The Member of the Scottish Parliament (MSP) for Eastwood, Jackson Carlaw, has warned of “serious uncertainty” over the ability of some areas in the City of Glasgow, which have been held up for years by the owners of private roads, to be connected to CityFibre’s new 10Gbps capable Fibre-to-the-Premises (FTTP) UK broadband ISP network.
In case anybody has forgotten. CityFibre is currently investing around £270 million to expand their full fibre network across the city, which at the last update in 2023 was still due to be “substantially completed” by the end of 2025. But some areas often get left until after the main deployment, and one of the most common reasons for this stems from the issue of private or unadopted roads.
Quite a few local estates and lanes fall into this bracket, which in the case of Glasgow is, for example, impacting local homes in the associated town of Giffnock at Egidia Avenue, Eglinton Drive, Winton Avenue, Arran Drive, Berryhill Road leading to Maryville Avenue and two blocks of flats at Hutchison Court etc.
Advertisement
Local MSP Jackson Carlaw told the Glasgow Times that the “ongoing absence of the upgrades means they are continually experiencing poor internet connection and with significant dismay that the rollout is yet to reach their home“. The MSP added that CityFibre’s most recent correspondence suggested that there is now “serious uncertainty about whether the streets will be connected” and he has thus complained about this to the operator, but it may not be entirely their fault.
A CityFibre spokesperson said:
“Our teams have worked hard and brought full fibre broadband to hundreds of thousands of homes and businesses across Glasgow, Clydebank and Renfrewshire over the past few years and we continue to work through the operational and commercial detail of any further rollout plan to ensure it can deliver what local people need.”
Sadly, the issue with gaining permission to access unadopted roads (i.e. private roads, which are not maintained by a public authority) is not a new one, with many network operators across the UK running into similar challenges. Broadband builders typically need to secure a legal access (wayleave) style agreement, which isn’t always an easy, quick or economically viable process (although it’s easier than it was in the past).
The network operator first has to figure out who owns the road (historic ownership changes etc. can complicate things), then they need to make contact (details not always reliable) and, finally, come to an agreement – all of which may present challenges. The owners of such roads, assuming you can reach them, will naturally also have concerns (damage etc.) or may not want new infrastructure. In addition, they can sometimes also make unreasonable demands for payment, obstructing deployment.
CityFibre and similar operators can raise disputes over this, but sometimes the number of premises involved is so small as to simply make it not worth the cost /effort (i.e. the rollout becomes unviable). In that sense, the MSP might be more effective if he also put some pressure on the owners of such roads, while the residents could play their part by petitioning the property/landowner to allow access – assuming they can actually contact them.
Advertisement
Advertisement
This is definitely a two-sided story. In Aberdeen, CityFibre simply avoided some privately owned streets, citing that private ownership is causing issues – and yet the ownership and wayleave acceptance was researched and resolved by the Local Authority in two days. Additionally, there are other cases where the operators are putting in a huge amount of effort to negotiate with landowners, with no success. This isn’t a policy or process issue – this is a human nature issue. The MSP can voice his concern, but the solution is to actually use his position to speak to landowners directly. In Aberdeen, this is happening because the Local Authority is actually stepping in to support, mediate and expedite.
The local authority would have nothing to do with private roads, that is why they are private, it’s not owned or maintained by the local authority.
Private is just that, it’s either owned by a single land owner, or could be split up amongst residents who own properties that include the land on which an private road passes.
As per the news piece, the works in private require wayleave agreements, works in the public highway don’t.
@Street Works Joe – Absolutely right, and thats all great. What the Local Authority can do though is support operators and residents by acting as an intermediary to expedite things. I work with a Council in Scotland, and Operators will reach out to me when they’re having issues in getting in touch with landowners, so I can actively engage with landowners and the community to move things forward. Equally, when residents are frustrated by being ‘missed’ by FTTP rollout, I can speak to the operators to find out why, and see what can be done to resolve it. The Local Authority has many levers it can pull to support FTTP rollout and other digital connectivity programmes.
Jackson is a former second hand car salesman and MSP
There are landowners but there aren’t leasehold properties like England and Wales. So these private roads will almost certainly be jointly owned by the same people complaining about the lack of modern infrastructure.
As for the adoption of road and public areas etc – developers and local councils are avoiding this as much as possible and so leaving the joint owners to foot the bill for not just common green spaces but pavements and roads in their new build areas that should be covered by their local taxation.