Agenda item

Albury Mansions Road Un-adoption - EPI/10/135

Minutes:

The Committee had a report before it by the Director of Enterprise, Planning and Infrastructure which advised of a request which had been received from the residents of Albury Mansions for the access road to Albury Mansions to be un-adopted and removed from the list of public roads.

 

Albury Mansions was a short cul-de-sac serving a development of 62 flatted properties and took direct access from the northern end of Albury Road within the Ferryhill residential area.  The road was currently adopted and formed part of the controlled parking zone of the Ferryhill area. Private car parking areas at the end of the cul-de-sac served the development and due to the close proximity of the site to the commercial area of the city centre, indiscriminate parking by non-residents had impacted on the availability of residents’ parking and the general environmental amenity enjoyed by the residents of Albury Mansions.

As such, a planning application was submitted in July 2009, on behalf of the residents for the erection of a gate across the access road leading to the car parks to ensure that they were only used by residents and the application was subsequently approved. However, the erection of a gate within the adopted public road required that the road be removed from the list of adopted roads.  The planning permission did not in its own right allow for a change of status of the cul-de-sac and could only be implemented following the agreement of the Roads Authority to un-adopt the road which would then be seen to form a private access to the development. The report explained that due to oversights residents had not been made aware of this, however highlighted that this omission did not remove or diminish the responsibility of the applicant to make the appropriate pre-application enquiries.

 

Residents and their factor had now been fully appraised of the position and what would be required of them if the road was to be un-adopted. Following this discussion the residents agreed that the preferred solution to the problem was for the access road to be un-adopted and removed from the list of public roads so that the residents might erect a gate at the original location in line with the first planning permission. In addition residents agreed to accept any consequential expense resulting from the un-adoption of this road as they would have to take over the responsibility of all future maintenance of the road and lighting. However, it was highlighted that two postal votes from residents against the un-adoption of the road were received.

 

Finally, it was advised that it was generally recommended that an access road serving more than three properties was adopted by the Council so that the interests of the residents were looked after with regard to the maintenance of the road and lighting, access for refuse vehicles and snow clearing all of which could result in significant costs to residents if the road was not adopted. Roads officers had concerns and reservations with regard to the un-adoption of the road as this would place a potential future burden on the residents should maintenance issues arise.  However, given the background to the matter, officers would not offer objection to the request for the road to be removed from the adopted list of roads due to the minimal extent of the adopted road and that the residents have clearly decided that they would rather have the access road un-adopted and were prepared to take over the management and maintenance of the road along with the associated financial responsibilities.

 

The Committee resolved:-

(i)         that the access road leading to Albury Mansions from Albury Road be
un-adopted by Aberdeen City Council and removed from the list of public roads; and

(ii)        that the road might be removed from the list of public roads and to instruct to carry out the procedure in accordance with the Roads (Scotland) Act and if no representations were received to remove the road from the list of public roads without returning to Committee, however if representations were received a follow up report would be presented to the Committee for further consideration.

Supporting documents: