to the use of conditions of this kind.
Is the Minister satisfied with the present bonding system because at times the amount is inadequate when a query is raised with a local authority? Householders have informed me that they cannot dispose of their houses because estates are left undeveloped. Is it possible to make an arrangement to ensure that the bond is sufficient so that local authorities do not have to enter negotiations or have to try to beat developers into completing estates?
I am aware that greater care is being taken by planning authorities in formulating conditions attaching to planning permissions regarding security for the satisfactory completion of housing development. More extensive and effective use is being made of the enforcement powers provided in the 1976 Act. Penalties for planning offences were increased in 1982 and this ensures that the problems which arose in old estates — I believe the Deputy is referring to such estates — will be exceptions in the future. I am satisfied that the circular issued in 1979 to bring to the notice of the local authorities their powers in this regard, and the advice given in it, has been taken into account by such bodies. This has resulted in more attention being paid to builders in local authority areas and to getting them to comply with all requirements under the Planning Acts. I am relatively satisfied with the present position.
Is the Minister aware of the number of estates which are not in charge and are directly under the control of Dublin Corporation? Is he aware that those estates have not been taken in charge due to a shortage in the number of inspectors employed by the county council and the corporation? Will the Minister take this matter up with the authorities concerned with a view to helping those authorities take the estates in charge?
I will follow up that matter with the authorities concerned. The Deputy will be aware that as a result of low cost housing which local authorities engaged in in the late sixties and early seventies I have had to initiate a scheme which will cost £5 million per year to bring local authority schemes up to a higher standard. It is incumbent on local authorities to ensure that the schemes they are responsible for are an example to other builders. I will take the Deputy's proposal on board.
In regard to the upgrading of below cost schemes I should like to know if that work applies to the houses only? Will the funding arrangement also apply to the upgrading of the environment such as open spaces, grass margins, tree planting and works that would improve the environment in such areas?
The Deputy is aware that the amount of money available for these schemes is limited. As a result of the volume of applications I have had from local authorities to carry out such work — to date I have approved of ten areas — we are trying to confine the money to the upgrading of houses. Where there is a need to upgrade estates this work may be carried out but I must stress that the money is primarily devoted to work on houses. I would not rule out some money being spent on the improvement of roads, planting of trees and so on.
Is the decision as to how the money is used the function of the Minister's Department or is if left to local authorities to decide the amount to be spent on a scheme?
Local authorities make an application for money to upgrade an estate. It is up to the Department, as a result of an inspection, to decide what portion of a scheme is to be funded.
The question deals with planning legislation and not defective housing. The Minister has told the House that permissions is given in regard to land and not to the individual and that any change in that system could not be made without fundamental changes in the planning system. Bearing that in mind I should like to know if he agrees that we have reached the stage where it is important that the individual, and the land, be taken into account? Surely the individual is more important when deciding whether sanitary services are to be made available or not?
The Deputy who is well versed in this matter is aware that the record of certain individuals in the past was not good.
That is why I asked the question.
Local authorities should be on their toes when they receive planning applications for large schemes in their area. They should use the adequate provisions in the Planning Acts, and the bonding arrangements, to tie such people down tightly. I accept that the record of certain individuals is well known throughout the country. Regardless of whether they are in a company who may have changed their name — and I am aware of that happening too — the local authority should be on their guard. I would have some sympathy with the suggestion the Deputy is putting forward.