Agenda item

Report ES14095

In recent years, Ward Councillors had received complaints regarding the condition and use of Upper Drive and Swievelands Road, Biggin Hill, neither having been made up and adopted as a highway maintainable at the public expense. On several occasions the Council had been asked to carry out urgent repairs at its own expense, under S.230 (7) of the Highways Act 1980, but no budget was currently available to enable such repairs.

For the unmade part of the streets to become highway, maintainable at public expense, the Council would need to adopt them, subject to the highway having been improved to an acceptable standard. Much of the cost of making up a private street would need to be recharged to owners of premises fronting the street in line with the Private Street Works Code.

A referendum was conducted to determine the views of frontage owners on making up of the streets. Initial designs were undertaken and cost estimates obtained for frontage owners. Consideration was also given to the effects of Greenery Agreements, degree of benefit, and the possibility of recharging a proportion of the costs to the owners of premises situated in the numerous cul-de-sacs served by the streets.

As part of the referendum, owners of a property having a flank or rear frontage were informed that, subject to their particular circumstances, their charges could be reduced by between 20-67% of the standard amount. The Council was not permitted to charge a proportion of the making-up cost to owners of premises in adjoining cul-de-sacs. Owners could be requested to make voluntary contributions, and any such monies collected would reduce the street works charges.

Taking account of the issues above, owners of premises in Upper Drive were advised that the estimated cost of making up the street would be between £720-£740 per metre of frontage, and in Swievelands Road between £815-£835 per metre of frontage.

For Upper Drive,  46 referendum letters were delivered to frontagers with 31 replies received (67%). The results demonstrated insufficient support for the road to be made-up and adopted, with 69% of the total frontage, excluding ‘Greenery Agreement’ land, either not in favour or not expressing a view.

A total of 57 referendum letters were delivered to properties in Swievelands Road with28 replies received (49%). The results did not indicate a majority of frontagers in favour of making-up and adopting Swievelands Road, with 67% of the total frontage, excluding ‘Greenery Agreement’ land, either not in favour or not expressing a view. However, given the road’s location on the highway network and the views of Ward Members Report ES14095 proposed that a Private Street Works scheme be progressed for the road.  The likely making-up cost was £600k, with £300k borne by L B Bromley.

Councillor Benington (Biggin Hill) addressed the Committee explaining that Swievelands Road and Upper Drive were located where Biggin Hill valley rises upwards. Part of Swievelands Roads was not made up and remained unadopted with the former tarmacked surface badly weathered causing difficulties for driving along the road. Councillor Benington supported this part of Swievelands Road being made up but accepted that Upper Drive would not be made up. Councillor Melanie Stevens (Biggin Hill) concurred with Councillor Benington that the part of Swievelands Road under consideration is in a particularly poor condition, causing serious difficulties for drivers, particularly during winter months.   

In discussion Members supported the recommendation that no provision should be made for making up Upper Drive.

In considering Swievelands Road, there was concern the referendum results did not show a majority in favour of making up and adopting the road. Although a referendum was not necessary for the project, the Portfolio Holder felt it would be worthwhile to make further enquiries on how frontage owners yet to respond might feel on the matter. There was no budget to make up and adopt such roads solely at Council expense - to do so would be contrary to current policy. It was explained that there had been much effort to approach those not replying or expressing a view. Officers had sent repeat letters to those not replying, and approaches had been made in person to each relevant property. From such visits, ten frontage owners had expressed support for the making–up and two were against.  

If it is against policy to proceed where the Council is expected to contribute financially (in this case £300k), and there is no significant demand for the work, it was suggested that no further consideration should be given to the project. Efforts had been made to contact frontage owners not replying or expressing a view. As such, and until such time as there is a clear majority of frontage owners expressing their support for such a project, Members agreed to decline their support for the making up and adoption of the remaining part of Swievelands Road.

RESOLVED that the Environment Portfolio Holder be recommended to agree that:

(1)  no provision be made for the making up of Upper Drive in view of the results of the referendum for this street; and

(2) no scheme be taken forward under the Private Street Works Code for that part of Swievelands Road between its junction with Valley View and Bankside Close.