Managing multi-owned, mixed-use developments in The Netherlands: The opinion of professional managing agents

H. Ploeger, D. Groetelaers
{"title":"Managing multi-owned, mixed-use developments in The Netherlands: The opinion of professional managing agents","authors":"H. Ploeger, D. Groetelaers","doi":"10.1108/IJLBE-07-2013-0028","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose \n \n \n \n– This purpose of this paper is to analyses the management difficulties experienced in multi-owned, mixed-use developments and possible solutions, based on the opinions of professional management agencies in The Netherlands. \n \n \n \n \nDesign/methodology/approach \n \n \n \n– We performed a survey among professional management agencies that take care of the day-to-day management of many multi-owned, mixed-use developments. The survey focused on aspects such as the influence of the developer on the deed of division and the appointment of the professional manager, and the role of legal advisors. \n \n \n \n \nFindings \n \n \n \n– The outcomes support the assumption that mixed-use developments have more problems, and problems of a different nature, than homogeneous complexes. We conclude that a custom-made deed of division, or at least one that is appropriate to the mixed-use situation, is preferable. The legal expert involved (a civil law notary) should therefore consult the owners and – if applicable – the professional management agency. They have the practical knowledge to identify management difficulties. Drawing up the deed of division should never be the final piece of the process, but it should be an analogous development to the design and development process. However, our hypothesis that developers should consult the notary during the planning phase of new projects was not confirmed by the survey. \n \n \n \n \nOriginality/value \n \n \n \n– Most legal research focuses on the law and the legality of instruments, sometimes including the practical implications by performing case law research. We stress the importance of including day-to-day practice and practitioners in legal research. Professional management agencies have the requisite knowledge – both practical and legal – of how the system of “apartment ownership” works. This makes them a very useful source of information.","PeriodicalId":158465,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Law in The Built Environment","volume":"157 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-10-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Law in The Built Environment","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/IJLBE-07-2013-0028","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

Purpose – This purpose of this paper is to analyses the management difficulties experienced in multi-owned, mixed-use developments and possible solutions, based on the opinions of professional management agencies in The Netherlands. Design/methodology/approach – We performed a survey among professional management agencies that take care of the day-to-day management of many multi-owned, mixed-use developments. The survey focused on aspects such as the influence of the developer on the deed of division and the appointment of the professional manager, and the role of legal advisors. Findings – The outcomes support the assumption that mixed-use developments have more problems, and problems of a different nature, than homogeneous complexes. We conclude that a custom-made deed of division, or at least one that is appropriate to the mixed-use situation, is preferable. The legal expert involved (a civil law notary) should therefore consult the owners and – if applicable – the professional management agency. They have the practical knowledge to identify management difficulties. Drawing up the deed of division should never be the final piece of the process, but it should be an analogous development to the design and development process. However, our hypothesis that developers should consult the notary during the planning phase of new projects was not confirmed by the survey. Originality/value – Most legal research focuses on the law and the legality of instruments, sometimes including the practical implications by performing case law research. We stress the importance of including day-to-day practice and practitioners in legal research. Professional management agencies have the requisite knowledge – both practical and legal – of how the system of “apartment ownership” works. This makes them a very useful source of information.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
管理荷兰的多所有制、多用途开发项目:专业管理代理的意见
目的-本文的目的是根据荷兰专业管理机构的意见,分析在多所有权、多用途开发项目中遇到的管理困难和可能的解决方案。设计/方法/方法-我们在专业管理机构中进行了一项调查,这些机构负责许多多所有权、多用途开发项目的日常管理。调查的重点是开发商对分割契约和职业经理人任命的影响,以及法律顾问的作用等方面。研究结果-结果支持这样的假设,即混合用途开发项目比单一的综合体有更多的问题,而且问题的性质不同。我们的结论是,一个定制的分割契约,或至少是一个适合混合使用的情况,是可取的。因此,所涉及的法律专家(民法公证人)应咨询业主和(如果适用的话)专业管理机构。他们具有识别管理困难的实践知识。起草分割契约不应该是过程的最后一步,而应该是与设计和开发过程类似的一个发展过程。然而,我们关于开发商在新项目规划阶段应咨询公证员的假设并未得到调查的证实。原创性/价值-大多数法律研究侧重于法律和文书的合法性,有时包括通过进行判例法研究的实际影响。我们强调将日常实践和从业人员纳入法律研究的重要性。专业管理机构拥有“公寓所有权”制度如何运作的必要知识——无论是实际知识还是法律知识。这使它们成为非常有用的信息来源。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Measures in curbing poor compliance to building control regulation among renovated terrace houses When enforcement fails: Comparative analysis of the legal and planning responses to non-compliant development in two advanced-economy countries Factors influencing land title registration practice in Osun State, Nigeria Liability in negligence for building defects in Ireland, England and Australia: Where statute speaks, must common law be silent? Deregulating planning control over Britain’s housing stock
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1